Representation 

Overview

Representation is important as it not only impacts how people view themselves, but also how society views them. Throughout the world, a key source of representation is the media. According to Larry Gross, our society is “dominated” by the mass media (2001). He explains that “The world has become a single giant organism” and that “its nervous system is telecommunications” (Gross, 2001). We have created a society in which the media defines societal norms and controls how particular groups and issues are represented. Therefore, the representation that we see in television and film is that which makes sense to the decision makers, either fitting their own worldview or following past success (Gross, 2001). Television in particular is “the key source of information about the world” as it creates and maintains common values and perspectives among viewers (Gross, 2001). His research shows that those who watch more television are more likely to use television’s depictions of reality as their conceptions of people and the world. Thus, diverse representation that strays from the standard heteronormative narrative is imperative in creating a more inclusive world in which every person feels they belong and receives acceptance and respect.

Having something, or someone, to relate to reminds people that they are not alone and that they can be their authentic self. Representation in media is a vital source for self-recognition and identity formation in the U.S.  (Hilton-Morrow & Battles, 2015). This familiarity in characters fills a void when those within the LGBTQ+ community have limited or no models of people with such identities around them. Young people in the LGBTQ+ community often lack real role models and access to identity-related information, and therefore rely on media representations for their identity development (McInroy & Craig, 2017). 

Representation has the potential to celebrate diversity and normalize communities and experiences that society may view through a discriminatory and stereotypical lens. According to Larry Gross, people will accept inaccurate or derogatory information about a group if they lack other sources of information (2001). For many people, LGBTQ+ representation in the media is their first point of contact with the community (Hilton-Morrow & Battles, 2015). Indeed, as Wendy Hilton-Morrow and Kathleen Battles write, “Developing more positive, realistic, and diverse representations of any group can lead to increased social and political tolerance of social diversity” (2015). Thus, visibility in media is impactful not only to those identifying with the content, but also to society as a whole.

Representation also creates a sense of belonging and has a positive impact on mental health. Media impacts our thinking and values, and plays an important role in influencing ideology (Johnson, 2016). Johnson further explains how media shapes the way we see and understand people and institutions (2016). At its core, media visibility is an important form of social and political recognition (Hilton-Morrow & Battles, 2015). What we see in the media has a significant impact on our lives and perspectives.

​

Key History of Queer & Lesbian Women in Media

In the nineteenth century, sexual identity was considered to be strongly connected to gender identity. It was believed that people experienced same-sex attraction because they hoped to be or considered themselves to be of the opposite sex, and therefore, only people who deviated from their assigned gender were considered to be homosexuals (Benshoff & Griffin, 2005). This ideology contributed to the stereotype that lesbian and queer women are expected to appear more masculine or exhibit more masculine behaviors. Interestingly, women who maintained feminine behavior were still considered to be heterosexual even if they had a partner of the same sex. In early films, filmmakers heavily relied on gender inversion to hint at their characters' sexuality.

Invisibility and the "idealization of heterosexual romance" are common themes in the representation of lesbian and queer women in television and film, both historically and today. According to Harry Benshoff and Sean Griffin, “Lesbians and queers of color were often denied access to the worlds of white gay men” (2005). In most cases in early Hollywood filmmaking, the existence of lesbian characters had to be implied instead of explicit (Benshoff & Griffin, 2005). The 1929 German film, Pandora’s Box, includes what is perceived to be film’s first lesbian character (Smith, 2020). However, any allusions to this were removed prior to the American release of the film. Then, in 1930, Marlene Dietrich’s American film, Morocco, challenged the heterosexual binary and norms regarding sexuality when Dietrich, dressed in a top hat and tailcoat, kissed another woman. This was a powerful performance during a time when women wearing trousers was inconceivable, and the kiss between the two women became prominent in cinematic history.

