jump to navigation

Concession Stand April 6, 2011

Posted by FCM in feminisms, gender roles, health, PIV, porn, rape, self-identified feminist men, trans, WTF?.
Tags: , ,
trackback

i am currently reading joanna russ’s “how to suppress womens writing” and its inspired another “creativity” post…but i am not in the mood for scanning.  so…i decided to open a radical feminist concession stand, instead.  radical feminist concessions!  get your radical feminist concessions here!

see…because radical feminism is theory-based, all its facets are consistent with each other (ie. internally consistent) and the conclusions drawn using radical feminist theory are replicable by other people.  ie.  they are demonstrable.  for example, the observation that rape and PIV-for-pleasure both cause the same result for women (but not for men): unwanted pregnancy.  see how easy that is?

so in the interest of maintaining consistency, i hereby make the following concession: post-op MTF transsexuals are less dangerous to born-women than are genitally-intact MAABs, because post-op MTF transsexuals cannot impregnate women against our wills.

okay?  there, i said it.  now, i am *not* saying that SRS makes MAABs into FAABs, or anything of the sort.  in fact, the problem with post-op MTF is STILL twofold: the MAAB problem, in that all post-op MTF are STILL MAAB, and therefore were groomed as oppressors of women (and rapists) since birth.  even if we concede that MAABs without their dicks are less dangerous than MAABs with them (or lets just say they have one less trick up their sleeve?) there is STILL a legitimate complaint here on the part of FAABs, who dont want to be subjected to misogynist hatred from the oppressor class, perhaps particularly in FAAB-only spaces and (yes!) the restroom.

second is the problem of schroedingers rapist.  among MTFs as a group, we dont know who still has their dicks and who doesnt, and we shouldnt have to guess.  AND in addition, the FACT that MAABs, as oppressors of women and rapists, rape with things besides their dicks, all the time.  its a rather MAAB thing to do actually.

and now for the fun part!  we all know that fun-fems, self-identified male feminists, trans, and the mainstream (not coincidentally) all do not consider “unwanted pregnancy” to be an issue, for women.  they dont care about it.  they literally (literally! its stunning!) cannot accept that unwanted pregnancy is a female-specific harm of PIV.  and “feminist” discourse regarding equality does not apply, when speaking about the inherent inequity of PIV.  no, it doesnt.  at least, to the extent that anyone cares about “equality between the sexes,” or equality within the context of het partnerships, they do *not* care about it enough to STOP FUCKING HAVING PIV.  no, they dont.  the only ones who are saying that PIV is inherently problematic are radical feminists.  we all know this.

whats hilarious about this, of course, is that if fun-fems and trans etc cannot accept that unwanted pregnancy is a female-specific harm of PIV, then they also cannot accept that MAABs are are BY DEFINITION specifically and particularly dangerous to FAABs.  they do not buy the argument demonstrable fucking fact that the penis is threatening to women, in particular.  fine!  they dont buy it.  however.  they also cannot make the concession that *i* am making here, can they?  where i say that post-op MTF transsexuals are less-dangerous to women than genitally-intact MAABs are.  no!  if the presence or absence of a penis means nothing to them, they must believe (mustnt they?) that post-op MTF transsexuals are JUST AS BAD as regular men.   which means post-op MTF are a problem.  just like men are.  oops!*

and now for my second radical concession (its a twofer!): penis-in-ass and penis-in-mouth, even when perpetrated on women, do not cause female-specific harm.  okay?  it has to be said.  i have maintained all along that unwanted pregnancy is the ONLY female-specific harm there is.  this is, i believe, beyond debate.  BUT. we all seem to get that PIA and PIM are degrading to women, at the same time.  right?  its degrading to women, but its not female-specific harm.  so what is this about, and why are these acts and others that *dont* cause pregnancy featuring so prominently in misogynist, male-identified PIV-pozzie rhetoric, BDSM, and modern heterosexual porn?

well…first of all, PIV is always implied with these *other stuff too* faux-sexual-diversity peeps.  isnt it?  so their sexualities are STILL PIV-centric, and STILL likely to knock a woman up.  even in porn, where PIV isnt explicitly shown, its assumed.  the “other stuff” is essentially meaningless in this context.

but specifically regarding PIA and PIM, and not-likely-to-impregnate rapes that are pretty obviously degrading to women, i have heard it suggested that when men abuse each other this way, they are essentially degrading a man “like a woman” is degraded.  but i dont think thats true, is it?  women can get pregnant, and men know this.  men cause unwanted pregnancies in women, deliberately, all the time.  thats the entire fucking point of raping almost universally women (and not men) and its the entire fucking point of PIV-centric sexuality, engaged in when the woman does not wish to become pregnant.

really, i think that degrading women with PIA and PIM is actually kind of a triple-think scenario…and (believe it or not!) can be illustrated by julie andrews’ character in victor/victoria (for anyone unfamiliar, julie andrews plays “a woman pretending to be a man pretending to be a woman”):

basically, men are abusing women like they abuse other men, when they abuse other men “like women”.  WTF?  i might write more about this later.

well what do we expect really?  and this is all brought to you by MAABs, the same fucked-up assholes who simultaneously see women as sterile fucktoys for men, and vaginas as sheaths, at the exact same time they are also sticking their dicks into women, with the deliberate intention of causing female-specific harm (via unwanted pregnancy).

what about teh menz, indeed.  and, do you want fries with that?

* i fully expect a chorus of “we blame the kyriarchy” here, but i’m not buying it.  even fucking fun-fems know there is something seriously wrong with MEN, in particular, or we wouldnt need feminism (ANY feminism, even theirs) in the first place.  DUH.

Comments

1. FCM - April 7, 2011

ok done editing now. enjoy!

2. FAB Libber - April 7, 2011

second is the problem of schroedingers rapist. among MTFs as a group, we dont know who still has their dicks and who doesnt, and we shouldnt have to guess. AND in addition, the FACT that MAABs, as oppressors of women and rapists, rape with things besides their dicks, all the time. its a rather MAAB thing to do actually.

YES !!!

Serano is probably the best example of this, with that painfully-long rant about her “female penis”, proving that masquerading as ‘a woman’ does not mean they become ‘a woman’, but still think very much like an MAAB. It’s the best example of being brought up as one of the oppressor class, and it does not magically go away just by slapping on a bit of lippy.

3. Sargassosea - April 7, 2011

I just want to say right now that Blake Edwards can kiss my ass.

Oh, that’s right. He’s freshly-ish dead.

*dances jig*
🙂

FCM - April 7, 2011

s4, we do NOT dance jigs on freshly-ish dead liberal hollywood dickwads graves in this house! oh, wait. carry on!

heres the NY times obit for edwards (andrews husband and director of v/v). its three fucking pages long:

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/17/movies/17edwards.html

FCM - April 7, 2011

ok speaking of “thinking like a MAAB” (and painfully long) the first comment on this thread was from a MTF, who “delurked” and went on and fucking *on* about how much he loves this blog (!) and how all this is making him identify with FAABs, EVEN MORE!!!!111!!11 he then went on (and on) to apologize *if* his comment here was unwelcome. KNOWING, of course, if he has read here at all, that MAABs are not welcome in this space.

he also asked, in all seriousness, in response to this post, what radfems “expect MTF to do???!!!!11!” about the bathroom problem, because MTFs are “victims” of schroedingers rapist tooooo!!!!111! not acknowledging at all, AS USUAL, that MTFs *are* fucking schroedingers rapist, to women. my answer to this one: NOT MY PROBLEM DOOD.

FCM - April 7, 2011

it was “plastic girl.” just ew. some of you might know her, and i am crediting her with this so that she may be privately (or publically) shamed for this very MAAB display, by her own peeps, who are ALLEGEDLY BOTH trans and pro-radfem, at the same time.

4. FAB Libber - April 7, 2011

I have two pingbacks on two of my posts from ‘plastic girl’, that will not see the light of day. I did a quick look over there, but it was all over the place, incoherent.

Which is appropriate given one of the main points of this post, that radfeminism is consistent and coherent. And the other stuff is NOT.

5. Undercover Punk - April 7, 2011

if the presence or absence of a penis means nothing to them, they must believe (mustnt they?) that post-op MTF transsexuals are JUST AS BAD as regular men.   which means post-op MTF are a problem. 

Right there!! THANK YOU sooooo much for this post. It’s about time to SPELL OUT these consistencies. They highlight the CORE of radical feminist logic. I wouldn’t even call them concessions except that you know some peeps don’t like to follow a thought to it’s END.

I think rape as oppression has EVERYTHING to do with phallocentric-obsessed sexuality. It’s very, very much about the penis’s “POWER.” and obviously harming females through impregnation is the ultimate harm. Or *it’s* ultimate harm, the penis that is. Rape is almost ALWAYS penetration. It’s phallocentric. Period.

6. cherryblossomlife - April 7, 2011

what non-radfems don’t seem to get that men-as-a-group are a class.

If you can’t think any further than individual choice and pomo then you’re always going to be able to compartmentalize your Nigel, MTFs, your brother etc

This misses the very important radfem point that *all* men benefit from being members of the privileged class. Every man. That’s how MTFs, a miniscule group of men, have been able to get laws passed so easily *compared* *to* women- who are 50% of the population. Women are *still* , after all these years, fighting for their basic human rights to be recognized properly by law (today’s rape and abortion laws are woefully inadequate)

They can’t even get to first base.

And MTFs, in particular, are so oblivious to their own MAAB privilege that they don’t even think that maybe the reason they were able to get laws changed to scratch the M to an F on their birth certificate *over* *the* *heads* of women, was because of their MAAB privilege!!!!

My favourite feminist blogger once said: Everyone knows they’re men, if anyone thought they were women nobody would give them the time of day.

7. FAB Libber - April 7, 2011

if the presence or absence of a penis means nothing to them, they must believe (mustnt they?) that post-op MTF transsexuals are JUST AS BAD as regular men. which means post-op MTF are a problem.

I too thought that was good.

Twanz and their supporters make absolutely no distinction on the pre/post op status (penis or no penis), thinking this strategy/philosophy will work for them (I guess) – but it distinctly works against them.

As you point out FCM, that the logical end to their ‘no distinction’ position, is that they are actually framing M2Ts as ‘no different to other males’ and at the same time ‘different to females aka women’. The basic bit of biology that 99.9% of the world’s population understand the concept “women do NOT have penises”.

8. cherryblossom - April 7, 2011

just come back to say that my FAVOURITE feminist blogger is FCM, obviously, but that blogger on a mainstream website really opened my eyes to radical feminism, then I found this blog, and the rest is history..

