台灣文學中的第一波「男同性戀」在1960年代密集出現，第一波的「女同性戀」則在1970年代大放異彩。當時台灣進入「經濟起飛」階段，女性大量離開家戶（離開家長監控）並投入工廠或學校，開始有一點談戀愛的餘錢和餘暇。在瓊瑤愛情王國已經矗立的商品時代，不同社經位置（含勞工地位）的作家紛紛生產女子的各種愛情敘事。本文研討的多種文本，不約而同仰賴「愛錢來作伙」的邏輯：兩個女生能夠作伙，是建立在物質（錢，或其他有形無形的資本）基礎上；如果拆夥，往往就是因為物質利益不再。這個邏輯也區隔了文學中的男同性戀和女同性戀。當時文學中的男同性戀「者」各自獨立追逐色慾而不特別看重錢，「女同性戀『關係』」（並非各自獨立的「者」）則在乎（撮合雙方的）經濟而非（一人獨享的）肉慾。本文所指的「女同性戀」並不限「T婆關係」；要到1970年代末，明確描寫T婆的長篇小說才出現。本文第一節以1960年代末尾的歐陽子、白先勇短篇小說為例，指出經濟的考量決定了女女聚散；第二節以1970年代上半期的李昂短篇小說為例，強調「性知識」形同人際關係中的本錢；第三節主張1970年代下半期通俗小說家玄小佛、郭良蕙的長篇小說（都比白先勇的《孽子》還早出版）不但展現了「T婆」的配對，也凸顯了「人我」（異性戀主流社會vs同性戀我）的差別；第四節藉著討論蕭麗紅、朱天心等人的作品，思考怎麼樣的「女同性戀」才「值得」（有價值）被紀念、被納入文學史。 By ＂the purchase of lesbian intimacy,＂ this article identifies in the 1970s literature the scenario that female homosexual couples in Taiwan are shown to be motivated more by financial security (with the help of capital either monetary or cultural) than by satisfaction of desire. Once the financial inducements end, such couples are subject to collapse. This connection of economy with intimacy is almost absent in the 1960s and 1970s literature on male homosexuality but highly visible in the 1970s literature on female homosexuality. Gay men (qua independent individuals) seek immediate sexual gratification rather than money whereas female homosexual couples (qua mutually dependent pairs) prefer long-term relationships, which require relationship-maintaining capital, to carnal satisfaction. This article focuses on the first wave of literary representations of female homosexuality in the 1970s. The advent of this first wave may be partially owing to the 1970s economic boom in Taiwan, which finally enabled women to leave home and escape parental control by working as laborers or by receiving middle and higher education. Equipped with pocket money and/or cultural capital, women, either in real life or in literature, were able to produce and consume narratives of romantic love, the luxuries not imaginable in the relatively more impoverished 1960s society. ＂Butch＂ and ＂femme＂ roughly correspond to ＂T＂ and ＂Po＂ in Taiwan. Contrary to common belief, the ＂T-Po＂ model does not monopolize the 1970s literary representations of female homosexuality. Many women in the texts creatively establish non-normative relationships with women, which do not necessarily exclude the possibility of bisexuality. It is noteworthy that many female characters interact with men (sexually or not) in order to procure capital to maintain their relationships with other women. Heterosexuality thus happens to take a part in the reproduction of female homosexuality as the texts under discussion suggest.