That same year, the Hays Code, or the Motion Picture Production Code, was introduced in the United States, determining “moral” guidelines for film content (Smith, 2020). The Hays Code forbade the representation of “sex perversion” and required the upholding of the sanctity of marriage in film representation. This included any depictions of nudity, suggestive dancing, lustful kissing, illegal drug use, mocking of religion, interracial romances, or the LGBTQ+ community. The code set guidelines that a picture was never to “lower the moral standards” of its audience, and declared that “the sympathy of the audience shall never be thrown to the side of crime, wrongdoing, evil or sin” (Mondello, 2008). While the code was voluntary for film companies, it was mandatory for filmmakers if their films were to play in American theaters (Mondello, 2008). This exacerbated the invisibility that lesbian and queer women were already experiencing.

German film Maedchen in Uniform was released in 1931 and follows a schoolgirl’s crush on her teacher. This film helped to break down the barriers for queer cinema as one of the first significant queer films. Additionally, it was directed by a woman without any men in the cast. Similar to the censorship of Pandora’s Box, by the time this film was released in the United States, it was so heavily censored and edited that it lost most of its queer meaning (Benshoff & Griffin, 2005). In 1933, Greta Garbo’s character in Queen Christina has a preference for men’s attire and shares a kiss with another woman. She is also portrayed as one who has intimate relations with both men and women. However, the script is refashioned to turn the story into a heterosexual romance.

During the time of World War II, Hollywood seemed to increase its coded references to queer sexualities as homosocial groupings became more common and expectations about gender were shifting with men at war and women working in factories (Benshoff & Griffin, 2005). As the war ended, queer people faced an increasingly hostile environment as the nation stressed an American norm of white, heterosexual, and middle-class. Racial and ethnic minorities became more vocal about their lack of civil rights, and women were frustrated with the restrictions in their lives. People of color, women, and the younger generation were increasingly in opposition to conforming and following the status quo. During this time, depictions of queer characters in film began shifting from silly and for comedic entertainment to villainous.

While sexuality was overlooked in the armed services during World War II due to needing numbers, soon a person could be dishonorably discharged from the military if they were even suspected of being gay or lesbian (Benshoff & Griffin, 2005). This dismissal made it difficult to be hired by most employers, and many gay and lesbian people had to relocate away from their friends and families. A “witch hunt” ensued against gay and lesbian people, and began affecting many areas of policy. Laws made “gender appropriate clothing” mandatory, and queer people were regularly arrested at gay bars. Many people were voluntarily, and some involuntarily, subjected to psychiatric treatments, including electroshock therapy and lobotomies, in an attempt to “cure” their homosexuality. Many queer people remained “in the closet” due to the prevalence of hate and fear. According to Harry Benshoff and Sean Griffin, “The toxic homophobia of the era was enough to keep most queers locked firmly into their closets” (2005).

More explicit queer characters began to appear in Hollywood films, but they were punished by being killed in the plot. Harry Benshoff and Sean Griffin explain that it is due to this “compensating moral value” that these characters were allowed to exist (2005). Throughout the 1960s, Hollywood representations of queer people also continued to exist around previously established stereotypes including homosexuality being portrayed as silly, villainous, or shameful (Benshoff & Griffin, 2005). Lesbian and queer women were also perceived as angry and “man-hating.” Therefore, filmmakers were reluctant to include lesbian and queer women because they believed gay men were more likely to be embraced (Streitmatter, 2008). While derogatory perceptions of homosexuality affected onscreen representation, they also impacted queer artists. For example, actress Sheila Kuehl was forced to leave the industry after it became public that she was a lesbian.

An early attempt at filming Lillian Hellman’s play, The Children’s Hour, was struck down by Code officials when they warned that they would not sanction a film with a lesbian angle (Benshoff & Griffin, 2005). Finally, The Children’s Hour was filmed and released in 1961, starring Audrey Hepburn and Shirley MacLaine. In this film, friends Martha and Karen run a boarding school for girls and face unexpected challenges when one of the girls lies about them being lovers. The film is careful to avoid explicitly mentioning Martha being a lesbian or the allegations against the two women aside from one scene when Karen confronts Mrs. Tilford, explaining that they were accused of being lovers. When Martha later confides in Karen with hints of her sexual identity, the film ensures to call it unnatural and dirty. Martha tells Karen that she feels “so sick.” Ultimately, Martha is so ashamed of her identity that she chooses to take her own life rather than live as a lesbian. 