FCM - April 7, 2011

Omg. Please stop that immediately.

FCM - April 7, 2011

And, the mainstream interwebs put you onto radical feminism? How? I don’t get some of these publications, honestly. Just like I can barely fathom how Dworkin got published, I don’t get how cath Elliot (for example) gets to quote Dworkin on her blog, and get paid to write, at the same time. What gives?

9. Undercover Punk - April 7, 2011

What a great comment, cherryblossom!!🙂

Trans denial of reproductive relevancy is ECHOED by Florida Republicans, who have essentially stated that UTERUS is a dirty word and should not be spoken on the floor/in public. M2Ts are getting SO MUCH POLITICAL TRACTION because the denial of *female-specific* vulnerability is foundational to both trans and neocon pseudo realities.

Excuse me while I file incorporation papers for my uterus. This is clearly the only way to get any RESPECT under patriarchy.

FCM - April 7, 2011

Don’t forget the porn-soaked liberal dickwad left. It’s critical to their agenda too. Aka. It’s the only game in town and these assholes are all the same. Mainstream, and misogynist.

10. FAB Libber - April 7, 2011

This misses the very important radfem point that *all* men benefit from being members of the privileged class. Every man. That’s how MTFs, a miniscule group of men, have been able to get laws passed so easily *compared* *to* women- who are 50% of the population. Women are *still* , after all these years, fighting for their basic human rights to be recognized properly by law (today’s rape and abortion laws are woefully inadequate)

They can’t even get to first base.

And MTFs, in particular, are so oblivious to their own MAAB privilege that they don’t even think that maybe the reason they were able to get laws changed to scratch the M to an F on their birth certificate *over* *the* *heads* of women, was because of their MAAB privilege!!!!

YES YES YES and YES.
It is so fucking frightening the speed at which all this ‘gender recognition’ malarky has been brought in – and it is primarily because they are M2Ts wanting it. If they were majority females wanting it, they would be waiting a few thousand years…

11. Undercover Punk - April 7, 2011

Well, I was working to discredit the trans agenda, but it just doesn’t have the same bite when you throw the beloved lefties into the pot too. Though, you are absolutely correct. Fuck male exceptionalism.

FCM - April 7, 2011

Actually I think it does, UP. It shows that no matter how special they think they are, really they are so mainstream as to be indistinguishable from anyone else. Including the neocons (who they probably hate, which makes it funny) AND the fucking lefty liberal dickwads…who now get to (HAVE to) associate themselves with both the neocons AND the trans. It’s fucking comedy.

FCM - April 7, 2011

I mean really. Ask your average lefty liberal dickwad whether he wants to be associated with trans. Ask your average fucking gay guy for that matter. The answer, I believe, would be NO, they do not. Glorious, hilarious comedy!

12. Undercover Punk - April 7, 2011

Mmm-hmmm. I believe it was Noanodyne who commented that the trans would ONLY hit a wall when gay men start protesting that they don’t want vagina and don’t want FABs in their bathrooms, etc. Unfortunately for us, because male sexuality is very much about domination and because FABs still have anuses to fuck, as long as F2T remain the “bottoms”, the gay male push-back is not the impending trans doom that I wish it was.

13. Noanodyne - April 7, 2011

Boys and men are long-marinated and slow-cooked in the fetid broth of power over. It floods their every cell and cannot be removed, but only hidden and mitigated. While the fact that women are impregnable is a very handy reality and substantial, useful, and reliable tool for them to use in working their power over women, they will use any measure that works: humiliation, pain, terrorism, harassment, bullying, etc. Cut off their dicks and they’ll simply use a bat or a stick or anything they can get their hands on. Cut off their hands and they’ll still find a way. Look at that as a metaphor or not. You have to get all the way to coring out his eyes and leaving a man to rot in a ditch before women are safe from him.

14. DarthVelma - April 7, 2011

Well, even if the gay men decide they don’t want F2Ts in their bathrooms, all that will mean is that we’ll end up with them back in ours. So we’ll get the M2Ts who may or may not still have a penis, and we’ll have the F2Ts all hopped up on testosterone.

I’d feel safer going behind a tree.

FCM - April 7, 2011

You are a terrible writer noan, and should cease and desist immediately! Holy crap, you have created an image and a feeling here that is burned into my brain. It might be permanent. Excellent.

I think the evidence shows though that men’s “power over” is rooted in the MAAB problem. In other words, women’s specific vulnerability to men is not merely “convenient” as an excercise of male power. It’s central to it. FAAB/MAAB is THE line that’s been drawn in the sand, under patriarchy. Those that can cause female specific harm are MAAB. Everyone else, isn’t.

Now, this is not to suggest that if women were all sterile, that men would cease to be dangerous, that’s obvious. It’s the marinade of patriarchy, as you say, that mobilizes men to victimize women, in every way and in all ways. But I don’t see any evidence that “impregnability” is merely collateral to the MAAB problem. Do you? I am still getting my mind around PIA/PIM etc, and how that fits into the puzzle, so any insight here would be helpful.

15. Undercover Punk - April 7, 2011

Fetid broth, yuck!! SPIT! SPIT!
PIA and PIM are obviously phallo-centric acts. I was thinking about how often (and I have no idea) a woman is “raped” by having her labia and clitoris rubbed, or her breasts fondled? I mean, not very often, right? If penetration is NOT involved, but it IS rape, then that’s what it would look like, right? The only other thing I can think of is boob-fucking, but that’s phallo-centric too, so…. There’s something about the penetration and phallocentrism and INVADING (not just violating) the body that DEFINES rape.

FCM - April 7, 2011

Exactly UP. Penetration does define it. Now, we have to ask ourselves Why? Same with the FAAB/MAAB distinction. WHY is this distinction THE most important distinction we make (and I think it is). It’s even more important than the ability to procreate as either male or female, as intersex FAAB illustrate: they aren’t bio females, but they also can’t CAUSE female specific harm. ONLY those who are judged at birth to have this particular ability, are assigned MAAB. Why? This is a serious question, and I think the answer is clear.

That its absolutely rooted in woman-hate I think is also clear.

16. Noanodyne - April 7, 2011

I agree that it’s way more than merely collateral. Awhile back on another thread somewhere I said that they conceptualize us all as impregnable and it matters not one whit whether individuals are or not. I just think that they see that impregnability as a weakness of ours that they can exploit and punish and terrorize us with, along with the other things they think up. (Carolyn Gage connected some synapses for me when she drew a very clear picture of what being pregnant meant for women in their daily lives down through history. It has been a very effective form of hobbling.) But if men find that they don’t have the particular tool to use, they look for other ways to hobble us (literally, or making us too afraid to [fill in the blank here] or creating divisions among us or between us and our sources of support, etc.). This is how PIA and PIM fits into the scenario — we’re sluts or we’re diseased (or dis-eased) or we’re not suitably GGG (I fucking hate that idea you asshole Savage) or we’re used like something to wipe their dick on. Yes, they place other men in that same role, but it’s our role that’s being filled in a pinch. That changes nothing of the basis for the behavior if it’s applied to other powered-over people. Maybe it’s because they can so easily conceptualize our weakness (and have it be so obviously something outside our control), that they can easily transfer that idea onto anything else they do to us (or our proxies).

I think we need a metaphor that will make all this clearer.

17. yttik - April 7, 2011

“Boys and men are long-marinated and slow-cooked in the fetid broth of power over…”

Beautiful writing! Excellent point.

I have a friend who insists in believing that men are biologically driven to reproduce, that they can’t help themselves, that you see this drive in the animal kingdom, in this case observing my chickens. The rooster just moves from one hen to the next, compulsively humping each one, hoping to fertilize. My friend seems to believe the rooster can’t help it and that human men are the same too, also having a brain the size of a pea and all. Well, the hens all got together a few weeks ago and simply did in the rooster. It was awful, but kind of funny too, because it’s left my friend sputtering while she tries to explain how the urge to bump off the only male fits into nature’s plan for survival and reproductive biology.

What can I say? Mother nature doesn’t mess around. No means no.

FCM - April 7, 2011

Bahahahaha!

FCM - April 7, 2011

If women were more connected to nature on a daily basis, and in the absence of male laws that would severely punish us for it, I think we would ruthlessly exterminate the parasite that is MAAB, the second it crossed the line from mutually beneficial to harmful. What a different world that would be, ay?

18. Undercover Punk - April 7, 2011

Hmmm, I’m thinking about sticking carrots in my nose again: it is penetration, it’s an INVASION, but it isn’t common and it isn’t RAPE. But what if a male tried to stick his penis in my nose (I know, I know, it wouldn’t work!)?? Is *that* a rape? I believe that using the PENIS TO PENETRATE is what distinguishes “rape” from carrot penetration. Further, penis-in-anything has a *sexual* tone to it BECAUSE of what comes out of the penis: semen (fluid of reproduction).
So rape is 1> use of the penis to INVADE a body (anywhere); OR 2> use of another object to PENETRATE a *sexualized* body part. Again, I do not call you sticking a carrot in my nose rape.

Also, if we’re gonna be all radical and have this convo, I’d like to suggest that we need a way to differentiate “rape” from generalized sexual assault. I mean, do we agree that there *is* a difference? I’m not sure that I think penetration is the end all, be all of rape, though. I think someone can be raped without being penetrated. Or is that better described as sexual ASSAULT and RAPE should be reserved for the act of penetration? I can see both sides here. Anyone? Anyone?

19. FAB Libber - April 7, 2011

English law, and many others, define rape as [paraphrasing] ‘sticking the penis into … PIV, PIA, PIM’. The key is the penis sticking into something. If that element is not there, it is a form of sexual assault (eg using fingers or other objects). So no-penis = not-rape but sexual assault.

It is clear that the law recognises that the penis causes a specific type of harm, even if the pregnancy part is not specifically mentioned, it is somewhat there by implication. I think it is tied up to the psychological association of the ‘penis being mighty’ and obviously some acknowledgement that ‘penis used as a weapon’. So this is how it ties in with male-on-male rape.

Dudes, including law dudes, recognise penis-as-weapon – but the sex pozzies and the tranz are all oblivious to penis harm, going lah-lah-lah, penis-good or penis-not-a-problem, as the case may be. They are morons to believe that, and even bigger morons if they think we will believe that shit.

