Lesbians aren’t in cafés, they are anywhere : the mainstreaming of lesbian identity and the decrease of lesbian public spaces in Amsterdam

(1)

“Lesbians Aren’t in Cafés,

They are Anywhere”

THE MAINSTREAMING OF LESBIAN IDENTITY AND THE

DECREASE OF LESBIAN PUBLIC SPACES IN AMSTERDAM

Mónica Brondos-Casas

10861521

Masters of Science

Sociology: Gender, Sexuality and Society

Spring 2015

Supervisor: Dr. Bojan Bilić

Second Reader: Dr. Gert Hekma

(2)

Abstract: This thesis investigates the growing preference of lesbian women in Amsterdam for mixed spaces by examining generational discourse on sexual and political identities. The author looks at how the changing concepts of identity are reflected through the use of lesbian spaces, and explores a generational discourse on the importance of lesbian visibility in community formation. Data was gathered in Amsterdam during four months through ethnographic research at lesbian bars and parties, a lesbian senior coffee-morning, and by means of semi-structured interviews with a total of 18 non-heterosexual women aged between 21 and 76. The author argues that, even though many Dutch non-heterosexual women prefer mixed spaces, those women who make use of lesbian spaces still find them very important and necessary. This suggests that lesbian spaces in Amsterdam will not disappear anytime soon. The investigation stresses the importance of community formation among older lesbian women and the emergence of a younger generation of lesbian women who tend to constitute a dispersed, invisible group. The fact that many lesbian women of the older generation still perceive a need for a koffieochtend (coffee-morning) raises the question of whether future generations of lesbian women will eventually come to feel the same need, rather than continuing to prefer to be dispersed in a variety of social spaces.

Special thanks to: All of the amazing women that I have met along the way and who shared their

experiences and stories with me. Thank you to Marjan, who welcomed me into her group and has shared so much with me. Also, special thanks to my advisors, Bojan Bilić and Gert Hekma, who have been so understanding and always available to engage in discussion. Finally, a dear thanks to my parents, for their incredible patience, knowledge and support.

(3)

INTRODUCTION

After having lived in Amsterdam for over two years, I have yet to find a lesbian bar, party, or group in which I feel that I share common interests with others or even simply fit in. I have tried frequenting the two lesbian bars in Amsterdam, and have attended a few of the lesbian parties— feminist meetings are too rare (once a year) for me to create community or contact there—, and at times I have gone to parties or bars where there are no men, but never find myself really enjoying them because it’s either all about flirting or dancing to electronic music, which I can’t stand. I have dabbled in the queer scene and over time have discovered that activist events do take place in Amsterdam, but I wish to focus on the lesbian scene in particular because of its importance to me. I recently had heard about café Bordó, which had been described to me by an acquaintance as an alternative to the Vive la Vie because she said they played more “indie” music. Unfortunately, a few months later, when I was feeling ready to visit it, I found out it was closed. In February 2015, it closed its doors after being open for merely two years. The closing of Bordó reflects a growing international phenomenon, in which some of the oldest and only lesbian bars are closing their doors. For me, this is frightening, since it suggests the disappearance of a vital aspect of lesbian identity. Hearing and reading about the closing of so many lesbian bars made me wonder if the oldest lesbian bar in Amsterdam, the Saarein, might also shut down one day soon. From my perspective, the closing of lesbian bars is worrying not only because of what it could say about a disappearing sexual identity, but also because these lesbian bars, which have had great historical significance for lesbian communities in the past, are no longer there to remind us of the political efforts that previous generations made in order to open those places.

What stands out to me is not only that lesbian bars closing but that, in comparison to their male counterpart, the number of lesbian bars has always been few. In the past, these cafés and bars were the result of lesbian women mobilizing and creating their own women’s and lesbian spaces. Lesbian spaces and communities have historical significance because of the stigmas and harassment of which homosexuals were victims of in the past. Having their own spaces provided lesbian women with opportunities to be on their own, away from heterosexual society, and also allowed them to express themselves freely and be themselves. Of course, those spaces also made it possible for lesbian women to come together to meet each other. Nowadays, lesbian bars no longer seem to be associated with political activism and feminism, as they were in the past. Instead, they appear to have become commercialized places that target youth in a sexual way.

In addition to no longer being identified with political activism and feminism, lesbian bars are simply not attracting the number of women that they did previously. Katherine Fobear, who has done considerable research on lesbian women in Amsterdam, claims that young women

(5)

today prefer to socialize in mixed spaces rather than lesbian spaces. She attributes this to the freedom that lesbian women now enjoy of being able to move about and mobilize in other social spaces. She sees the lack of lesbian bars and parties in comparison to those for gay men as evidence of a “decreasing visible lesbian presence” (2012: 739). However, she does not engage deeply in discussion regarding the importance of visible lesbian spaces for community formation.

Although my research reflects the work of Fobear in claiming that women today feel they are “Beyond a Lesbian Space” and prefer socializing in mixed spaces, I emphasize the importance and relevance of these for the few regulars who still, almost exclusively, attend lesbian bars and spaces. In addition, even though most of the women I interviewed felt they had no need to socialize in lesbian spaces, most of them admitted being part of a network or group of friends that were primarily lesbian or gay. This evidences a generational similarity in the need and desire for the bonds, friendship, and support acquired through lesbian groups or communities. Because the older generation of LGBT women seem to be at a higher risk for experiencing feelings of loneliness and isolation, they considered those spaces important. In Amsterdam, there are several Roze Senioren koffieochtends (Pink Senior coffee-mornings), two specifically for women, which provide them with an opportunity for creating community.

The main generational difference seems to be that lesbian women today no longer need lesbian bars to make initial contact with each other. Instead, they can do this through the internet as well as in the various other spaces in which they socialize. This reality is behind the idea that “lesbian women are anywhere.” The fact that women feel like they are beyond the need for a lesbian space suggests that that they consider themselves free to mobilize in a variety of spaces. A number of the younger women in my study expressed the desire for integration into mainstream society so as to be seen as “normal.” This freedom and desire are reflected in their belief that they no longer need to be involved in activism because they feel they have all their rights. They therefore feel emancipated. The fact that younger women are less concerned with topics of visibility or involvement in activist work was a concern expressed by the older generation. For them, there are still many challenges for women, as well as for the LGB1

community, which need to be addressed and resolved. The need to give attention to lesbian invisibility was a motivation for the creation of the lesbian koffieochtend, which was created to avoid feelings of loneliness and isolation in older lesbian women.

Lesbian bars and parties are certainly not the only spaces where lesbian women socialize, yet these are often used as a foundation for analysis because of their accessibility as

1_{Here, I use the term LGB because they did not show me evidence that they also worked on trans* or} queer topics.