The Children’s Hour is an example of the homophobic themes and hushed connotations that often surrounded lesbian and queer characters in early television and film. At the time, psychiatry still deemed homosexuality to be a mental illness, and Hollywood portrayed queer people as “just as likely to kill themselves as they were to murder someone else” (Benshoff & Griffin, 2005). The Hays Code, or Motion Picture Production Code, was amended in 1961 to allow the subject of homosexuality to appear openly on screen, and the Code was finally abandoned altogether and replaced with a ratings system in 1968. 

The following year, in 1969, the Stonewall Riots marked a new era for the LGBTQ+ community, launching the gay rights movement. As the riots received publicity, the idea of queer resistance and the reminder of queer people’s existence spread around the world. Homosexuality became centered as a civil rights issue instead of a medical one. Despite the growing fight for “gay liberation,” Hollywood films in the 1970s mostly ignored the gay rights movement and avoided including queer characters. The intense desire for media representation and the frustration from waiting for Hollywood inspired queer people to begin producing their own films in larger numbers than ever before (Benshoff & Griffin, 2005). For queer women, this was the first time experimental films were made by, about, and for lesbian and queer women. One of the first includes Jan Oxenberg’s Home Movie in 1972 in which she uses home movies of her as a little girl with voice-over narration to describe her childhood and coming out experience.

Lesbian and queer people were becoming more visible to the public. Pride marches and festivals started to be organized each summer around the nation to commemorate the anniversary of the Stonewall Riots. A major victory occurred in 1973 when homosexuality was removed from the American Psychiatric Association’s list of mental disorders. Then, Elaine Noble became the first openly lesbian woman elected to a state legislature when she was elected to the Massachusetts state legislature in 1974. In 1976, The War Widow was a pioneer in lesbian visibility when it became the first lesbian love story on mainstream American television. The plot follows two women who fall in love during World War I, and it even has a positive ending. While the emotional connection between the two women is clear, their physical romance only goes so far as holding hands. However, it was a pivotal portrayal of lesbian identity and the difficulty of being true to oneself and prioritizing one’s happiness despite expectation and judgment. 

In the 1980s, more queer people were living openly and expressing their sexual identities despite the hate and opposition that was still prevalent. Queer characters in television and film were still controversial. Those in opposition claimed the inclusion of these characters promoted “the gay agenda.” The growing opposition resulted in a variety of Hollywood films that centered around the stereotype of the villainous queer character or “killer queer” (Benshoff & Griffin, 2005). Vito Russo explains this stereotype delivers a message that “homosexuality is not only contagious, but inescapably brutal” (1987). Meanwhile, the boom of cable television in the 1980s resulted in minority filmmakers, such as African American and queer filmmakers, documenting their communities in independent films. In 1985, Donna Deitch’s Desert Hearts was a groundbreaking film as it explored a sensual affair between two women after one of them divorces her husband. Upon its release, it was regarded as the first film to depict a positive portrayal of a lesbian relationship without heartache or death. Desert Hearts was one of the most successful independent films during this decade.

One of the earliest and most significant texts in examining the impact of the Hays Code on queer cinematic visibility is Vito Russo’s The Celluloid Closet, which was first published in 1981 with a revised version published in 1987 (Kohnen, 2016). This text explores queer visibility from early cinema to the mid 1980s, analyzing the way in which gays and lesbians were portrayed and highlighting stereotypes, both prior to the Hays Code and after. According to Russo, queer cinematic visibility was rendered via connotation during the Hays Code, and denotation after the Hays Code (Kohnen, 2016). Vito Russo was an early gay activist and one of the founders of GLAAD before passing away in 1990. A documentary of The Celluloid Closet was later created in 1995.