FCM - April 7, 2011

i am sure the trans and sex poz etc would be upset to realize that sarah palin (for example) knows something they dont. or at least that *she* is being honest about it, whereas they are all lying their fucking asses off. every fucking woman in the world knows that the penis is dangerous to women. women who dont have access to quality medical care know better than anyone that this is the truth, which makes sex-poz fully racist, classist, every other -ist (and yes, SEX-ist, DUH, men are known to have way better health care than women). what a bunch of shit it all is, and we *are* expected to just believe that PIV = truth, because THEY say it is.

they obviously believe that PIV = truth, if they also believe that anything thats “sex-negative” (PIV-negative) should be dismissed out of hand (ie. NOT TRUE). and they all do. see the “if its sex-negative then it cant possibly be true” post for more on that.

FCM - April 7, 2011

we have another mansplainer! they all start out the fucking same: I KNOW YOU DONT ALLOW MEN HERE, BUT I CANT RESIST! do you jackasses SEE. WHAT. YOU. DO.

of course they dont. heh. but i also dont have to publish them, or even read them. and this one i didnt even read, although i noticed that it had a list of “questions” that he wanted us to answer. NOT GONNA HAPPEN ASSHOLE!

FCM - April 7, 2011

i wanted to mention the reason i used the victor/victoria clip is that this “woman pretending to be a man pretending to be a woman” was literally my first exercise in unraveling triple-think as a child. i was probably 10 when i first saw the movie, and that is how the plot was explained to me. and i had to literally use “woman” as a placeholder in my mind, then take it out a step to “pretending to be a man” and then out again to “pretending to be a woman.” its funny to me now that my first experience with this was with a fucking gender-bending musical brought to us courtesy of some lefty liberal dickwad man.

today, i suppose we would just refer to her character as “queer” and call it a day. which is also funny. because it takes the sex/gender descriptors completely out, which would seem to defeat the purpose of this film. it would be meaningless. AND because essentially shes a woman, presenting as a woman. not that exciting afterall is it? and definitely not QUEER, at all.

20. Sargasso Sea - April 7, 2011

Brilliance today! Fascinating! Funny too!

Radically speaking, I will say that every single heterosexual contact I ever had was rape-by-coercion. And this is coming from 20 years of trying to figure out what the fuck was wrong with ME. Haha, joke’s on me!

There can be no *consent* for FAABs in a MAAB dominated world.

21. Sargasso Sea - April 8, 2011

exercise in unraveling triple-think

Ha! I used to play that I was going to be a V/V-esque queen so I would (and, sometimes still do!) get into that mindset to see how long I can perform the ness of drag without puking =-p

22. cherryblossomlife - April 8, 2011

“And, the mainstream interwebs put you onto radical feminism? How?”

It was just a boring mainstream web forum I used to freqent, and now and again I would see one particular poster writing some CRAZY things. I thought she was slightly insane. Until slowly the more she posted, the more the penny started to drop. Now I realise she was the SANEST poster on that whole site.

She was an unapologetic radical feminist [smile]

23. cherryblossomlife - April 8, 2011

“Those that can cause female specific harm are MAAB. Everyone else, isn’t”

This is probably what makes me angriest of all. As Greer pointed out, women are not the “catch-all sex” for any random MAABS that other MAABS reject.

THis may come as a shocker to some, but WOMEN EXIST IN THEIR OWN RIGHT, not *in* *relation* *to* MAABS.

Despite what all the “great” male philosphers and psychoanalysts believed, wOmen are not penis-less non-males.

If anything, women are the original prototype for humankind (actually we are: foetus’s all start out with a female form, which is why men have nipples). If anything men, with their extraeneous bits of flesh, exist in relation to women, NOT THE OTHER WAY ROUND.

24. FAB Libber - April 8, 2011

The victor/victoria film, which I have not seen for over 20 years – I was amused by the clip above, that a queen would have to instruct her also on the ‘woman’ part, specifically drag queen woman – which really shows the artificial nature of so-called femininity, a performance in itself.

Thinking back to my early days of working in an office environment (70s), dressing with the usual pantyhose, heels, skirts and crap – I did feel weird and unnatural, like being in perverted dress-ups. Like a drag queen who didn’t enjoy it! Later career I did not have to do that, and could wear regular clothes.

And I will mention at this point, pantyhose are evil.

FCM - April 8, 2011

The opening bit about “I’ll sleep with you for a meatball” kind of ruined it for me. Julie was so adorable she kind of pulled it off as not a blatant reference to prostitution and starving women fucking men to survive…but it WAS a reference to it nontheless. Horrible. I read the wiki entry for vv and her literal starvation is the catalyst for the entire plot. At one point she passes out from hunger. What a delightful idea for a musical comedy.

FCM - April 8, 2011

And I don’t suppose we should ignore the economics at play here, where a wildly talented female artist goes hungry, and (or perhaps because?) the real demand is for talented men MIMICKING talented women. That hurts.

FCM - April 8, 2011

Also, re the post, I forgot to mention that UP was exactly right when she said that neither of my points are really “concessions” at all, they are really just the result of following a thought to its end. Exactly right.

FCM - April 8, 2011

Also, its disturbing to me what I remembered about vv versus what I forgot. I didn’t recall the starvation part of it, at all. I can only assume that I wasn’t intended to remember it, and that whomever (!) was in charge of these things didn’t consider that aspect of it to be very important, compared to the rest of it, at all.

And since I am comment spamming my own blog now, I wanted to revisit what noan said about men filling women’s “role” with other men, when needed (specifically regarding PIA and PIM related abuse of other males.) It’s clearly the case with musical comedies featuring drag queens too of course, but regarding the sexual abuse part: is piv-related abuse relevant to womens physical state of being biologically female, while other phallocentric (and general) abuse is related to women’s female social ROLE? The use of “role” in that context stood out for me, because the female-specific harm of piv has nothing to do with women’s ROLE. Or, it wouldn’t, if we didn’t ALSO have social consequences of childbearing.

25. FAB Libber - April 8, 2011

I read the wiki entry for vv and her literal starvation is the catalyst for the entire plot.

I had not actively remembered that part either, but now I remember it was because she had trouble getting work otherwise. It says a lot about women’s “choices”, when the choice is between prostituting or going into drag, the latter could be a metaphor for being het or appearing het, in other words ‘playing’ woman in this fucked up system. It is also why M2Ts probably think they can ‘play woman’ as well.

but regarding the sexual abuse part: is piv-related abuse relevant to womens physical state of being biologically female, while other phallocentric (and general) abuse is related to women’s female social ROLE?

It is probably a mixture, both of the social role and what I said earlier about the penis being regarded as ‘a weapon’. The latter part I am going to think more about, and see if anything further comes of it, because I think there is something there.

26. Sargasso Sea - April 8, 2011

I had thought and written about the “weapon” aspect of the dong yesterday but I didn’t post it because it was kind of half-cooked. (half cocked?) There was a lot of synergy going on yesterday; we’re definitely on the right track here with the “weapon” and the “role”.

Anyway I had the thought that weapons, to men, are impersonal, replaceable, a means to an end a la, Guns don’t kill people, people kill people! as murder advocates (men) say. Why don’t they apply this same *logic* to their penises? As in, Penises don’t rape women, men rape women! Oopsie that sounds an awful lot like the truth, doesn’t it?!

Also, if the dong is a weapon (and it IS) and is therefore *replaceable* or *interchangeable* then they have to think of their penises as something APART (not *a part*) from themselves. The truth is that men really DON’T care as much about their penises as a physical part of their living body, a goddamn organ, (hence 8 hundred billion uproarious videos of crotch hits) as they do its use as a weapon.

I mean obviously they DO NOT think of their dick as a part of themselves because they will stick that fucker anywhere.

So there’s something definitely there in this disembodiment of the weiner.

27. Undercover Punk - April 8, 2011

Hi again!
FAB said:

English law, and many others, define rape as [paraphrasing] ‘sticking the penis into … PIV, PIA, PIM’. The key is the penis sticking into something. If that element is not there, it is a form of sexual assault (eg using fingers or other objects). So no-penis = not-rape but sexual assault.

I’m OK with that. As I say, the penis is not like teeth or claws. EXCEPT for what the penis shoots out and how SEMEN can violate FEMALES BIOLOGICALLY. *That* is the unique harm that a penis can cause. See: rape as oppression. *THAT* harm is THE REASON why using a penis, or any object, to penetrate sexualized areas of the body is SO OFFENSIVE, so HARMful, so OPPRESSIVE.

Now,
FCM says:

but regarding the sexual abuse part: is piv-related abuse relevant to womens physical state of being biologically female, while other phallocentric (and general) abuse is related to women’s female social ROLE?

Oooh! oooh! This is excellent! I think that female *impregnation* is THE vulnerability that FEEDS the idea of generalized female vulnerability in everything. Well, maybe our aggregate smaller physical size also contributes, but the impregnation thing as reflected in the SEXUAL nature of misogyny renders the connection undeniable, IMHO.
Yet, how do we explain the epidemic of non-sexualized violence against women? Or even sexualized, but not impregnation-specific violence? I think that definitely goes to the female ROLE. It’s just a matter of whether/how much you consider impregnation as relevant to the ROLE of female itself.

28. Undercover Punk - April 8, 2011

Mmmm, disembodied phallus. DEFINITELY. It’s every-fucking-where. Seriously.

FCM - April 8, 2011

I’m still LOLing about “dong” and “weiner.” These aren’t very mighty-sounding nicknames for the mighty phallus now are they? Interestingly of course, these are the nicknames made up BY MEN, to refer to their own members. This has to mean something.

29. Sargasso Sea - April 8, 2011

Ha!

Like how many times do you hear a woman say, Old “Betsy” and I are going out for a night on the town! or, But “Betsy” NEEDS it bay-bee! like her uterus is her *wing woman* or something?😛

30. noanodyne - April 8, 2011

There’s an old joke email from the early days of the intertubes with all the phrases men use for masturbation. Many of them are derogatory (choking the chicken, for instance). That always struck me as odd, given what they seem to think of their extruded parts.

31. FAB Libber - April 8, 2011

Yet, how do we explain the epidemic of non-sexualized violence against women? Or even sexualized, but not impregnation-specific violence? I think that definitely goes to the female ROLE. It’s just a matter of whether/how much you consider impregnation as relevant to the ROLE of female itself.

The non-impregnation violence is probably the flow-on from the ‘role’, which is how it is transferable to other ‘lessers’ in the hierarchy (like boys or weak men), perhaps just a woman-proxy thing.

