reading dorothy allison write of amber hollibaugh, “i watched her nurture lovers and their books, watched her set hers aside over and over again to help someone else,” and thinking about kennedy & davis saying compared to butches they interviewed, fems talked less about their internal experiences during their memories & more about what was happening in the community (which i want to be clear is the product of their specific social environment & not some inherent difference)
& thinking about how much i’ve coped with being homebound through recognizing my impact on the world through my partners’ actions, the way my support is part of the invisibilized scaffolding making their writing & research & activism & protection of others possible
guess my takeaway goes both directions: my own writing is just as much a part of my legacy, and no work is done in isolation — the femme who nurtures their lovers’ work is often positioned as synonymous with the cishet academic’s wife, both of whom are met with contemptuous pity (i’m reminded of rachel wiley asking “do you love femmes or just femme labor?” — but they only love femme labor when they don’t know it’s there)
but the solution isn’t for everybody to go write independently unnurtured; rather ideally everybody would have options, would be supported & respected in their work & have that work valued, including & especially when it’s the work of nurturing. to nurture lovers & their books (their posters, their journal articles, their speeches) is one of the two great callings & crafts of my current life, one of the most fulfilling & rewarding things i’ve ever done — an impact invisibilized even to myself until the months & years they spent painting it neon pink for me.
& when i’m ready to write, they nurture me right back.