In the 1990s, queer people continued to become more visible in America. Artists such as Melissa Etheridge came out and publicized their sexuality without losing their careers. Additionally, due to their unapologetic focus on gender and sexuality mixed with emotion and various stylistic elements, many independent films in the 1990s became classified as New Queer Cinema. These films “raise controversial issues and celebrate a variety of queer sexualities” (Benshoff & Griffin, 2005). The films’ deconstruction of concepts of race, gender, and sexuality resulted in praise by theorists and activists, but they were not generally pleasing to broad audiences longing for feel-good films. However, New Queer Cinema helped to pave the way for film and television to include more queer images (Benshoff & Griffin, 2005). 

By the early 1990s, lesbianism was considered to be commercially desirable, resulting in 1993 being deemed “the year of lesbian chic” (Smith, 2020). This cultural trend resulted in multiple leading magazines, such as Cosmopolitan and Vogue, including lesbian and queer women in their articles. “Lesbian chic” focused on a distinct appearance of the lesbian and queer woman community - highly attractive and feminine. Women with masculine mannerisms or with fuller figures were excluded from the “explosion” of gay women in the media during the early 90s. Lesbian content was overwhelmingly curated for the pleasure of a straight male audience. Further, the ideology of “lesbian chic” also created a new trope known as the “temporary lesbian” along with the “lesbian kiss episode” (Smith, 2020). 

In 1991, L.A. Law (1986-1994) featured the first kiss between two female characters on United States commercial network television (Smith, 2020). In L.A. Law, one of the women was immediately redeemed as heterosexual and then was abruptly written out of the show after the kiss episode. The other woman was identified as bisexual, but she was only shown having relationships with men. In 1994, another “lesbian kiss episode” in the television show Roseanne sparked major controversy. In fact, ABC decided not to broadcast the scene because its “racy content” would “violate the standards of decency” (Streitmatter, 2008). Roseanne Arnold then threatened to remove her program from the network if they did not include the scene, resulting in ABC agreeing to reverse its decision. The scene shows a kiss between Roseanne Arnold’s character, the central character in the sitcom who has a husband and children, and Sharon, a lesbian character played by Mariel Hemingway. However, the kiss lasts for five seconds and viewers do not see the two women actually kiss. The camera shows the back of Sharon’s head and then Roseanne’s surprised, and disgusted, expression. 

These depictions of lesbians and queer women were not an attempt at inclusive representation, but were driven by economics (Streitmatter, 2008). According to Richard Streitmatter, media organizations did not glorify gay women in the early 1990s to serve a stigmatized minority group but because they hoped it would lead to increased profits (2008). The Roseanne episode is an example of producers and decision makers using lesbians for shock value and to increase ratings. A record number of viewers tuned in to watch the Roseanne episode.

In 1996, Friends aired network television’s first lesbian wedding when Carol and Susan married, although same sex marriage was not yet legal in the United States. In 1997, Ellen Degeneres came out both in her personal life and as her character on her sitcom, Ellen (1994-1998), which was a significant milestone for lesbian visibility in the media. ABC Network then added a parental advisory warning to episodes before the show was ultimately canceled soon after as viewership began to decrease (Salam, 2019).

In 2004, The L Word (2004-2009) provided groundbreaking and unprecedented visibility for lesbian and queer women. It was television’s first attempt at making lesbian and queer women the center of attention. According to Kate McNicholas Smith, the show provided a “still unsurpassed scale of queer women’s representation” and also captured the tensions of a critical time in the fight for LGBTQ+ rights (2020). Additionally, the show successfully reflected the racial diversity in the lesbian and queer communities and reminded viewers that some people do not fit into a dichotomy of either gay or straight. “Since 1950, gay men have been more prominent in the various genres of the media than gay women have been. It wasn’t until the early 2000s when The L Word began airing on Showtime that gay women achieved a sustained visibility in the media” (Streitmatter, 2008). While The L Word was the first program of its kind and provided important representation to lesbian and queer women, it also included controversial messaging like lesbian and queer women are obsessed with sex and struggle to remain monogamous. In the show, one of the characters keeps a wall chart with intertwining lines of who has had sex with whom. This messaging contributes to objectifying stereotypes surrounding lesbian and queer women. Additionally, the characters in the show were mainly feminine and highly attractive, and they lived glamorously with nice houses, vehicles, and clothing. This contradicts previous perceptions of lesbian and queer women being masculine and reminds society that lesbian and queer women can be feminine and attractive. However, it’s also important to note that the show represented a very specific group and excluded characters that did not fit that group, such as those with fuller figures or different financial circumstances.