(6)

well as their historical relevance. A few studies have been conducted on lesbian informal social networks (See: Morgan, Pritchard, Sedgley 2010, Podmore 2006, Burke 2000), yet that is not the focus of this study. Rather, I explore why lesbian nightlife seems to be diminishing, and is thus less visible. Even though there are other spaces that lesbian women occupy, it remains a fact that there are only two lesbian bars in Amsterdam. This is considerably less than the existing 25 gay male bars.2

Throughout this research, terms such as “lesbian identity,” “community,” “visibility,” “space,” and the “lesbian scene” are used and explored. These terms can be considered very subjective, and I recognize that there is no “one true meaning” for any of these terms. Defining these terms could in and of itself constitute a separate thesis. My aim here is not to define these terms, but rather to discuss participants’ perceptions and feelings about topics of space, identity, and visibility. This involves allowing those interviewed the space necessary for their own interpretations of these terms. I also make use of the term “lesbian spaces,” but I must acknowledge that the bars themselves prefer to be known as “open-minded women’s Cafés.” I therefore use these terms loosely in order to better get my point across, yet I recognize that the definition of these terms could be contested and that they are also “unstable concepts.” Nevertheless, in conducting my research, I realized that women do make use of these terms, and certainly have clear perceptions about their own identities and use of space. For research which focuses on defining terms such as “lesbian,” “community,” “space,” and “visibility” in greater depth, refer to footnote3_.

In this thesis, I investigate the various reasons why lesbian women now seem to prefer mixed spaces, thus leading to a decline of lesbian spaces, and explore how this reality is influenced by perceptions of identity. I contend that, although the majority of the women in my study were, as Fobear has found, “Beyond A Lesbian Space,” lesbian bars are still relevant and necessary for the women who do frequent them, and also provide a visible, safe space where lesbians can meet and interact with each other. Ultimately, I regard the changes in perceptions of lesbian identity as important for understanding the changes in the ways in which lesbian and other spaces are used, and claim that having visible enclaves is not only helpful, but necessary for lesbian women to come together. I begin by describing generational changes regarding perceptions of both sexual and political identities. I then relate this to an increasing preference of women to socialize in a variety of mixed spaces which suit their personal interests. I discuss

2_{http://amsterdam.gaycities.com/bars/tid/1007/}

3_{For research which focuses on defining terms such as “lesbian,” “community,” “space,” and “visibility” in} greater depth, as well as research which analyses the social networks and the notion that lesbian women are “invisible,” see: Podmore 2001; Kowalska 2011; Anderssen, Giertsen 2007; Wellman, 2001; Timms 2002; Jalvingh 2010; Eliason ,Schope 2007; Brown, 1995; Eliason, Morgan 1998; Wilton 1995.

(7)

the preference for socializing in mixed spaces and changes in identity as influencing levels of lesbian visibility, while considering generational differences. I conclude with a recognition of the importance of visibility in creating communities and spaces to come together.

SHIFTING LESBIAN IDENTITIES AND DECREASING PUBLIC

SOCIAL SPACES

When it comes to the use of space by lesbian women, a growing concern of authors and activists, according to Fobear, is: “Why are there so few lesbian bars in Amsterdam?” (2010:722). This is attributed to lesbian women becoming a more dispersed group due to the preference of socializing in other spaces and venues which suit their individual interests (Ibid). Fobear claims that women no longer feel confined to socializing in specifically lesbian or women only spaces. She states:

Lesbian women, both young and old, blamed the decline of lesbian social spaces on the feelings of younger lesbian girls that they shouldn’t be restricted to only socializing in lesbian-specific spaces, and instead desiring the freedom to socialize in both gay men’s and heterosexual spaces. This growing detachment from identity politics and the desire to socialize in non-lesbian specific venues was seen as creating a tension between the younger and older generations of lesbian women in Amsterdam. There was a perceived disconnection between both groups as to how they connected space, politics, and appearance (2012:732).

Fobear claims that there have been changes in the ways that Dutch women relate to and perceive of their identities. These changes are manifested through generational differences in the way space is used. A comparison of generations makes it possible to identify changes in the ways identities, politics, and space are perceived, and also helps to understand the current context better. Fobear attributes the generational differences in use of space to changes in identity politics.

Changing Perceptions of Sexual Identity

Although Fobear is one of the only authors who have studied the decrease of lesbian spaces in Amsterdam, other authors across the Unites States, UK, and Australia have made similar claims. The reasons provided for this decrease vary across authors, sources, and fields. In her work, “The Incredible Shrinking Lesbian World and other Queer Conundra,” Stein claims that many women, including academics, “fear for the future of the lesbian world and fear it is shrinking and even possible dying” (2010:24). She ascribes this to contextual factors, such as more lesbian women coming out as transgender or queer, but claims that it ultimately comes down to changes in the ways they perceive of their identity. In her conclusion, she asserts,

(8)

What we are seeing, quite possibly, is the exhaustion of particular historical construction: a group of individuals who are defined primarily on the basis of their sexual identity (2010:28).

She found that many lesbian women did not want to define themselves based on their sexual identity, and instead have a desire to be “integrated” and “mainstreamed” into American life. This, she contends, has led to youth not wanting to define who they are solely or primarily by their sexual identity. Similarly, Savin-Williams’ work, “The New Gay Teen: Shunning Labels,” found that teens today often reject the “gay” label because they “don’t want their sexuality to define them.” (2005:16). As teens increasingly aim for integration, labels are no longer a primary identity marker, and sexual identity is not desired as a defining characteristic. Nowadays, sexuality for younger people is a very fluid concept and that’s why the younger generation lesbians may have progressed beyond a separate space, because you can go to a regular bar and meet a [lesbian] girl there” (Fobear 2012:735). Because sexual identity is no longer at the foreground of one’s identity, it is not as important for lesbian women to go to an exclusively lesbian bar as it used to be, for example, in the 70s.

However, the claim that youth are progressing towards fluid sexual identities and that there is greater sexual fluidity among women is not new. Women have been described as more prone to having “changes in attractions or sexual identity” than men (Katz-Wise 2015:190). This assumption of greater sexual fluidity in women compared to men has been attributed to various factors, including gendered sexual socialization and different levels of arousal of men and women (Ibid.192). Conversely, there have been other studies which found either no gender differences, or higher levels of sexual fluidity in men as opposed to women (Rosario et. al. 2006). Whether or not these claims are true, they could provide a possible explanation for why lesbian women are becoming a more dispersed group.