I think SarSea is onto something with the ‘disembodiment of the weiner’, and this may be how it effectively becomes a ‘standalone weapon’, the psychological detachment necessary for doing harm to others, the sociopath.

The disembodiment thing is also their big excuse “I couldn’t help it, it was the urge” like Mr Dong has a mind of his own … his penis made him do it which is their attempt at coming off as a Nice Nigel instead of the raping scumbag that he truly is.

But, they really truly are fucked-up puppies to think of their own body part as separate, and just being consequence-avoiding when they maintain that the phallus has a mind of its own.

Basically, all these dudes should not be in charge of anything.

32. noanodyne - April 8, 2011

Basically, all these dudes should not be in charge of anything.

LOL and hell yes.

FCM - April 8, 2011

Anyone remember john Meyer (I think?) saying that his dick was racist? Mm-hmm.

33. cherryblossomlife - April 8, 2011

“The non-impregnation violence is probably the flow-on from the ‘role’, which is how it is transferable to other ‘lessers’ in the hierarchy (like boys or weak men), perhaps just a woman-proxy thing.”

Have you read the climax of Kate Millet’s Sexual Politics, in the last chapter, where she goes into detail about Genet’s plays. Genet was a homosexual man who experienced a lot of self-loathing, and he created a world on stage which represented the pecking order of gay men.

Now, what was interesting to Millet was how precisely it co-opted the hetero role playing i.e Masculine-dominant- effeminate-submissive. IN Genet’s time, gay men had no other template with which to relate to each other than the farce going on between men and women. It showed up patriarchy for what it was: role playing between two people and nothing more.
It is quite liberating to read.
Although from reading this I’m still having difficulty understanding whether the men in the victim/passive role were playing *women’s* role, or whether women’s role in society is actually the way they would abuse men, transposed onto women (!) i.e

“basically, men are abusing women like they abuse other men, when they abuse other men “like women”. WTF? i might write more about this later.”

34. cherryblossomlife - April 8, 2011

when I say “and nothing more” I mean that there is nothing *natural* about the sado (male)-masochist (female) status quo. Obviously women can be impregnated and gay men can’t, which means our situation is more dire.

FCM - April 9, 2011

king missile “detachable penis” video…its “uncensored” but i would give it a PG rating…

FCM - April 9, 2011

ok why the HELL cant i get videos to embed anymore? its driving me nuts. anyone know? i am using the “embed” code and all i get is a link.

FCM - April 9, 2011

ok maybe PG13? not sure. i am not so good at ratings.

FCM - April 9, 2011

FCM - April 9, 2011

jeebus! finally. thanks wordpress! FYI: for youtube only, you can just copy and paste the URL (ie. the http:// addy in the address bar…NOT THE SHARE/EMBED CODE) into the comment box.

35. FAB Libber - April 9, 2011

Are you spamming yourself again FCM?
LOL

36. Sargasso Sea - April 9, 2011

She may be suffering from ASD (auto-spam disorder). Maybe we can get a grant to look into it?😛

Thanks, Fact for ‘gifting’ us with that hideous liberal dickwad dude bro, Hey! I can’t find my penis, just like I can’t find my keys or my cell phone! Ha ha.

And that they have the woman in black *demonstrating* the detachable one-eyed-snake with a STRAP ON is just the icing on that hip/edgy waste of video.

37. Sargasso Sea - April 9, 2011

(omg, I hope King Missle isn’t Fact’s favorite band!)

FCM - April 9, 2011

HA! actually i did have this album at one point. let me find another video for you all…

FCM - April 9, 2011

mm ok nevermind! god i cant even listen to these dickwads anymore. i used to find them clever, having been encouraged to think this by the liberal dickwads i used to hang around with, who were so lame themselves that all they could do was play cover tunes of other bands and air-guitar when they werent playing cover tunes. you know, instead of actually creating anything new, themselves.

still thinking about this disembodied-penis stuff. thats really interesting isnt it? its clearly the norm for men to think about their penises this way. clearly.

FCM - April 9, 2011

sheesh i havent listened to king missile in ages. the bar is just set extremely low for some people isnt it? i mean really!

38. Noanodyne - April 9, 2011

A feminist punk band did a parody of that song, but I can’t find it in a quick search. Anyone remember that?

FCM - April 9, 2011

Ooh, a feminist punk parody! Awesome. You know what this video reminded me of actually, with their clever my-penis-this, my-penis-that penis monologue? Julia serano. No shit.

39. thebewilderness - April 9, 2011

http://www.amiright.com/parody/90s/kingmissile0.shtml

Dissociating themselves from their penis is what makes it possible to believe that they are not responsible for what their partner in crime makes them do.
That is part of the cognitive dissonance that males are conditioned to from birth.

FCM - April 9, 2011

from the link: “detatchable fetus” for those who dont want to be pregnant all the time, and dont want to get an abortion either:

I woke up this evening with a bad feeling,
And my fetus was missing again.
This happens all the time.
It’s detachable.
(background vocals of “detachable fetus” begin)
This comes in handy a lot of the time.
I can leave it home, when I think it’s gonna cause me back troubles,
or I can get it out, when I don’t need it.
But now and then I go to a party, get slammed,
and the next evening I can’t for the life of me
remember what I did with it.
First I looked around my apartment, and I couldn’t find it.
So I called up the place where the party was,
they hadn’t seen it either.
I asked them to check in my sleeping bag
’cause for some reason I leave it there sometimes
But not this time.
So I told them if it pops up to let me know.
I called several friends who were at the party,
but they were no help either.
I was starting to get desperate.
I really don’t like being without my fetus for too long.
It makes me feel like less of a mom,
and I really hate having to explain every time I need a break.
After a few hours of cleaning the house,
and calling everyone I could think of,
I was starting to get very depressed,
so I went to the Q-Mart, and ate some food.
Then, as I strolled down Seventh Avenue into St. John’s Place,
where all those people sell used books and other crap on the street,
I saw my fetus lying on a blanket
next to a broken toaster oven.
Some guy was selling it,
But I had other plans.
He wanted thirty-two bucks, I screamed at him, grabbed it, and ran away.
I took it home, cleaned it off,
and put it back in. I was a mom again. Complete.
People sometimes tell me I should get it permanently attached,
or just give birth.
Even though sometimes it’s a pain in the a$$,
I like having a detachable fetus

FCM - April 9, 2011

you know, in my pre-radfem days, it occured to me more than once that it would be really nice to be pregnant, because you could have PIV without having to worry about getting pregnant. HOW STUPID IS THAT? a detachable fetus would have worked nicely for that purpose.

also…how much more fucking clear does it have to get that PIV is abusive, and that men are harming women by subjecting them to it? it really could not be more clear. PIV-poz has been exposed, its been debunked, its been utterly evicerated, crucified, creamated. its DONE. anyone who continues to NOT ONLY DO IT, but to fucking cheerlead for PIV and PIV-poz is just putting their fucking fingers in their ears, and ignoring the obvious.

40. FAB Libber - April 9, 2011

Dissociating themselves from their penis is what makes it possible to believe that they are not responsible for what their partner in crime makes them do.

Thanks TBW, I think you said what I was trying to say, much better than I did.

FCM - April 9, 2011
FCM - April 9, 2011

omg. elkballet just emailed me this link from feministing….speaking of cheerleading, and putting fingers in ears. i did NOT watch the video.

http://feministing.com/2011/04/09/clpp-2011-sex-positive-feminism-101/

41. thebewilderness - April 10, 2011

I read their list of benefits and harms. Even with saying pleasure three different ways the harms so completely overwhelm the benefits that a woman would be a complete fool to risk it.

The saddest thing about is at the bottom of the list of benefits. “Evade violence”.
I want to scream and cry at the same time.

FCM - April 10, 2011

yes i noticed that too TBW. my thought: at least one of them is being honest. i wonder who it was, and why she was attending a workshop presented by feministing.

FCM - April 10, 2011

and yes, there is NOTHING on the “benefits” list, INCLUDING “love” that in any way trumps anything on the harms list, which includes things like “dropping out of school” and HIV. of course, as you say, they can think of 12 different ways to say “pleasure” but didnt even think to mention DEATH, at all. or complications from pregnancy. even though their OWN FUCKING MENTOR, jessica valenti, nearly died from her pregnancy and its what caused her to leave. blinders! god.

42. yttik - April 10, 2011

That sex benefits and harms list reminds me of a drug commercial and the 5 minutes they take to list all the harmful side effects. On the bright side, you’ll get rid of your toenail fungus, but on the downside you could wind up with a leaky bladder, high blood pressure, and a compulsive gambling problem.

FCM - April 10, 2011

vegan primate has deleted her blog. 😦

43. thebewilderness - April 10, 2011

Do you think the stalker found her again?

FCM - April 10, 2011

I wouldn’t know, but last I heard she was aggravated by “feminists with hair triggers” and was contemplating closing it for at least the last couple of weeks. Hopefully she will still comment?

44. GallusMag - April 10, 2011

“Oooh! oooh! This is excellent! I think that female *impregnation* is THE vulnerability that FEEDS the idea of generalized female vulnerability in everything. Well, maybe our aggregate smaller physical size also contributes, but the impregnation thing as reflected in the SEXUAL nature of misogyny renders the connection undeniable, IMHO.
Yet, how do we explain the epidemic of non-sexualized violence against women? Or even sexualized, but not impregnation-specific violence? I think that definitely goes to the female ROLE. It’s just a matter of whether/how much you consider impregnation as relevant to the ROLE of female itself.”

Our smaller aggregate physical size is a result of patriarchy and the allocation of increased nutritional resources to males over thousands of generations. Size difference between males and females is related to “feast or famine”. When resources are plentiful females get larger, when there is famine women shrink over generations. Why do males get more nutritional resources allocated to them? Patriarchy due to female impregnability. So even female size is a result of impregnability.

45. cherryblossom - April 10, 2011

The patriarchal double-think of the detatchable ronin penis drives me mad.

Men have always asserted that *they* are the rational, logical members of the species and have exluded women from positions of power, authority and learning on these very grounds.

Women, they say, are hormonal, our thoughts are ruled by an irrepressible hysteria emanating from their wombs.

And yet women don’t have detatchable wombs (or other body parts) that posess a volition of their own and act independantly of our brains, forcing us to commit heinous crimes beyond our control…

Men, apparently, do.

Men: MAKE UP YOUR MINDS. You can’t have it both ways.

So yes, if their hormones and penises drive them to behave in ways that are beyond their control, perhaps even natural, then men should never be allowed in positions of power and authority.
But it’s more likely that the men attached to these penises know exactly what their doing when they violate women, and there is no irrepressible ‘natural’ urge at all.

