Lesbianism — A Hobby But Not a Profession?

T. K. Oih

Firstly, as should be evident to anyone familiar with yours truly and their taste in pornography in particular, we are a very open-minded person, and secondly, as is true by definition, as one keeps an open mind, thoughts enter into it. As such it should not be a tremendous surprise that not that long ago a thought entered our mind, and the thought was this: how come there are thousands of videos on the internet about amateur lesbians doing as various things as licking juicy pussy, sucking perky tits, swapping spit, fisting buttholes and getting drenched in piss, but no videos whatsoever about professional lesbians? And, perhaps more interestingly, are we to conclude from this that there are no professional lesbians — for surely if there were professional lesbians, there would also be videos about them?

Let us begin to approach this enigmatic question from the ground up, by clarifying what it means in general to be an amateur or to be a professional.

A common definition has to do with money: a professional makes a living by doing what he does, while an amateur or a hobbyist is in it purely out of passion. Yours truly, for example, is an amateur writer, an amateur musician, an amateur chess player, an amateur wizard etc., meaning he partakes in these activities somewhat frequently, generally with moderate to great enjoyment, but makes little or no profit off any of them. His profession, that is, his means of making a living, is something entirely different: he is a social security leech.

What strikes us as odd if we do accept this definition is that many of the so-called amateur lesbians appearing in the videos about amateur lesbians do make money from these very videos. Yet they are specifically described as amateur lesbians, not professional lesbians. It would therefore seem that making money off being a lesbian is not enough in itself to make the lesbian a professional lesbian.

What then do these lesbians lack that if they had it would make them professionals? Could it be formal education? Certainly it cannot be denied that none of them have graduated from any of the top universities as Masters of Lesbianism, and while many of them have undoubtedly majored in feminist studies, it would seem that such a degree without any particular work experience is not enough to make them professionals of anything, not even academic research.

In fact it is the concept of work experience that brings us to reject studies as an implication or indeed a requirement of professionalism. In many fields such as arts it has been the tradition to learn by working as an apprentice of a master, and surely anyone would admit that once the apprentice has sufficiently learned the profession, he is himself a professional.

Curiously it is evident that lesbianism, just as painting, fishing and masonry, is chiefly learned by doing. However we remain stumped as to why lesbianism, even when mastered and profitably practiced, remains a mere hobby. What is it that separates lesbians from painters, fishermen and masons? As thoroughly as we conduct the comparisons, we fail to find any substantive difference.