The ability to reject sexual labels as a primary identity marker has been attributed to a “narrative of emancipation.” In this narrative, sexuality is no longer the “primary index” of identity, and the constraint of adherence to gay and lesbian labels has been transcended (Coleman-Fountain 2014:803). Youth today feel that they have high levels of freedom, as well as high levels of societal acceptance and tolerance (Cohler and Hammack 2007:54). This emancipation can be understood as involving increased feelings of freedom, leading to a desire and ability of lesbian youth to participate in mainstream or mixed spaces. Fobear, similar to Cohler and Hammack, recognizes a “narrative of emancipation” by attributing the preference of women for mixed spaces to heightened levels of tolerance and acceptance within Amsterdam. She links this to their desire for recognition of their “multiple identities” and the way in which this influences the spaces they inhabit:

(9)

This desire [for mixed spaces] has been framed as coming out of the gay emancipation in the Netherlands and it is very much celebrated as an achievement. Instead of being confined to one social group, identity marker, aesthetic style, or space, it is argued, at least to a certain extent, that lesbian women now have the ability to place themselves into the various gay and heterosexual subgroups and social spaces in Amsterdam. In one sense, many of the younger lesbian women interviewed felt out of place within the traditional lesbian only scene, seeing it as being too confined to one aesthetic, ideological, and social appeal. Therefore, mixed spaces offer an opportunity for some of the younger lesbian women to create a place of their own where they can incorporate other parts of their life (2012:736).

Lesbian women in Amsterdam, she claims, are now more dispersed within other spaces and scenes which conform to their individual interests; sexual identity is no longer the common denominator for coming together. This phenomenon of lesbian women preferring mixed spaces could explain why these have been declining.

This rejection of gay and lesbian labels influences the spaces which lesbian women choose to occupy because teenagers choose to use space in ways that suit their desires for being seen as “normal” and “integrated.” Many younger gays and lesbians prefer to keep their homosexuality as “‘normal” and “private”—and thus as invisible—as possible” (Duyvendak &H ekma 2011:627). This aim for normalization of homosexuality in the Netherlands is evident in the work carried out by the COC (Cultuur en Ontspanningscentrum: Center for Culture and Leisure), an LGBT organization that has existed since 1946 and currently works on sexual education and sensitivity programs within schools (Hemker and Huijsmans 2009). The COC emphasized the normalization and integration of homosexuals as a main goal of their organization because homosexuality was seen as “abnormal” for such a long time (Bijleveld, Sax 2009:40). This focus on integration is exemplary of how gay and lesbian women in the Netherlands wish to eradicate the image of homosexuality as abnormal. Many lesbian women want to be seen as “normal” and “average,” which leads to further dispersing of lesbians and makes them less visible (Van der Steege 2009:130).

From Activism and Feminism to Mainstreaming and Mixing

To a large extent, even in the 21st century we live in a world conceptualized by men and run under their rules. Creating women’s community is an act of validation, a centering of one’s existence. The essential core of women’s community has been creating safe spaces for lesbian identity and existence, in different kinds of lesbian communities in the United States today (Rabin, Slater 2005:170).

Today a generational difference in the use of space exists not only because of sexual identity, but also because of changes in political identity. The core of political activity for lesbian women in the 60s and 70s was the struggle for visibility (Van Heugten 2010). During the Second Feminist

(10)

Wave, lesbian women in the Netherlands began to get involved in feminist groups and “actiegroepen” (action groups) where women could come together and mobilize (Bijleveld, Sax 2009:40). At these feminist meetings, lesbian topics were not discussed in an attempt to also reach the “average” woman. Yet, with the appearance of radical feminism, more women were openly lesbian, and feminist groups began adding lesbian topics (Ibid.) These lesbian and women-only spaces provided them an escape from heteronormative society, as well as a safe space to express and celebrate their lesbian existence (Van Heugten 2010:8). In Amsterdam, women recognized that there were not enough women’s spaces, compared to those for men. To make up for this gap, a Vrouwenkern (Women’s Core) was created within the COC in 1964 (Bijleveld, Sax 2009). During the 60s and 70s many women’s spaces were created which provided them with the opportunity to meet, organize themselves, and discuss relevant topics.

Throughout the 70s and 80s many Cafés, organizations, and parties appeared, which were designed exclusively for women as a way of creating and claiming a safe space. From today’s perspective, making these exclusively for women may seem “essentialist” and “limiting,” (Avarett et. al. 2012:912), but at the time it was important for lesbian women to be able to exercise their control over space.

Their women-only status was an important territorial strategy that ensured freedom from harassment and voyeurs… these bars were embedded in a lesbian-feminist culture that was committed to increasing lesbian visibility by building ‘women’s’ culture. While this factor certainly limited the clientele of these bars, it did create an environment in which lesbians could produce bar culture on their own terms (Ibid.).

These were times of activism, during which women came together to address topics of emancipation, visibility, and equality. Within a few years, several laws and practices that discriminated against gay men and lesbian women were removed (Fobear 2012:727). For the women throughout the 70s and 80s, the social mobilization and creation of lesbian and women-only spaces were fuelled through political contexts and a desire for change.

Today, lesbian and gay identities are conceived of as a “lifestyle” or “matter of taste” as opposed to the political identities of previous decades (Rooke 2007). The identity shift from activist to lifestyle is also present in the way that lesbian women relate to gay or lesbian spaces now: these used to be sites of activism, where women got together to organize. Now, however, they are seen as places to “party, flirt and have fun” (Ibid:233). These changes in the types of parties and bars are attributed to the increased consumerism and capitalism of cosmopolitan cultures (Rooke 2007:248). With few exceptions, young women today do not attend lesbian bars or parties out of an interest in activism or feminism. Instead, they are motivated by a desire to experiment with sexuality (Hemker, Huijsmans 2009:246).

(11)

The influence of the internet in the lives of lesbian women and gay men cannot be ignored since it has drastically altered the ways and spaces in which young persons meet each other. The growth in the use of social media and internet among youth has meant that lesbian and gay youth, as well as straight, are able to connect and meet others without having the same need for designated or fixed physical locations (See: Collins 2004; Ruting 2008; Mowlabocus 2010; Nash 2013; Visser 2008; Nash, Gorman-Murray 2015). The use of chatrooms and forums by lesbian and gay persons can create a sense of community that serves as an alternative to going out to bars (Burke 2000:593). As Kowalska notes, “Internet groups and cyber communities, usually based on common interests, provide information, places for exchanging ideas, but also decrease the need for a sense of belonging or identification with the group” (2011:331). The fact that lesbian women can connect with each other through the internet has further diminished their need for designated spaces or locations to meet one another. Older generations did not have this immensely broad resource that lesbian women have today.