In 2009, Glee (2009-2015) aired and mobilized a visibility tolerance project for the LGBTQ+ community during a difficult social and political climate (Smith, 2020). During this time, the Defense of Marriage Act was still in place and situations of homophobic bullying and rising reports of suicides were in the news. Glee provided a central narrative of LGBTQ+ visibility and included many characters that identified with the community. Many became enthralled with the relationship between characters Brittany and Santana, two very feminine and attractive cheerleaders who eventually get married. Later, The Fosters (2013-2018) introduced a new imagining of family and normalized LGBTQ+ people as spouses and parents. The show provided a hopeful trajectory for queer and lesbian women that was, and still is, often abandoned in television and film representation. 

Looking back reminds us that we have made significant progress in seeing queer and lesbian women represented in television and film. However, heterosexual characters still dominate television and film, and white gay men are still included more than lesbian and queer women (GLAAD, 2023). More effort is to be made to increase the visibility of queer and lesbian women and to ensure this representation is more authentic.

​

Queer & Lesbian Representation

For queer and lesbian women, representation in film and television is often uncommon and short-lived. Johanna Church states, “For decades, the Lesbian community has been starved for representation” (2023). In the 2022-2023 season, 596 LGBTQ+ characters were counted across primetime broadcast and cable and scripted originals on eight streaming services, which is a decrease of 41 from the previous study (GLAAD, 2023)*. Of those, only 180 were lesbian characters. Cisgendered gay men have historically been more represented in television and film than lesbian and queer women (Klecko, 2022). This is partly due to the sexualization of relationships between women for the male gaze. Therefore, there is sometimes hesitancy from media companies to include lesbian and queer characters in order to avoid accusations of including them for prurient interest (Klecko, 2022).

The representation of queer and lesbian women in television and film often comes with a variety of issues. One of these issues includes the characters not being relatable or authentic. According to Kate McNicholas Smith, “Lesbian desire repeatedly emerges with connotations of temporariness and/or inauthenticity” (2020). Lauren McInroy and Shelley Craig (2017) explain that traditional media “creates a common dialogue and validates identity” but still represents LGBTQ+ people as “one-dimensional and stereotypical.” In interviews conducted by Lauren McInroy and Shelley Craig, participants reported that sexual identity was the main focus of most characters and their identities were portrayed as a struggle, which was unfavorable by participants yearning for representation (2017). Recent studies have strayed from focusing on the quantity of LGBTQ+ representation and have instead started to analyze the depth of characters and how audiences identify with characters (Cover & Milne, 2023). Another issue is the restriction in storylines and trajectories of these characters. The storylines and trajectories of the community often lack complexity and normalcy, instead frequently focusing on coming out and validating their identity. Traditional media ignores LGBTQ+ subgroups and limits the community’s perceptions of their futures (McInroy & Craig, 2017). It is crucial for people, especially young people, to see that those within the LGBTQ+ community can live happy and fulfilling lives.