46. FAB Libber - April 10, 2011

She was just at my blog yesterday. I noticed she made her blog private the other week, and just assumed if she wanted me to continue reading, she would add me on. Alas, no. Could be that stalker dude again.

47. cherryblossomlife - April 10, 2011

Gallus, that is so true. As any woman who has ever had a husband will tell you: the preparation and serving of MEAT is a patriarchal construct.

48. Hen-pecked | twanzphobic since forever - April 10, 2011

[…] yttik’s comment about her chickens over at FCM’s, the legend has spread across radfem blog comments like wildfire, hell, it even […]

49. FAB Libber - April 10, 2011

When resources are plentiful females get larger, when there is famine women shrink over generations. Why do males get more nutritional resources allocated to them?

I look at some of the Asian countries and there is generally only a minor difference in size between females and males on average. This would certainly indicate the truth that the size disparity being so great in most western countries was due to generations of nutritional manipulation.

It certainly gives males an unfair advantage to overpower females.

50. m Andrea - April 10, 2011

Could be the reason why they use words like weiner and dong is to occasionally make their dick sound innocent and harmless. Would be more difficult to cameoflage the harm — and their own massive ego –if it was referred to as a mighty conqueror of vagina people all the time.

The don’t have any actual derogatory names for their own genitali like they do for women’s, “junk” is about the worst and that’s really only used as a euphemism for “collection of assorted parts”.

51. m Andrea - April 10, 2011

er, male animals are frequently larger than female in many species.

52. m Andrea - April 10, 2011

Read something a long time ago that is applicable. It was something about mate selection. It’s easier for a larger animal to over-power a smaller animal and so the offspring tend to inherit the physical characteristics of the parents, including size.

If women were able to routinely choose men smaller than themselves to be the sperm donor, then eventually evolution would produce females who were larger than the males. But as long as males are coericing females who are smaller than themselves, the current ratio will continue.

FCM - April 10, 2011

re physical size, i believe it is true that resources are often allocated among the males in a family or community, with the females literally left to savor the leftovers (if there are any). i have heard (for example) that the males get all the meat or the best cuts of it, and the women get to sop up the grease with bread, or get to chew on the gristle. BUT i am not sure how this would cause GENETICALLY smaller females to reproduce more successfully than larger ones, which is what you would need to have evolution play a part?

AT ANY RATE, the point that SOME PORTION of the size-difference between males and females is a SOCIAL consequence and not a natural one is solid. the ways men and women are expected to eat, exercise, labor etc all contribute to an unnatural size difference that favors men and puts women at a marked disadvantage in defending themselves against men, or being perceived as a physical threat by men. this is all deliberate of course. i particularly like the blanket statement of “caloric needs” of men and women being so different, when its doesnt even take into consideration the size, age or muscle mass of each individual. YOU are supposed to make the adjustment yourself, but they never tell you how to do this, just that if you are female, you are supposed to eat less. this is particularly interesting i think following the discussion on 24-hour menergy: men are literally expected to input and expend more energy than women are. a “calorie” is a unit of energy, and thats all it is, although its come to be a dirty word for women thanks to the diet industry and all this unequal allocation of resources stuff. interesting ay?

FCM - April 10, 2011

If women were able to routinely choose men smaller than themselves to be the sperm donor, then eventually evolution would produce females who were larger than the males. But as long as males are coericing females who are smaller than themselves, the current ratio will continue.

but only for GENETICALLY smaller females, correct? women who are small due to starvation or malnutrition would NOT pass on the characteristic of “smallness” just like either parent with a traumatic amputation (for example) would not pass on a missing limb.

this WOULD tend to have an effect over time, but only where genetically smaller females are reproducing more successfully than “artifically-small” females that WOULD HAVE BEEN LARGER but for malnutrition, and/or where genetically larger males were reproducing more successfully than genetically smaller males, and/or where genetically smaller females and genetically larger males were the most reproductively successful pairings OF ALL.

i hate talking about evolution, blech! it all comes down to “YAY RAPE!” on every level. when yttiks chickens actually show at the very LEAST that theres a point at which male sexual aggression does NOT cause them to reproduce more successfully, and instead results in their untimely and gruesome (and hilarious) deaths by being hen-pecked.

53. veganprimate - April 10, 2011

“Could be that stalker dude again.”

Nope. Fortunately, he has continued to stay away.

I have grown weary of the internet. There’s something kind of existentially bizarre about it. And I felt like I was just blogging about the same things over and over. And I hate taking pictures, so my knitting blog was kind of pointless (which I also deleted). The only thing interesting that I do in real life worth blogging about is my traveling job, but again, for it to be worthwhile, I’d have to take pictures of the various areas of the country I’m in, and if I get too specific, there goes my anonymity which some dude could exploit.

I had a good run (since 2005), but change is good, and I feel better when I focus more on my analog life. I get too overstimulated with online stuff.

54. veganprimate - April 10, 2011

“They don’t have any actual derogatory names for their own genitalia like they do for women’s,”

I think they do. I think most words are derogatory, especially the ones that reference animals like pecker and cock. When men refer to women as fillies, chicks, foxes, bitches, heifers, it’s derogatory b/c animals are seen as less than human. So, if a man refers to his penis as a cock or a pecker or a chicken (that he subsequently chokes), he is degrading his member.

I think men in general have really low self-esteem and they have really bad attitudes about sex. You can’t degrade women sexually if you have a positive attitude about sex. It’s like that famous line by Groucho Marx (I think it was): I wouldn’t want to join any club that would have me as a member. Women agree to consort with men. Men know that they are shit. So, with their twisted logic, they assume that women are shit, too.

FCM - April 10, 2011

hey VP! glad you are doing whats best for you. i liked your archives though, so i am sorry to see those go. i often think ahead to the day when i finally give this up, and i wonder whether i will hit the delete button before just walking away. leaving it there unattended is absolutely a vulnerability, and i dont think i would be able to put it out of my mind and behind me, knowing it was still out there for everyone to see. but who knows right? i will jump off that bridge when i come to it, as will we all.

feel free to stop by whenever you like until then!

55. veganprimate - April 10, 2011

Well, I exported my blog as an XML file, so it’s not completely gone. I have access to all my posts if I need to.

56. FAB Libber - April 10, 2011

It is not recommended to delete radfem blogs, enough of our work gets deleted by the malestream as it is. Just leave them stand, with comments off, and walk away if you have to.

I dedicated a post to yttik’s chickens.
They deserved a “job well done”.😛

FCM - April 10, 2011

well fablibber, i of course agree with you, that your solution would be the ideal. however. some of us have more to lose than others, and have more personal stories etc out there than others, have done more actual work than others, and have taken more shit and abuse than others. its for each of us to decide how this ends isnt it? in the end, i have none of you looking after me. you wouldnt even know how to get ahold of me, if you needed to, after i am gone. i know that this would be a source of anxiety for me, and that i would never be able to truly walk away. like i said, i dont know how this will end. none of us do. thats all i am saying, and i am NOT recommending that anyone delete their blog. i am not recommending anything to anyone, and i dont think i ever have.

57. Sargasso Sea - April 10, 2011

Men know that they are shit. So, with their twisted logic, they assume that women are shit, too.

Yes! As the ULTIMATE projection/reversal.

They are in a constant state of subconscious panic trying to hold on to their control: aggressiveness, posturing, demanding PIWevs (PIV as handy *woman-crowd control* and subsequent pool of little, EASY victims), never asking for help, always complaining about how they are so badly treated, forever expecting more, thereby consuming more.

(glad to know that you’re okay, VP :))

58. noanodyne - April 10, 2011

Just read a review of The Uncoupling (Wolitzer) today and wondered if there were any chance she talks about giving up PIV specifically. No reason to be hopeful, just curious.
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/10/books/review/book-review-the-uncoupling-by-meg-wolitzer.html

59. FAB Libber - April 10, 2011

FCM, you are not the only one, nor are you the first. Why the hell do you think I always stress the security, and not giving out too much personal detail, particularly location?

The one reason I have a fairly loyal following in radfem circles is that I am fiercely loyal, and stand by them. I know the real names and locations of quite a few radfems, but I would never ever divulge that info, ever. I am even strict on former online IDs as well. And I have also been a fairly major target in the past (backward compliment, I did not know I was that good).

“The Code” includes never giving out another radfem’s name, address, location, former IDs, or anything overly identifying. Anyone that breaks that code, is no longer considered trustworthy or an ally.

And unfortunately, “The Code” also applies to radfems that have broken that trust, including one who used to comment here, and recently gave a ‘how to’ on tracking down another radfem, which was effectively dropping breadcrumbs directly to our enemies (on their blogs). And I know who she is IRL too, even though I am really pissed off that she revealed personal info about me that was said in a very private forum.

So I ask all radfems to adopt “The Code”, even if you have a falling out with them.

If you want to discuss more, I have the private open thread on my blog. Search category “Open Thread”.

FCM - April 10, 2011

The only one what? The first what? I don’t even know what you are talking about.

FCM - April 10, 2011

All I said was there are things we will all consider when it comes time to make that decision. Eventually, every single one of these blogs will shut down. That’s a given isn’t it? And I don’t think anyone needs to be making recommendations to anyone else. Last time I took it upon myself to recommend anything to anyone, in a very serious matter where a lot was on the line, she almost killed herself. I will not be responsible for anything like that, ever again, and I am NOT going to recommend to anyone that they leave their blogs up in perpetuity if they don’t want to. Okay?

60. FAB Libber - April 10, 2011

Oh FFS.
And grow some ovaries. Particularly over that one DV victim you keep bringing up. You do realise that many of your commenters are actually DV survivors? Namby-pamby and sitting on the fence is not always the safest option for the victim, who could be in more immediate danger for staying. The ultimate is they ALL have to get out of the DV situation, and MOST if not all want to kill themselves at one point or another in DV. Your ‘job’ is to offer as much support and resources as possible to help her exit. You don’t do DV victims any favours by sitting on the fence, in the fear she might hurt herself, because it is a given that HE will hurt her again anyway, and sometimes fatally. You would be moaning about NOT advising the woman to leave if he had killed her. Stop the lightweight shit.

The ONLY thing you can do is ‘measure’ your advice for the woman to leave, not leave it up to someone who is damaged and broken to make a rational decision. Now get it through your skull that there are only three outcomes of DV: years of further abuse, her murder, or her managing to kill her abuser. That’s it. That’s the menu of choices.