The Importance of Visibility for Community Formation

Although private spaces and community sites are important components of lesbian territoriality, bars have been central to the process of building visibility among lesbians at the urban scale and expanding what lesbians have identified as their territory (Avarett et. al 2012:598).

By claiming space and having spaces to come together, women can create lesbian “‘territoriality” and build visibility within their urban environment. Lesbian bars are a fixed locality where lesbian women can become visible in their urban environment and gather to create places of contact, belonging, and meaning (Cattan, Vanolo 2014:1161).

Lesbian visibility is influenced not only by the silence of older generations or the “desire for normal” of younger generations, but also by the dominance of male space in general. Manuel Castells, a Spanish sociologist, has become the most cited author on the subject of the differences in the use of space between lesbian women and gay men. His research, conducted in San Francisco during the 80s, claimed that lesbian and gay commercial and neighbourhood bases in both the U.S and Europe were dominated by gay men and “institutions of gay male culture” (Castells 1983). He “argued that men seek to dominate and therefore achieve spatial superiority, while women have few territorial aspirations, attaching more importance to social relationships” (Valentine 2008:3). Other authors have claimed that women have less economic power than men and are able to spend less money, which leads to a marginalization in public space (Elwood 2000, Nash, Gorman-Murray 2015). These claims, however, have been criticized because of their gendered assumptions, as well as the failure of researchers to acknowledge other ways and spaces in which lesbian women come together (Binnie, Valentine1999; Podmore2001, 2006; Valentine 1996, Wolfe 1997).

(12)

Nevertheless, other research has claimed that the significant differences between gay male and lesbian women’s spaces are related to heteronormativity and patriarchy. “The problems of developing female spaces must be seen in the context of a society where public space has been traditionally characterized as male space—women’s use of space is constructed by patriarchal discourses” (Morgan et al 2010:109). By recognizing that space, in general, is divided along gendered and sexed binaries, we can begin to address the power relations that reproduce male dominance of space (Jo 2005). These gendered divisions of space have influenced the formation of lesbian spaces, as well as how lesbians inhabit other “heterosexual spaces.” In the 60s, women began to recognize and address this invisibility and the relations of patriarchy and heteronormativity that dominated space through the creation of spaces specifically for women and, later on, for lesbian women (Hemker and Huijsmans 2009).

Why, then, do lesbian bars still exist today? Gay and lesbian parties today are commercially orientated, yet they are still seen as providing a meeting space for women, away from the “male gaze” and heteronormative society. The importance of space for lesbian women now is a bit different; the focus is not so much on the political claiming of space, but on offering a safe space for women to meet and be able to escape “heterosexual” everyday-society. A study by Morgan et al. (2010) found that heterosexual women also benefit from lesbian and gay spaces as a way to distance themselves from heterosexual men and the “male gaze.” The “male gaze” refers, in this context, to the sexual objectification of lesbian women by men (Calogero 2004:16). What makes lesbian bars a “safe space” is that they enable women to escape the “male gaze” and freely express their sexuality without being objectified.

Lesbian bars are important not only because they are a “safe space” but also because they provide a place to meet and interact with other lesbian women (Van der Steege 2009:112). Lesbian friend networks are considered to be important for the well-being of both lesbian youth and seniors due to the need for support and understanding that they can offer (Cruikshank, Raphael 2015). Other studies have claimed that lesbian communities are not always public or territorial, but are rather “constituted either through informal networks or mixed sites” (Avarett et. al. 2012:596). The importance of social networks of lesbian friends comes from the need for what Wilkens calls a “community built on sameness” (2015:95). Such communities help those who participate in them to avoid feelings of isolation and loneliness (Ibid.).

Studies of older generations of lesbians have also emphasized the importance of belongingness and community so as to avoid problems of loneliness. For older lesbians, the importance of lesbian friend networks was rooted in the difficulties related to the stigmatization of homosexuality (Traies 2015:47) For older generations who suffered discrimination and rejection from family, the existence of lesbian, gay, or queer friend networks provided the

(13)

support needed to prevent feelings of isolation (Cruikshank, Raphael 2015). Having lesbian friend networks can aid in individual’s mental well-being by offering a support network which is based on sameness and understanding.

The way that lesbian women relate to space has changed over the years and is paralleled by shifting understandings about sexual identity. Does this mixing of space and the decrease in localities for lesbian women mean that these lesbian spaces are no longer necessary? As levels of emancipation, shifts in identity, and mixing of space occur, do lesbian women still have a need for lesbian spaces? Does the lack of visibility of women in the gay scene affect, interest, or concern young women today?

METHODS

(…) the ethnographer should not sit in 'his' armchair theorizing but should get out there and spend time learning about different peoples from within their own natural surroundings. (O’Reilly 2005:10)

As an ethnographer, I gathered data not only by conducting interviews, but also by immersing myself within the lesbian scene. The main data being used is the material obtained from the interviews, but in order to really “get a feel” for the lesbian scene in Amsterdam, I also conducted participant observation as a form of supplement to my research. I attended three lesbian and gay parties and regularly visited the two lesbian bars in Amsterdam, the Vive la Vie and the Saarein. In this way, I could experience what the women interviewed talked to me about, as well as get my own first-hand account.

A total of ten one-to-one interviews and five group interviews were held. I had initially intended to do only individual interviews, but on two occasions, the Dutch women wanted also to have their partner present, both for language purposes as well as comfort. The third group interview happened spontaneously. All of the women interviewed live in or around Amsterdam. The duration of time they have lived in Amsterdam varied from a few months to several years. Their ages also varied, ranging from 21 to 76. All the women where white-Dutch, except for one woman who had been born in Surinam and has Indian parents, but has lived in Amsterdam since she was two years old. The participants worked in various fields and had different levels and topics of study. I grouped the women in two main categories, which I have designated the “younger generation” and the “older generation.” All of the participants interviewed aged 21 to 34 are in the first group, while Josje, the two women interviewed at Saarein, and the women interviewed at the koffieochtend are included in the latter.

All interviews were held in person, with the exception of one Skype interview. Typically, the locations where chosen by the interviewees themselves, usually at bars or Cafés close or

(14)

convenient to them. During the interviews, I had an interview guide, but I avoided looking at it and instead asked follow-up questions to the responses they gave. This provided for a more informal, conversational interview atmosphere. I found that the main topics which I wanted to include were usually covered throughout the course of the interview, without requiring me always to prompt them. The interview guide focused on topics of personal experiences with lesbian spaces, as well as their thoughts and opinions on topics of lesbian visibility, identity, and generational differences. All interviews were audio recorded and subsequently transcribed verbatim.