Other issues include the removal of their queer and lesbian female characters, and shows that include these characters facing higher cancellation rates. The frequency of character removals and show cancellations has lead to the creation of the “bury your gays” trope. Of the 596 LGBTQ+ characters counted earlier, 175 will not return due to character deaths, cancellations, and plot endings. Further, 140 characters will not return specifically due to cancellations, and 44 of those are lesbian characters (GLAAD, 2023). These cancellations, plot endings, and deaths illustrate the “bury your gays” trope. This trope also includes the frequency in which LGBTQ+ characters are denied happy endings. According to Rob Cover and Cassandra Milne, this trope is an audience reading position that “critically identifies a perceived cultural shortfall in the quality, depth, continuity, or framing of a gender or sexually-diverse character” (2023). Further, they explain that through this position, “The unexpected death of an LGBTQ+ character is considered an offensive or problematic depiction” (Cover & Milne, 2023). Queer and lesbian women are often the target of this trope (GLAAD, 2023). The “bury your gays” trope highlights one of the industry’s issues of narrow storytelling when it comes to this community.

Despite the progress that has been made for equal rights and creating more inclusive programming, the number of lesbian and queer female characters in television and film is still declining and insufficient. Underrepresentation and symbolic annihilation are two terms that could be referenced when referring to this issue. Symbolic annihilation is a concept that describes when a group is almost entirely absent from media (Scharrer et al., 2022). Since the legalization of same sex marriage in the United States in 2015, there has been a general rise in LGBTQ+ representation in television. However, the majority of that representation has been cisgendered gay men. While the representation of queer and lesbian women was already minimal, GLAAD reported a decrease in lesbian and queer female characters in the 2022-2023 season (2023). This is amidst an intense socio-political climate that has resulted in an increase in anti-LGBTQ+ legislation and violence towards the LGBTQ+ community. Hateful rhetoric and predatory legislation are targeting classrooms, medical offices, bathrooms, locker rooms, and sports (Attack on LGBTQ+ rights: The Politics and Psychology of a Backlash, 2022). Florida’s “Don’t Say Gay'' law is a prime example of the attack that the LGBTQ+ community has been facing due to harmful right-wing leaders and the current socio-political climate. These attacks exemplify the importance of media representation and visibility. It is crucial for the community to see themselves represented on television and in film, especially during a time of heightened fear and significant erasure.

The representation of queer and lesbian women in the media also poses the issue of characters “trapped by the parameters of the heteronormative binary” (Church, 2023). According to Waggoner, studies on representation reveal that even when representation of LGBTQ+ people is present in media, it is still full of heteronormativity” (2018). This fits the claim that increased presence and visibility does not exactly mean there is an increase in representation (Waggoner, 2018). Heteronormativity describes the way in which heterosexual privilege is woven into the fabric of society (Hilton-Morrow & Battles, 2015). For example, if a queer character is included in television or film but is tailored to a heterosexual audience rather than a queer audience, it may not be authentic representation. Even as shows include overtly LGBTQ+ characters, “elements of heteronormativity often overshadow them” (Ng, 2008). According to Ng, “Even The L Word, the first U.S. television show to revolve around a group of primarily queer women, has been charged with impulses to privilege heterosexual desires and narrative conventions” (2008). Television and film created for lesbian and queer women and with the intention to represent queerness is rare. Jewelle Gomez stated that lesbians are often “alone in an island of heterosexuality” (1999). Queer and lesbian women crave and deserve more authentic and relatable media representation.

​

The Domination of White Representation
While the lesbian and queer woman community has historically been generally overshadowed, this has been an even greater issue for lesbian and queer women of color. “The media showcased only a handful of gay people of color between 1950 and the early 2000s” (Streitmatter, 2008). Black lesbians are rarely represented in television and film. Even when a show or film includes queerness, lesbian and queer women of color are often excluded. Lesbian and queer women experience a double invisibility due to presumptions that lesbian and queer women are White (Walker, 1993). Masculine-presenting lesbian and queer women of color face an even greater degree of invisibility and erasure. Additionally, sometimes a show or film speaks for Black women while still keeping Black lesbians invisible (Gomez, 1999). When Black lesbian and queer women are included, most depictions rely on stereotypes. Jewelle Gomez explains “A Black lesbian is more often seen through than seen” (1999). 