FCM - April 10, 2011

she wasnt a DV victim fablibber, and i dont believe i ever said she was. she was in a long term relationship with a fucking fag, is what she was.

there is no room in some womens lives for the truth. period. if anyone doesnt get that by now, then they arent paying attention.

FCM - April 10, 2011

but thats not what we were talking about is it? dont tell people what to do on my fucking blog. VP had her reasons for deleting hers after doing it for 6 fucking years, and here you are, with a blog about 2 months old, telling her and everyone else how they should end it, when the time comes. either you are deliberately ridiculing VP for doing what she did, OR you are implying that her blog wasnt feminist anyway, so your rules dont apply to her.

its none of your goddamned business, is what i am saying. you and jilla can sit over on your private threads all you like, and piss and moan about the newbies, and act like you know whats best. this blog isnt about giving advice. there is information, perspective and discussion here. thats all.

61. Sargassosea - April 10, 2011

It’s the same thing.

Being in a relationship long (or short) term with a “fucking fag” is simply another *twist* on domestic abuse. Done been there meself.

FCM - April 10, 2011

yes it is s4, which is why i brought it up in the context of a “domestic abuse” discussion awhile back. ive done it too BTW. HA! but fablibber is wrongly assuming that my friend was in danger of being killed by him if she stayed. which isnt true, at least she wasnt in any more danger of being killed than any normal “het” relationship with any man that could kill you at any time. basically, shes making shit up that never happened, to get her uppity on. and i hope she feels like an ass.

FCM - April 10, 2011

but my point for bringing it up then is the same as my point for bringing it up now: there is NO ROOM in some womens lives for the truth. PERIOD! i think we have to understand that and accept it. it has nothing to do with “growing ovaries” (nice misogyny there BTW) its the truth, and thats just the way it fucking is. i have never told anyone here or anywhere to stop engaging in PIV, even though there are at least a million good reasons to stop fucking doing it. i know as well as anyone that its not really up to individual women, at all times, and that even though there are a million good reasons not to do it, there are a million more reasons why women engaging in it is critical to thier ability to survive. there is information here, only. the million harms of PIV and a few dozen PIV-critical posts over the last year and a half are here for people to see, and to think about and discuss. i have NEVER told anyone to stop it, and i never fucking will.

and i think thats an interesting topic to discuss actually, if anyone wants to discuss it. telling women what to do versus providing information, or thinking any of us know whats best for anyone else. i think its dangerous, and i have explained why. if anyone else has anything to say about it, they can.

62. Sargasso Sea - April 10, 2011

to get her uppity on

Okay that’s just funny x10.

63. FAB Libber - April 10, 2011

Oh FFS, you think I have only been around for 2 months? You are way stoopid. Yeah, that blog is is new, and I had several blogs way before you started yours.

FCM - April 10, 2011

yes, i am both stupid, and without ovaries. wtf is the matter with you today?

your blog isnt even available to search engines fablibber. how fucking dare you tell anyone else how much exposure they should have? i think you need to take a fucking break. seriously. you can have your fun wanking privately over at your place, away from prying eyes, while you tell everyone else that they should leave all their material up indefinitely for public consumption.

FCM - April 10, 2011

and ONCE AGAIN, i never said any of what you are attributing to me. you have made it very clear that you have been around “since forever.” i think everyone can read between the lines with that one, stealthbomb! plus, you keep repeating it in every other comment, regardless of whether its relevant. we get it already mkay? you are an elder. bow and/or curtsey ad nauseum.

i am saying that its very easy to start a fucking blog. you should know, you keep doing it!

64. FAB Libber - April 10, 2011

Having a crack at Jilla is both ableist and ageist.
Really fucking insulting on both fronts.

I had no problem with you asking for the pw on the private threads, but you play the high and mighty. Elitist.

And no, I am not ‘an elder’. But I am more in touch with that generation that you are. You are attached to the Valenti generation. Not something to be proud of.

FCM - April 10, 2011

also, i would like to know from people who have started and then “walked away” from multiple blogs, whether they have had to change the style, tone, vocabulary etc each time? because its not that hard to tell one author’s voice and/or perspective, even when its associated with multiple usernames. so whats the point of walking away at all? and if a username change/walkaway is done for security reasons, why is it safe to leave it up? if its not for security reasons, why bother? its a lot of wasted energy unless its for a very serious reason isnt it? this is going to a very weird place, so i have to assume someone has something invested in this one. for my part, i have THOUGHT about how this would all end, from the day it began. i have THOUGHT about leaving it up, and i have THOUGHT about taking it down. i really dont have anything invested in it either way, as i have not yet arrived at that point.

i get that you have probably done this multiple times fablibber, and that YOU think its important to “leave them up” because you have probably done it more than once. you are making this more and more clear. but AGAIN, how fucking dare you tell anyone else what they should do?

FCM - April 10, 2011

yep, thats me! i am stupid, without ovaries, ableist, ageist, elitist, and share a “generation” with jessica valenti. do you have any actual points to make here fab? or does this list comprise your “point”? i am a giant dickhead, somebody call the cops!

65. rhondda - April 10, 2011

I belong to the older generation and I am rather fond of the younger ones who have despite all the propaganda and pomo figured it out. Thank you. You are the ones who give me hope.

FCM - April 10, 2011

thanks rhondda.

and i didnt realize anyone was taking it PERSONALLY, but since they clearly ARE, i will say that i dont normally participate in private threads. i wish people would just make up one password and keep it the same all the time, but they dont. i dont have time for that shit, sorry! i also dont join facebook groups. ITS NOT FUCKING PERSONAL. JESUS FUCKING CHRIST.

FCM - April 10, 2011

i was just talking to another blogger the other day about what to do when the comments go to shit. my usual custom is to throw shit into spam immediately if it looks like people are deliberately misreading, or have a fucking chip on their shoulder, or are bringing shit over from other blogs, although sometimes i am a bit slow on the draw. some bloggers have turned the comments completely and permanently off, because people in general cannot be trusted to comment well. VP made that change several months ago, as did at least one other blog that i know of. i dont think i could ever do that, although i do think about it from time to time. as i said, its very easy to START a blog, especially when you already have a pre-fab audience who are known to comment well (but even then things can go off the rails). dealing with all the shit that comes with it is the hard part, including modding comments, dealing with personalities, MAABs and stalkers, and of course the the creativity-part. and doing all of this consistently, over time. its all so FUN i cant imagine ever giving it up!

FCM - April 10, 2011

so what do people think about telling other people what to do? i think its relevant, and i am actually open to changing my mind on this one. obviously, i used to do it. but i had a rude awakening to an obvious fact, which is that i value the truth very much, but not everyone else does. its a recurring theme actually, when considering sex-positivism, and the women who cheerlead for it. anyone?

also, fablibber: if there is anything in these comments that reveals something about you or your past blogs that you didnt intend to reveal, let me know and i will remove it. i agree with the “code” as you described earlier, although i do not personally trust anyone with my info, and i have not given it to a single person i have met on these blogs, no matter how much i like them, or how much we correspond. its just not safe, and people absolutely do have “blowouts” and unintentional security breaches as well.

FCM - April 10, 2011

also, the stats always spike when theres infighting, and they are spiking now. and i always tell you all about it, when it happens. people are watching. that is all.

66. thebewilderness - April 10, 2011

It is hard not to give advice, or at least it is for me. Problem solving r us. So instead, I have learned to examine the possibilities. Usually if you do a bit of analysis the solution presents itself without the one up/one down position in the relationship that advice giving creates.
Even when people ask for advice a goodly part of the time what they want is affirmation. Certainly when they ask for a different point of view they do not mean an opposing point of view. They mostly just feel stuck and need a nudge to take their train of thought to a reasonable conclusion.
In the situation under discussion, it seems to me that it is very much an individual decision.

FCM - April 11, 2011

my mom tells me how horrible her husband is, and asks me to analyze the situation with her, but also tells me she is in no position to leave him at this moment in time. at least she knows it i guess.

we are in the process of finding a better way, for herself and for me, so that we will be ok with or without teh menz. i hope we both live long enough for our plan to come to fruition, as it will take many years to attain, and is not all under our control. its going to take money, and i wish so much that we had come up with this idea years ago, but we didnt. the discussions on this blog and others have brought me to this place, and she is in complete agreement that she and i would take much better care of each other, and it would be a much better deal, than anything either one of us have going now.

FCM - April 11, 2011

i have also *repeatedly* made golden-girls references, and said how that sounds like a good deal to me, but she gets offended and tells me that shes not old enough to be a golden girl. i dont know…her kids are grown, she owns her home, and she hates her husband, sounds like a decent solution to me!

67. cherryblossomlife - April 11, 2011

I read something interesting the other day. Apparently evolutionary “fitness” is defined by whether or not your *children* go on to mate, not how many women you can stick your weiner in to.

This is very significant.

It means that the amount of resources allocated to each child is much more important than how many you sear.

Raising even one child has always require so many physical, mental, economic resources that raping a lot of women and leaving them to rot is an evolutionary *dead* *end* (love that term, thank you FCM).

A woman who was raped is not likely to nurture her baby in the same way she would if it were a planned pregnancy. She would probably seek an abortion (which is an ANCIENT) practice. She might even abandon the baby at birth. Or, her body might spontaneously abort the child, which can often happen if the baby is not wanted or the woman is under stress.

Plus if she is not supported in her pregnancy, she won’t be able to raise that child as well as a woman who IS supported.

Almost all patriarchies try to pretend that conception is *the* most important part of reproduction. They purposely ignore the 18 years of nurturing that takes place after conception.
This line of thinking gives fathers huge rights over their children’s lives, even if they do nothing to help raise them.
It also means that society doesn’t have to help mothers because it can pretend that what happens after conception is irrelevant to the outcomes.

Basically the woman who told me that put it like this” A man will have more chance of passing on his genes effectively by nurturing his sister’s child than by raping a woman.”

I live in Asia, men and women appear very androgynous. Women are very flat-chested (proving that large breasts have got F-all to do with attracting men, otherwise why are they not fetishised in Asia), and men are small, with slim hips and backs. Many men dye their hair blonde and wear make up, and although the women are often hyper-feminine, not all of them are. Oh and CHILDREN, you can hardly tell at all until they reach around 12.Boys have longish hair and girls have shortish hair!!! This is another reason why trans makes no sense to me at all.