Participants were recruited mainly through snowball sampling, as well as convenience sampling. I began by asking friends in my social group, but soon realized that this would be limiting. In order to broaden the variety of experiences, I placed a message on several social media.4_{The postings I did on various sites yielded only four participants, yet those postings}

helped me make contact with further participants through snowballing. I also interviewed some women whom I met from the field work conducted at lesbian bars and parties. I attempted to find women who varied in ages and nationalities, as well as in their level of involvement in lesbian parties or bars. I was mainly looking for women who varied in ages, but found that the 40+ group can be difficult to contact because of my own age and my lack of involvement in their social network.

This was not the only reason, however, that finding older participants was difficult. In my search for older women, I encountered first-hand the predominant presence of gay men. I attended two koffieochtends, which I had seen advertised in a local newspaper as “Roze Senioren Koffie Ochtend” (Pink Senior Coffee Morning), with no distinction to gender. When I attended these, I found that these two groups were attended only by men. When I asked one of the organizers about this, he explained that women would come once in a while, or come with another girl friend, and then would never come back. This limitation in sampling is illustrative of the lack of visibility of lesbian women, especially those who are older.

When initially searching for participants, I planned to interview only women who self-identified as lesbian. However, as I kept meeting more participants, I found that it was necessary for me to stretch my own boundaries on this question, since many of them considered that the term “lesbian” did not address adequately the complexity of their sexuality. Using the snowball method of finding participants, I asked some of the women to put me in contact with other of their lesbian friends. At the time of the interview, however, I discovered that many actually

4_{Most of the messages were published on various Facebook groups such as: Roze 50 Plus Nederland (Pink 50} plus Netherlands), LGBTQ Amsterdam, Amsterdam Durft te Vragen (Amsterdam Dares to Ask), among several others.

(15)

identified themselves as something other than lesbian, such as bisexual or sexually flexible. These women shared some very valuable insights with me regarding the topic, while at the same time underscoring the fact that our perceptions and ideas on how sexual identity is defined are quite complex and therefore must become more nuanced.

It is important to recognize that the sampling done cannot and does not attempt to be representative of a larger population. This is in accordance with the observation of O’Reilly: “Ethnographers rarely worry about sampling for representativeness […] However, we often do want our research to have wider relevance and we have to choose who to study and where and when and what” (2005:39). I attempted to interview subjects characterized by a variety of different experiences so as to better show the subjectivity of lesbian identity. The use of social media enabled me to find a varied sample.

Before doing the transcriptions of the interviews I had done, I listened to them several times. Coding was then performed through the use of Atlas TI, making use of the Code Manager and the software coding tools. During the first phase of coding, my objective was to encompass all the relevant aspects of interest. When coding, I began by using extensively codes for everything the interviewees said, and subsequently made use of the Code Families function in order to group the common codes together. Finally, I made use of the Network Viewer function to see how the codes related to each other.

Participant observation took place at both the two existing lesbian bars in Amsterdam and at three lesbian parties that were held during the time of research. I visited the Saarein on three occasions, with my length of stay varying from one to five hours, and visited the Vive la Vie a total of four times, staying between two and four hours. I wanted to get a feel for these places and be able to see for myself the things that the interviewees were talking about. One of the parties, My Crush, was recommended to me by three of the participants, which they had described as “different from the other gay parties.”

At these bars and parties, at times I merely observed, yet when possible I entered into conversations with people who would approach me or whom I would approach. Sometimes, the topic of my study would come up, while at other times I just engaged in “small talk” with others, usually chatting for no more than five minutes. On several occasions, however, I was able to have what I will call “exceptional conversations,” which stood out to me because of their relevance to my research and because they lasted longer. I wrote up my filed notes at home so as not to seem intrusive in the setting and avoid giving an “impression of supervision” (Cattan, Vanolo 2014:1162). Rather than giving the impression that I was doing research, I wanted to be seen as another lesbian at the bar, so that I could experience the culture without it being interrupted.

(16)

Besides the conversations, I focused on observing music, styles, and clothes worn, as well as nationalities, ratio of women to men, languages spoken, and how people approached each other, among other things.

All interviewees have been kept anonymous and confidential out of respect for the privacy of the participants. The names of the participants have also been changed. Furthermore, since some of the interviewees know each other, I have been careful not to share any personal, revealing information in the present work. I have decided not to include some of the information regarding actions within the scene that certain key participants shared with me as they opened up to me, since I find it to be sensitive. For example, some shared information about the financial status of another person or bar, or mentioned issues of jealousy in relation to other participants.

Because not everyone I talked to at the bars knew about the research I was doing, for my final thesis I have made use only of my field notes so as to further provide anonymity for the people I interviewed. My field notes reflected things I had seen and heard, and are included so as to give greater insight into the culture of everyday life. There were, however, other women who opened up to me a great deal when they knew about the project I was doing. When it has been possible, and when I have seen these women again, I have asked them for their consent for me to include in my thesis the things they shared with me in conversation. Most of them agreed to this on the condition of anonymity.

Self-Reflexivity and Limitations

Throughout this research, I have considered it important for me to remain very aware of my own position as a social researcher. My position as a young student, lesbian, and foreigner undoubtedly had an influence on the way I was perceived by the people at the parties and had a relational effect on the people I interviewed. This position became very evident to me when I was searching for older women to interview, since they do not form part of my immediate social circle. I am conscious of the fact that our positions as researchers influence the research process and the data produced (Haraway 1988; King 1994; Held 2009). I tried to be aware of my position, as well as the way in which I presented myself throughout the interviews. I strove to present myself in a relatable manner so that the interview participants might be more willing to open up to me. Furthermore, I attempted to phrase my questions in ways that built upon and developed further the responses they had given me.

Similar to Rooke, who analyzed not only the subjectivities she encountered in her research but also identified and acknowledged her own subjectivities, I have attempted to pay close attention to my own subjectivities. Rooke states that [queer] subjectivities are a “process of ongoing personal construction rather than a point of arrival” (2007:236). Recognition of this reality has enabled me to become aware that my own experiences as a researcher have been

(17)

ongoing. In addition, I have become attached and grown closer to some of the people I have met throughout my field work. The result of this is that my experiences have led me to reflect more on my own positionality and reflexivity within this research, as well as within the lesbian scene in Amsterdam, which hopefully is well-illustrated through the field notes presented throughout the data analysis.