The Watermelon Woman made cinematic history in 1996 as the first feature-length film by a Black lesbian and about Black lesbians (Richardson, 2011). According to Matt Richardson, the film provided important Black representation as it was the first time Black lesbians “seized the power of the filmic gaze and turned it to look for themselves” (2011). The film follows a young Black lesbian, Cheryl, searching for information about her ancestors. She dedicates her time to researching the life of a fictional Black cinematic figure who was also a lesbian. Cheryl faces many challenges in her research due to the domination of the White experience in books and film, and the invisibility and erasure of Black history. The Watermelon Woman highlights the misrepresentation of Black women, especially lesbians, in American cinema (Richardson, 2011).
 

According to GLAAD’s latest Where We Are on TV report, streaming services finally met GLAAD’s goal of ensuring at least half of LGBTQ characters are people of color for the first time (2023). In the 2022-2023 season, 53 percent of LGBTQ characters on streaming services were people of color (GLAAD, 2023). Further, 156 of the characters on streaming services were White, 63 were Black, 59 were Latinx, 41 were Asian and Pacific Islander (API), 12 were Middle Eastern or North African (MENA), 9 were multiracial, and 3 were Indigenous (GLAAD, 2023). Additionally, there were 21 Black characters out of 101 LGBTQ characters on broadcast networks and 33 Black characters out of 139 LGBTQ characters on cable networks (GLAAD, 2023). Overall, GLAAD counted a total of 596 LGBTQ characters across broadcast, cable, and streaming services. Of this total, 277 characters were White, 117 were Black, 82 were Latinx, 55 were Asian and Pacific Islander (API), 25 were multiracial, 20 were Middle Eastern or North African (MENA), and only 5 were Indigenous. Of the total 596 LGBTQ characters counted by GLAAD, 310 of them were LGBTQ women and only 180 were lesbian characters.

As the overall representation of lesbian and queer women needs improvement and has decreased since GLAAD’s previous report, this issue is worse when it comes to women of color. As some progress has been made in creating more diverse characters, the visibility of lesbian and queer women of color remains limited (Moore, 2015). Due to the visibility, or rather invisibility, of people of color throughout history, there is a significant difference between the experiences of lesbian and queer women of color compared to those who are White. As explained by bell hooks, we must not attempt to make different oppressions synonymous (Walker, 1993). To better represent lesbian and queer women, we must acknowledge and represent all lesbian and queer women of color, not just one kind.
 

The Lesbian and Queer Woman Community

The lesbian and queer woman community encompasses all women who are attracted to women physically, emotionally, and romantically. Some prefer to identify as a queer woman instead of a lesbian woman if they perceive the term lesbian to be limiting or filled with cultural connotations that they do not identify with (GLAAD, 2023. It is important to note that there is not only one way to be a lesbian or queer woman. Additionally, there is not only one way to look like a lesbian or queer woman. Although women who are more masculine-presenting are more likely to be perceived as a lesbian or queer woman. According to Kristin Esterberg, “To be a lesbian is to be coded as not feminine” (1997). This ideology can create challenges for women who are more feminine appearing and wish to be visible as a lesbian or queer woman. Additionally, this ideology can cause women to question or struggle with their identity if they do not appear a certain way. While research suggests that appearance has been an important symbol of existence and belonging for lesbian communities, self presentation does not determine a person’s identity or sexual orientation (McLean, 2008).

​

The identity politics within the lesbian and queer woman community created structures that have produced exclusion. Throughout history, differences such as race and ethnicity, social class, ability, and self presentation, have all questioned conceptions of lesbian community (Esterberg, 1997). When I refer to community in my research, I am referring to a general commonality in which all women who desire women are welcomed and celebrated. Kristin Esterberg explains that we should think of lesbian communities as “overlapping friendship networks, and sometimes exclusive ones at that, with multiple centers and fuzzy boundaries” (1997). It is also important to understand that there can be many constructed lesbian identities within the community. For example, femness and butchness are important themes in lesbian history and culture (Esterberg, 1997). Ultimately, the overall community of lesbian and queer women is diverse and does not present itself in only one way.

​