FCM - April 11, 2011

Basically the woman who told me that put it like this” A man will have more chance of passing on his genes effectively by nurturing his sister’s child than by raping a woman.”

yes, i have heard this one too, because if you share the same mother, you obviously share the same genes. a mans sisters children would share his genes FOR SURE, whereas his wife/gf/victim might be pregnant by some other guy and he wouldnt even know it. so YES, this makes sense to me, but its not talked about much is it? its all yay rape, all the time. the fucking EPs are so sick, they really are.

68. cherryblossomlife - April 11, 2011

Have to say, reading all the discussion about private blogs/threads, and whether to delete your blog or not has been a real eye-opener for me. I’ve been on the nasty side of some trans abuse before now but that’s about it.
But feminists are at risk, aren’t they.

69. cherryblossomlife - April 11, 2011

yes, exactly! A man can NEVER be sure that any woman’s child is his own. And besides, the woman he is raping might already have conceived a child by someone else.
Rape is always a dead-end.

It’s not talked about because then we would have to rearrange society in order to nurture mothers, and financially support them. Currently it is arranged to give the man who inseminated the mother his RIGHTS over the kids.

FCM - April 11, 2011

as fab libber has said, one of the biggest threats is actually from other feminists who deliberately out each others identities, in a fit of rage. of course, if there werent predatory men out there just waiting for any of us to become vulnerable, what us women do to each other wouldnt be that bad. but there it is. the best thing to do IMO is to never, EVER give out your personal info, and that includes commenting on enemy blogs, because your IP addy will be given away. i have been invited to join facebook groups and never got back to them, and i have been emailed by people that i will never feel comfortable emailing back, no matter how much of a fucking temper tantrum they throw, or how personally they take it. too fucking bad. i do not correspond with very many people off blog, at all, and thats just the way it is.

as far as leaving things behind when i leave, thats a similar situation, in that it would be a source of anxiety knowing it was out there, unattended. i have enough to worry about, without something nagging at me from the background, some loose ends that werent tied. and thats what i imagine it would feel like, to walk away from all of this, and leave it intact as an archive. thats why i dont know if i will do it. but as i said before this comment thread went to shit, i will jump off that bridge when i come to it. as will every single other feminist blogger. its something we will all have to deal with at some point, and its a CHOICE. i dont feel any of us are MORALLY OBLIGATED to leave our work up “for the cause” or some such shit. this is my work, and i can do with it what i please, including destroying it if i want to. i also find it ironic that the same women who are the first to remind us all that we didnt make this shit up, that early feminists did, are the same ones that appear to be telling us that we *are* in fact morally obligated to preserve it. why? this is not a rhetorical question.

FCM - April 11, 2011

thanks cherryblossom and TBW for getting us back on track!

70. Miska - April 11, 2011

re reproductive quality vs quantity, the problem with evo-psych is that it pushes the idea that men are driven to “sow their seed” with a lot of women, the scattergun approach to reproduction. Its true that lots of species do favor quantity over quality, but humans arent fish, or lizards. Like all other higher primates the human reproductive strategy is to invest a lot of resources into fewer offspring, not fewer resources into a lot of offspring. Men who claim it is their reproductive nature to sleep around a lot and/or rape are living in a fantasy world, one which is not supported by the facts.

Also, re the sister’s offspring thing, I read about one society which doesnt have marriage, instead a woman will have a baby, and her brother/s will take on the husband role as provider/protector. It seems like a better deal for women. It means they can mate with several men if they choose to, which maximizes reproductive success, and it means they arent tied to one man who continually demands piv from them amongst other things. I’m sure there is a downside though (being reliant on male kin, for anything. My brother is a deadbeat, so the system wouldnt work for me, lol).I wish I could remember more details about this society, as I would like to read more about it.

71. GallusMag - April 11, 2011

It would be great if someone maintained an online archive of your stuff FCM- wasn’t a university or something going to archive you? I hope they do, not only your work but the comment discussions which are some of the most interesting illuminating reading around.

I agree with the total anonymity. There’s only one human being who knows who runs my blog and that is me. And I don’t allow comments critical of other bloggers, even those I don’t like or agree with.

72. Miska - April 11, 2011

I’ve thought about what I’d do with my blog when I stop too. I’d probably take a handful of posts I thought were the most important, edit them to get rid of any personal anecdotes etc and archive them and delete everything else. Comments are tricky though. The best stuff comes from the comment threads, but archiving other people’s writing seems unfair. Maybe I’d edit the comments for personal stuff, and anonymize them. I dont know.

I wouldnt feel comfortable leaving my blog intact and simply walking away from it, that’s for sure.

73. GallusMag - April 11, 2011

Oops did I just derail it again? lol

FCM - April 11, 2011

I have said repeatedly that the best stuff that happens here, happens in the comments. And archiving a blog is therefore different than archiving other work. A screenshot of the post wouldn’t really cut it for example. Regarding the university offer to archive me, their offer was to send me a release to sign, which obviously I am not going to do, and if they didn’t hear back from me by march 31, they “may” go ahead and do it anyway. So we will see.

I think that if the “elders” truly want this stuff preserved, instead of just using it as one of many sticks to beat the newbies with, then they should start offering us book deals, or use their real-life contacts from their many years in the field to make it happen. It pisses me off to think that one generation got to make their living this way, but that we are having to do it all for free, and taking all the shit that comes with it too, including shit and expectations from other feminists. As long as I am doing this on my fucking dime, on my fucking time, I will do it the way I want. That’s part of the tradeoff. And again, the medium is so different, I don’t even know if a book deal would cut it. Not only are we anonymous, but we are constantly building off each others work, without giving credit. This is common and acceptable, but very different from the way feminist writing has ever been done before. Maybe it will just serve as consciousness raising, and then it will disappear, and that’s it.

74. cherryblossomlife - April 11, 2011

“Also, re the sister’s offspring thing, I read about one society which doesnt have marriage, instead a woman will have a baby, and her brother/s will take on the husband role as provider/protector. It seems like a better deal for women.”

That is absolutely fascinating. Thinking of my own personal family dynamic that would totally work. It wouldn’t be for everyone though, true, but it does go to show that there is nothing natural about the nuclear family (as if WE didn’t know that…!)

FCM - April 11, 2011

Maybe this stuff will inspire others to write books too. Women who don’t have to or don’t want to be anonymous, or who are willing to eat handouts and sleep on peoples couches while they are trying to get published, like Dworkin did. I don’t think I could do that, and I hope I never have to find out. I have a gluten allergy ffs, I can’t even eat regular food, let alone other peoples leftovers. There will be a lot of history lost though, and here will be a huge hole in the historical record, if writers are inspired by this material, to the extent that its different from or goes farther than previous published work, but can’t or don’t cite to it. It’s going to seem like it came out of nowhere, which is a common theme with repeated erasure of radical work.

75. Mary Sunshine - April 11, 2011

Google up HTTrack website copier. Certainly, anyone who wants a copy of your blog (or anybody’s blog) already has it, or can have it. That’s internet technology.

FCM - April 11, 2011

Nobody is under the impression, I don’t think, that any of this is under our control anymore, once we put it out there for public consumption. The issue for me is whether *I* will feel comfortable leaving loose ends when I leave, and to the extent that deleting my blog or leaving it up is within my control, I might decide to delete it. To do what *I* can do, to manage my own anxiety, to the extent its under my control to do so. Why is this so difficult to understand? Miska knows exactly what I meant, so I don’t think its me. NOBODY is saying that other people havent already taken what they wanted from here, or that they couldn’t do so at any time.

76. yesindeed - April 11, 2011

Re: the society in which women don’t marry and where brothers help with the childrearing – perhaps you’re thinking of the Mosuo in China? There’s a short documentary about them here:

pbs.org/frontlineworld/rough/2005/07/introduction_to.html

77. zeph - April 11, 2011

“Also, re the sister’s offspring thing, I read about one society which doesn’t have marriage, instead a woman will have a baby, and her brother/s will take on the husband role as provider/protector. It seems like a better deal for women. It means they can mate with several men if they choose to, which maximises reproductive success, and it means they aren’t tied to one man who continually demands piv from them amongst other things. I’m sure there is a downside though (being reliant on male kin, for anything. My brother is a deadbeat, so the system wouldn’t work for me, lol).I wish I could remember more details about this society, as I would like to read more about it.”

The most well known society that still functions like this, is the Mosuo society. It should be remembered that they are the remains of the day, where matriarchal societies are concerned, and have already started to show patriarchal aspects.
Their chief deity is the Goddess Gemu, but they have also been infiltrated by Buddhism.

They probably originated from the historical ‘Country of Women’ recorded by the Tang Dynasty ( A.D. 618—907) were the country was ruled entirely by queens and a council of state, made of exclusively female ministers. Men, the imperial scribes tell us, were not held in high esteem and took their name from their mothers.

Here are a couple of youtube links; remember that all footage is filmed by patriarchal hands and the scripts exaggerate somethings and belittles others. Like the part where the film says men arrive in the women’s rooms, not so, they are usually invited at the dance, and only if he is one of her regular lovers would he appear at her door. He always has to leave if she asks him to. http://youtu.be/C5O0x2ohKYg andhttp://youtu.be/XIPUNYImpBA.
Here is a link from my blog: http://reallyrad.wordpress.com/2010/01/07/mosuo/

Don’t worry about the brother aspect, families are only considered unfortunate if they have no girls, all girl families are fine. The men are raised to respect their mothers and grandmothers so their level of arrogance is different to the level of our males.

I believe, once much of the human world organised and lived like this. It is a natural way of being, unlike our society based on gangsters and fake coupledom.

78. Sargasso Sea - April 11, 2011

Even as only a commenter I am vigilant in maintaining my online anonymity/safety. There is only one person beside AH and The Kid who is aware of the connection between *me* and Sargasso Sea. I’m keeping my teaspoon dry😛

At the same time, it is so very difficult to find radical feminists AT ALL, anywhere, so when you do it’s kind of natural to start fantasizing about Camp Rad-Fem in the little radfem wood outside Undisclosed Location! *heavy sigh*

Her blog, her choice I always say BUT I do so wish that there was a safe way to archive *Greatest Hits* from radfem blogs when they shut down due to any reason. One such site (which appears to be only the tattered remnants of a once glorious blog) was an extremely important signpost along my radfem way; without it I very well not have been writing this now.

Figuring out a way to save these writings, and to the specifications/comfort level of their authors, may be actually be of the UTMOST importance for the long game. I/we seriously need to think about this.