Other than finding older participants willing to be interviewed, I did not face any challenges that I would regard as significant, with the exception of experiencing at times a language or cultural barrier. The fact that I have become quite fluent in Dutch had a positive influence on the interviews and the field work I carried out. For example, when I e-mailed the woman who organizes the koffieochtends for lesbian women above the age of forty, I first wrote to her in English and did not receive a reply for several weeks. However, when I contacted her again and mentioned that I was able to speak Dutch, she replied immediately and encouraged me to attend one of the meetings. This interaction is a reflection of my position as a foreigner who is able to speak Dutch; another researcher might encounter more problems due to language barriers. I was also able to help the interviewees find words in English for what they wanted to say, or was able to understand certain things they said without finding it necessary to disrupt the interview in order to ask for clarification. At the same time, however, speaking the language was also a limitation because sometimes the interviewees would assume that I knew some of the bars, parties, or places they were talking about, even if that was not always the case. If participants had not assumed that, because I spoke Dutch, I had become fully acculturated, they might have tried explaining certain topics more fully and conveying some of their ideas more clearly. I found that the participants would often skip over certain subjects or fail to mention certain parties because they assumed that I knew what they were talking about. Sometimes I had to ask for an explanation, but for the most part, this was not much of a problem.

(18)

“NO NEED FOR A LESBIAN CAFÉ SINCE LESBIANS ARE

EVERYWHERE”

The Small Lesbian Scene and Reasons for not Being Involved

I’ve been in the Netherlands now for about a year and a half and I still just feel like I can’t figure out where all the lesbian women are. As a Mexican-American, we hear about Amsterdam as the ‘”gay mecca” and I can’t seem to find other lesbian women who are into the same music, art, or activities as me. Talking with Sabrina tonight at Lesbique5_{really validated my feelings. She was}

wearing a long skirt and had dreads, and we talked for about an hour about our frustrations in not finding lesbian parties with good, non-techno music. I can’t help but feel like there are few lesbian hippy girls. I mean, they have to be out there, I met Sabrina tonight! But, where can I find more?

(Field Notes April 17, 2015.)

In general, the women I interviewed regarded the lesbian scene in Amsterdam as being very small. Even the women who described themselves as not being involved in lesbian and gay “going out” perceived it as small, and thought of it as one group of women that just moves amongst the Vive la Vie and other lesbian and gay parties. Danielle states unreservedly,

I think all the gay women in Holland are connected. Everybody knows each other! It sounds crazy, but it’s really true; if you don’t know somebody then your friend knows them.

The lesbian scene in Amsterdam is perceived as being so small that Nikki even went so far as to claim “I can say without bragging that I pretty much know all the lesbians, I mean, at least by face.” Most of the participants had this same perception of the lesbian scene as small. More importantly, not only was the scene described as already being small, but it was perceived as becoming even smaller and more limited. This was attributed by Hansje and Femke separately to the fact that less and less lesbians are going out. When I was asking Femke about why she thinks the Vive la Vie is so successful she answered, “I don’t know if they’re so successful. In my memory, a few years ago it was busier.” For Hansje, this feeling was also present, not only in Amsterdam but also in her hometown:

In Tilburg you had the Popcorn and the Lollipop and they both had to quit; everything is having to stop. Things are closing because people aren’t showing up, and I just can’t seem to figure out what it is.

For them, the scene was less busy than a few years ago, and there were less lesbian women going out. However, when I asked about why they thought less women were going out, they both

5_{Party marketed for “For fags, faguettes, freaks, friends, family, homofobiques, Kings & Queens” held at} OT301 (Overtoom 301, Amsterdam) on April 17, 2015.

(19)

answered with, “I don’t know; I really don’t know.” This perception of the lesbian scene becoming even smaller was something that they felt they could not explain.

The women who regularly go out in the lesbian scene regarded this decrease in activity as a problem. I realized how important this topic was to them when they made comments like that of Danielle, who said: “I don’t know where they are going! If you know, tell me!” Another such comment was made by Hansje, who said she couldn’t figure out why there are less lesbian women going out to lesbian bars and asked me to take action: “When you find it out, you have to let me know, and you have to let society know so that we can do something about it!” Nikki compared this problem of the decrease in bars and women going out to the recent shutting down of the oldest lesbian bar in San Francisco, the Lexington: “It just closed for the same reasons we are struggling. There are no people coming in.” The feeling that less lesbian women are going out, together with the recognition that lesbian bars and parties have been closing down, was expressed as a problem by a few of the women who were involved in the lesbian night-life.

The sexual nature of going out, described as feeling that one was involved in a “meat hunt” or the “filthy” lesbian scene, was something that led women to choose not to be involved. Several of the women interviewed expressed their dislike for the culture of “hitting on people” and used expressions such as “meat hunt,” “meat market,” and “vlees keuring (meat inspection)” to characterize the lesbian scene. In Sara’s words:

You know….when you enter [the Vive la Vie], it’s like a meat market. Everyone stares at you, and it feels like “who are you?” And, “can I date you?” I think that’s what is keeping me from going there now, because now I am married. I mean, we would like to have a nice day to go out, but it’s just a bit awkward when you are there.

For Sara, going out meant that women were on the hunt, and since she is not interested in flirting with women because she is married now, she has no desire to go out. Closely related to this “meat hunt” perception of the lesbian scene was the idea that it’s all about sex. Rachelle described the involvement of her ex-girlfriend in the lesbian nightlife by saying, “She was in that filthy lesbian scene for a really long time […] Like being with three girls at the same time, and you know, that sort of thing.” Maartje said she had gone to a lesbian party called Venus Freaks a few years ago, but after attending it once, she had no desire of going again because of the sexual nature of the party: “Then I scratched that off my list, like I don’t have to go to that anymore. It’s just so much about sex, and being out there, and seducing people.” Tanja attributed the reason the lesbian scene was so sexual to its small size,

Everybody had everybody, had sex with everybody. Everybody knows each other from somewhere. You have a lot of drama. Really a lot of drama. Fights and

(20)

gossiping, and like, “oh you screwed my ex-girlfriend”, “oh no I’m in love with her”, and “no, I’m in love with her,” and yeah you get fights. You have that in the lesbian scene.

Although she is not highly involved in the scene, she recognized that this perception of being overly sexual was one of the reasons that some women would stray away from being involved in the lesbian scene. Several didn't like the sexual environment of lesbian bars and parties and said they preferred to stay out of the “drama” that came along with being highly involved. This dislike of the overly-sexual nature of the lesbian scene contrasts with the feeling expressed by other of the women who were actually attracted to the lesbian scene because of the opportunity it gave them to flirt and kiss with other women.

Yet, it was not only the overly-sexual nature of the lesbian scene which led many women to choose not to go out, but other more specific, individual reasons as well. Anna, for example, had a desire to lead a healthier lifestyle, including less drinking, which is why she does not like to be involved in the night-life in general. Sara, whose main reason for going out is that she likes to dance, felt that neither the Saarein nor the Vive la Vie had a good dancing area. Similarly, Danielle preferred going out to music festivals and other events that have music that she likes. These reasons were specific to the individual and cannot be generalized.

Among the women in this study, there were different reasons why they chose to be involved or not in the lesbian nightlife. Whether they were involved or not, most of them felt that the two lesbian bars in Amsterdam would never close. For each of these two bars, they gave different reasons for their belief. In the case of the Saarein, which has existed since the 70s, they felt that its historical importance would prevent it from being closed. The fact that they perceived of the Vive la Vie as a highly frequented bar that is internationally renowned led them to conclude that it would also remain open. When I mentioned to Sara that, on an international level, many lesbian bars are closing, she yelled, “If the Vive la Vie closed its doors I think we would have a riot!” Some of the women felt that the Vive la Vie would remain open due to the need for a space where women can come together to meet each other, as well as the fact that there will always be new groups of young lesbians coming out and wanting to party there.

I had expected that lesbian women who felt that there were few lesbian spaces would also have tried exploring the queer scene in Amsterdam. To my surprise, most of the participants said they were not involved in the queer scene. In fact, they even claimed that they didn’t know what it was. Only Rebekke, Marieke and the bartender Nikki said they sometimes go to the Vrankrijk for their Queer Night or to a queer party. Outside of them, none of the other participants in the younger generation have been involved in the queer scene. In response to my question about being involved in the queer scene, I even received the response, “What is queer?”

(21)

Marieke, who is involved in the queer scene, explained to me that I had probably not encountered other queer women in my research because the “lesbian scene and the queer scene don’t mix.” Thus, the only woman that identified as queer (more specifically lesbian-queer) was Marieke. This was contrary to what I expected to find, because I initially anticipated that women, feeling the lesbian scene was too small, would attempt to go out also to queer spaces. This was not the case, however.

Marieke shared with me some of her perceptions regarding the queer scene and how it differs from the lesbian scene. Linked to activist identities, she felt that the queer scene was more political, which was a reason why the scenes didn’t mix. She stated,

I think I’m more in the queer scene. I like the diversity. I like the fact that it’s more political. That’s also a difference. It’s really important in the queer scene, that it’s political. This is what I like, I like to have more deepgang (deepness). Not only to just party. I like people around me having that, more intellectual. More interested in activism.

Marieke went on to share some of the things she was involved in, such as squatting, and said that she had recently been in a protest for better health care programs. She and another participant, Rebekke, who had been to a couple of queer parties, commented that they feel like the lesbian and queer scenes don’t mix much. This could be one of the reasons why most of the participants in my study were not involved in the queer scene, or did not identify as queer.

Changing Perceptions of Identity

I just find myself staring at pictures of the Saarein in the 70’s. I’m fascinated by the women’s looks, the styles, and the fact that there are so many that they are even sitting outside. I still feel like I was born in the wrong decade. I wish that the women in the lesbian scene could see that there is still so much to be done! Even in Amsterdam, on King’s day I was kissing my girlfriend and a guy came up really close and asked if he could join. As long as things like this are happening, we are still objectified and there is still much to be improved! I almost want to yell at the top of my lungs: Come on! We need to make things like this stop! (Field Notes April 30).

Ultimately, the desire of the younger generation for frequenting mixed spaces can be related to the way they perceived their own identities. Even my search for lesbian women became more difficult after realizing that most of the women I found didn’t even adhere to that category, or found it too limiting. Because of this non-adherence to the term “lesbian,” several of the participants felt it was not necessary or even desirable to go to a lesbian bar or space. Also, it was apparent that generational differences influenced whether or not one identified as an activist. The younger generation either did not identify with that term or else saw themselves as “passive activists,” to use the term of one of the participants. In contrast, Josje and the organizer of the koffieochtend were both adamantly activists, involved in research on lesbian women as well as policy changes.

(22)

As women identify less rigidly with the lesbian category, they feel less of a need to find spaces that target their sexual orientation. The women who said they didn’t go to lesbian Cafés were mainly the ones who did not identify as “lesbian.” Most of the women in the younger generation tended to reject labels, preferring instead a more fluid identity and refusing to see their sexual identity as their primary identity marker. Anna was the most adamant about her rejection of labels, a subject which came up several times in the interview:

So, yeah. I don’t really see myself as gay or bisexual or an artist or you know, whatever. I’m just a person doing stuff. (Laughs.) I don’t like labels too much. Similarly, Maartje stated:

I hate the label of being a lesbian. But just any label. I just want to be labeled as myself.

Here we can see a strong dislike for labels. Other participants similarly explained that labels feel confining, both for themselves and for the way other people see them and interact with them. In addition to seeing labels as confining, several participants felt that labels could not fully capture their identity. Nikki did not want to attach herself to any label because she felt that none of them were appropriate:

I mean I’m not butch, I’m not femme. I’m in between. I’m not lesbian, I’m not bi. I’m in between. Are there words for that? No! So, how about just Nikki? Or, just being a woman? That’s enough for me. I don’t need words attached to me. I’m just me. There is more to me than my sexuality.

Nikki felt that she was not able to put into words or labels the way that she felt about herself. She saw herself as being “in between” categories, and preferred to see herself simply as Nikki.

Just as Nikki felt there were no words for her sexuality, many other participants found different ways to describe their sexual identities. Most of the participants in the younger generation didn’t even identify as lesbian. In order to illustrate the variety of ways in which women identified themselves, I list the different terms the participants used to speak of their sexuality:

 Lesbian [n=5]

 Sexually flexible or fluid (n=2)

 No Label (“Just Myself”) [n=3]

 Bisexual, but mainly attracted to women [n=2]

 80 % lesbian 20 % open for anything

 Gay woman

 Bisexual

 Queer - Lesbian

 Pansexual

(23)

Most of the younger generation of participants in this study did not adhere strictly to a “lesbian” label, and felt that their sexuality was more complex than a single label, while others considered sexuality as falling on a spectrum. Several women also felt that they did not want to “close themselves” off to the possibility of being with a man again. Rachelle, for example, felt that she had learned through her studies that there are no “clear divisions” of straight gay or bi, and saw sexual identity as “more on a spectrum.” Other women expressed feeling mainly lesbian, but sometimes wanting to kiss or flirt with a man, even though they had no desire to be in a relationship with men. Nikki said that she had gone through a difficult time after she had been living as openly lesbian for a few years, and then started to develop strong feelings for a male friend which made her doubt her lesbian identity. She stated:

Well, from that I became confused. Then I thought about it a little more… I was like, who am I? Why can’t I just be that or that? It took me so long to figure out I was a lesbian, and then I was attracted to a man! So, now everything is like a grey area. I don’t identify that much as a lesbian, and more so as bisexual, but also that doesn’t fit me. So, I’m just who I am.

For her, this time was difficult because, after she had been so involved in going out as a lesbian and had come to be very proud about liking women, she felt very confused that she was having feelings for a man. She went on to tell me that this was something she had struggled with for a long time and that, in the end, she had decided that she did not have to limit herself in her attractions. Instead, she now just “accepts them as they come.”

For most of the women in the younger generation, this approach to sexuality as fluid and on a spectrum is central to understanding and defining their sexuality. I was, however, surprised by the response Josje gave to my question about how she identifies her sexuality:

I call myself lesbian. But also, I think, I am bisexual. I also had sometimes affairs or relationships with men. Not anymore because for me, it’s better in relationships to be with women, but it’s kind of fluid. It’s not really only one or the other. But, I don’t like to be normal. I don’t like to be like everyone. So, to be a lesbian, and to say I am a lesbian, I feel comfortable with that. I am not straight or heterosexual. Definitely not.

This surprised me because I expected that the older generation would adhere to the lesbian label. Therefore, I was taken aback when she said she was also bisexual. Josje recognizes that sexuality is fluid, but feels comfortable in calling herself a lesbian. Different from the younger generation, Josje felt that it was important to adhere to this lesbian category in order to make it clear that she is not “normal” and that she is not heterosexual.

Josje’s desire “not to be normal” stands in contrast to the desire to be seen as normal that the younger generation expressed. For example, both Rachelle and Andrea had done volunteer

(24)

work at the COC by giving lectures to students. Both of them, independently of one another, said that the aim of doing those lectures was to “show that homosexuality is normal.” This generational difference was highlighted by Danielle when we were talking about whether she identified as a feminist or not. She said that she felt that in previous times, when women were activists and involved in the feminist movement, the result was that more divisions were created. For that reason, it’s better now to be “normal.” In her words:

We like normal things, we have jobs, and we are getting more accepted because of that. And if you go to Dam Square every week and ask for more rights for women, I think at a certain point people will think like “oh there she is again talking about men being bad”….you know? So, I think because lesbian women start to accept straight people more, the straight people start to accept the lesbian women more.

Here she stresses the idea that lesbians are normal people who do normal things, like having jobs. According to Danielle, when women were out protesting, they were perceived as being “man haters.” This created tensions with straight people. She felt that if lesbian women do not create those boundaries, they are more easily accepted.

Most of the women in the younger generation did not identify as activists, as opposed to the older generation. The sentiment of the younger generation was best explained by the term used by Andrea, “passive activist.” By this she meant that women like her did not consider themselves activists, but instead tried to lead by example and to “speak up” when they felt something was unfair or they wanted to make a point. Hansje related her desire to be normal as a reason for letting others know in certain situations that she was lesbian:

I’ve worked a lot with children and teenagers, and for me it was always a big deal to let them know I was a lesbian. I was like ok, if I don’t tell them now, they won’t know to deal with a lesbian, then maybe when they’re 12, 13, 14 years old and meet the first lesbian in their life who is maybe afraid to come out of the closet, she will get all the shit over her head. So, for me it was always important to be some kind of voorbeeld figuur (role model) and well, let people know: I’m a lesbian, I’m perfectly normal and I like the same stuff as you, and I don’t do drugs, I don’t deal with the police or whatever, I’m just like you. And for me, that’s important, to let people see, here I am, now what? When you act normal about being a lesbian, other people will too. If you make a big deal out of it, then other people do too. Maybe it’s not like, I’m not a feminist or whatever, but like, I do try to keep that in mind because I know a lot of people don’t dare to come out of the closet, and I can because I live in the Netherlands, so I have to, yeah, use it, I guess.

In this quote, Hansje brings up a variety of topics and relates them all to each other. For her it is important to let children know that she is a lesbian so that they can see it as a normal thing, and in that way it is less likely that they will bully others when they are teenagers. She also makes an important statement when she says she wants to let people see, “here I am”; she wants to be visible so that she can further the idea that homosexuals are normal. She doesn’t identify herself

(25)

as a feminist, but recognizes her privilege in the Netherlands and feels she should take advantage of it.

Although the participants who adopted this type of “passive activism” felt that they no longer had to be activists, they also indicated their willingness to be involved in activism if or when the need arises. For example, Tanja shared that, whenever she heard homophobic comments from friends, she would make it a point to disclose her sexual orientation. Several participants also chose to clarify that, even though they did not consider themselves activists, they would practice activism if they felt there were a need for it. Sara reflects the voice of several participants:

There aren’t many hurdles to take, and yeah, if there was not equal marriage, then I would fight for it, I think so. I think I would petition and do stuff, but because it’s been so easy, I don’t think of myself as a feminist. We are past that time, but if there ever came a point that, for example, they stopped equal marriage, then of course I would hit the streets. The same, if say, they made abortion illegal. I would definitely go and rally.

Sara, as well as several other participants, felt that there aren’t many “hurdles” for lesbian women to overcome anymore. Therefore, they don’t feel the need to be engaged in activist work or identify as feminist. The younger generation felt that the previous generations had fought for their emancipation, which had let them have, as one participant put it, “the luxury of not identifying as an activist.” Also, several of the women who said they did not consider themselves activists indicated that they had done volunteer work, such as being involved with the COC and mentoring vulnerable youth groups. They also mentioned trying to be role models by being openly lesbian. This understanding of what activism involves was linked to a generational difference, since it was based on the perception that we are past the point of fighting for emancipation.

The older generation had a very different perspective, and felt that there were still a lot of challenges for lesbians and gays that needed to be addressed and resolved. Shortly after arriving for the first time at the koffieochtend, I received several informational pamphlets. Among these was one calling for protesting a new bill that is being passed regarding child welfare, claiming that it further increases the ”gender pay gap” in Holland. Also, right after I met Josje, she began talking to me about all the research in which she has been involved regarding lesbian and gay youth and seniors. She has done research on a variety of topics, including isolation and loneliness of LGBT seniors and the consequences that this has had within the healthcare sector. She also told me she has been involved within the women’s movement and the gay and lesbian movement since she was 30 years old. Josje ended with a comment that summarized her perception of generational differences regarding activism. She indicated that she felt that the

Lesbians aren’t in cafés, they are anywhere : the mainstreaming of lesbian identity and the decrease of lesbian public spaces in Amsterdam