79. thebewilderness - April 11, 2011

Blogging is rather reminiscent of the pamphleteers that were common on the street corners of my childhood. Do you remember those?
Primary schools, high schools, and uni would be my target of choice.
I do a little roadside blogging, myself, in the burma shave tradition.
Most of the PIV essays you have written would make excellent pamphlets, FCM.

80. thebewilderness - April 11, 2011

They could also be collected into a book, but i suspect it would have to be self published, since the publishing world is only interested in that which supports PIV.

FCM - April 11, 2011

How did Dworkin get published? How did she get “intercourse” in print? This is a serious question.

I like the idea of pamphlets tbw. Like leaving a stack of them in public restrooms. I wasn’t ONLY talking about the posts any of us have already written though. I am sure some of us have it in us to write a book. Maybe not me, but someone!

81. Sargassosea - April 11, 2011

in the burma shave tradition.

Yes. And pamphlets too.

Hmmm, everything old is new again.

FCM - April 11, 2011

What if the people who think this work is important and should be preserved were the ones who took responsibility for archiving it, or started creating and distributing the pamphlets? To me, that sounds very cooperative. Instead of (for example) expecting the writers to not only continue writing and modding etc but to also be responsible for “preserving” or distribution too? Not everyone can do everything and all that. Like an old school cooperative.

82. cherryblossomlife - April 11, 2011

Dworkin and Kate Millet have written about how difficult it was to get published in the additional forewords of more recently re-published work.
Millet explained how humiliating it was, above all, to have to keep explaining to a publisher that there was indeed a market for her book. Her book has been out of print many times, and she had to fight to get it back into print. That is shocking because Sexual POlitics is probably *the* masterpiece of the 20th century. Think of all the kudos frauds like Freud get.

And Dworkin was told outright that they wouldn’t publish her work because she wrote like a man WTF

83. Mary Sunshine - April 11, 2011

FCM,

I’ll volunteer to do the HTTrack thing, with your permission. That program can also go in and do a daily update.

Plus any other blogs or websites anybody wants me to do.

I’m very much the lez-sep communal nerd from the olden days. Once lived in a house where nobody owned anything, even their own underwear.😀

FCM - April 11, 2011

Like, offer to adopt-a-month or something, and everyone takes a turn archiving.

84. cherryblossomlife - April 11, 2011

I noticed that there are some independant women’s publishers that focus on feminist work. And then Virginia WOolf’s husband was a publisher so that’s how she managed it (but before anyone thinks he’s a good guy read “Who’s afraid of Leonard Woolf” where it shows how he was a typical Victorian husband but with the added twist that he depended on his wife’s income for his hobbies!!)

FCM - April 11, 2011

Oh that sounds great Mary, thanks!

FCM - April 11, 2011

Maybe adopt a month or adopt a post will work well for pamphlets then, or maybe something else?

85. rhondda - April 11, 2011

Carolyn Gage publishes through lulu.com. The author keeps 80%. I am not sure of all the details, but I do buy books through them.

86. thebewilderness - April 12, 2011

If people pamphlet and distribute your work how would you want it signed? Are you giving permission, or would you like to think it over?
FYI Publius is already taken.

FCM - April 12, 2011

i had to google publius. but its a male name isnt it? i do like that you can just abbreviate it “P” seems like it would save time.

actually since you mentioned the pamphlets, i have been thinking about what that might entail. what do you have in mind TBW?

FCM - April 12, 2011

dworkin wrote like a man? wtf indeed. she of course wrote much, much better than any man i have ever read, and thats just her style. WHAT she says is the opposite of what any man would ever say: she told the truth, to women, about men. WROTE LIKE A MAN? WTF?

FCM - April 12, 2011

more important than a signature, would probably be this: PIV = sexual intercourse. 😛 since nobody outside the feminist blogosphere probably even knows what it means. perhaps some rewriting would be in order first, whatever you do.

87. cherryblossomlife - April 12, 2011

I think “write like a man” is probably publishing code for “has an opinion”

88. thebewilderness - April 12, 2011

In total, the Federalist Papers consist of 85 essays outlining how this new government would operate and why this type of government was the best choice for the United States of America. All of the essays were signed “PUBLIUS” and the actual authors of some are under dispute, but the general consensus is that Alexander Hamilton wrote 52, James Madison wrote 28, and John Jay contributed the remaining five.

I was making a joke.
Obviously not a very good one.

Of course Dworkin wrote like a man where man=person.
I write like a person too, so between that and the non sex specific ID I use I am assumed to be a man on the interwebs, right up until I start telling them how sick and tired my half of the population is of being the default insult for their half of the population. Then they don’t know WTF to think, cuz thinking is too hard.
How very dare she write like a default human being and not like a girly girl.
Blech. Even when you explode their stereotypes right in front of their face they prefer to deny reality and cling to the myth.

89. thebewilderness - April 12, 2011

Ha! The pamphlets.
Just the standard eight and a half by eleven, formatted and printed at home, and distributed either by hand or posted on a bulletin board. You could peg five or six on top of each other on a bulletin board so people could take them.
There is a danger if you leave them in a stack on an info table at a book store or library that some d00d would dump them. So there has to be a certain amount of follow up.
I suggest signing them with this web address.

I think some of the peeps here are at Uni.
Other peeps will have other ideas.
I personally would put them on the bulletin board across from the local high school. Because that is where the kids go for snackies.

90. cherryblossomlife - April 12, 2011

you mean the myth that the trans are clinging onto TBW?

FCM - April 12, 2011

Tbw, if that’s what you want to do, that’s fine with me. Signing with the addy sounds good too. Can you print them with the header?

Also, if you want, you can send me pdf files and I could probably collect them in the sidebar. Let me know how it goes!

FCM - April 12, 2011

Also, I never liked history. Gee, I wonder why?

FCM - April 12, 2011

I seriously would’ve never thought of pamphlets, in a million years.

91. GallusMag - April 12, 2011

You would be shocked at how far pamphlets can go. The more amateur the reproduction the farther they go.😉 Human nature.

92. noanodyne - April 12, 2011

So many interesting things on this thread to comment on.

But just wanted to quickly second the need for this stuff to somehow be archived for the women who are out there in the wilderness looking for something that makes sense. There was a site from years ago that was like an island of sanity that I found after much exhausting swimming in the liberal feminist sea. I’m so glad it’s archived, but I would much prefer that one of us had control over it than it just being available through a generic one that could disappear it at any time (see the convo over at FABs for examples of news items disappearing from the web).

The thing is, we have to make it both easy to find this stuff and easy to consume it. One way to do that is to create “pathfinders” (it’s a librarian’s term) so people interested in a subject will be led to this stuff. We can’t just rely on search engines, obviously. I created a page on my blog linking to all the great articles I’ve found in the radfemisphere about a particular topic as a kind of pathfinder. We could each be doing something similar.

93. Mary Sunshine - April 12, 2011

I just finished a mirror. It’s my first go at this one. I need to review the mirrored site (it’s on my hard drive) to see how the links work.

FCM - April 12, 2011

how does this work mary? should i just google it?

94. Mary Sunshine - April 12, 2011

Hi FCM,

Here’s the link that you want:

http://www.httrack.com/

Download the program and install it.

If you read around on their website, it will give you a bit of orientation to what you will be doing.

Or, if you are the type who like to teach yourself, just plunge in and start using the program.

It won’t and in fact *can’t* change anything on your blog, or on any website.

It just reads the ‘net, and writes files to your hard drive.

FCM, if you want to have a thread for all this so that we can learn from each other, then we can keep coming back to it and compare notes.

95. Nelle - April 13, 2011

I think there’s one word in particular I really like that’s negative towards the penis.

It’s called “junk”. They openly and willingly refer to their penises as this-some of them.

Accidental honesty on their part. It is indeed “junk”.

96. FCM - April 13, 2011
97. FCM - April 14, 2011

so was the book-deal talk too much? 😛

it was the EXPECTATIONS OF OTHER FEMINISTS that put me over the edge. i plead insanity!

98. rhondda - April 14, 2011

You have a book fcm. It is the form you want it to be that is the decision. One thing I have always admired about Mary Daly and other feminists is their willingness to footnote conversations with other feminists. She never claimed the ideas she put across were all her own. Conversations inspired her and she credited them. It would be a little different with the internet and the anonymous personas, however I am sure any of us would be okay with that,knowing that the information is very valuable to younger women. There have always been anonymous women helping other women. Consider it. You do have a gift.

FCM - April 15, 2011

thanks rhondda! i have thought for a long time that if i can manage it, i would like to spend my retirement writing books. i dont have time for a book right now, its the research that takes all the time, and i just dont have it! of course, thats for a “normal” book, what most people think of when they think of a book, and the kind of books i always hoped to write. ie. REAL books. i dont know if i am creative enough to rethink the “form” actually, are you? the fucking fun-fem bloggers are turning out books by the dozens though, and it makes it too obvious that theres an absolute drought of inspired IRL radical feminist publishing right now. there is a need, and i wasnt kidding when i said that SOME of us could probably turn out a book, if they could get the deal. i am *not* one of those people, at least not at the moment. these ultra-short blog posts are actually the perfect format for me right now, and i am absolutely inspired by the discussions. yes.

99. thebewilderness - April 15, 2011

Pls forgive this intrusion of history, butbutbut

Emersons Essays
Samuel Johnson
Paul Krugmans
Mark Twain
My all time favorite Johnathan Swift’s Modest Proposal
Grace Rhys
Maria Edgeworth
Mary Mitford
Elizabeth Cady Stanton
Agnes Repplier

Essay writers one and all, so you would be in good company.
Srsly. What is a blog but a series of essays?
Collecting them, editing them, putting them in order, is a job of work for another time perhaps.

For now, please know that your essays are of great value to us all. Having the added advantage of talking with you about them is splendid. Bit of a pain in the arse for you if previous essay writers opinions on the matter are to be trusted.

100. thebewilderness - April 15, 2011

All of those essay writers and many more have been collected and published in

wait for it

Books!

101. cherryblossomlife - April 15, 2011

I can’t find it but I remember an amazing Dworkin quote on the subject of women’s writing being consistently rejected, especially women with something important to say. It went something along the lines of “they are driven back into madness or child-bearing or suicide. Very few women survive this process.”

So blogging is an outlet, but the problem is you *should* be given credit for the work you do because men are “paper-shuffling” their way through life, as you say, writing reams and reams of absolutely nothing, and getting lots of money and status for it.

But I do remember Daly’s warning that some women fall for the trap of thinking that it’s better an idea gets out there, even if someone else takes the credit for it, than letting it die. What often happens is that men take credit for women’s work, and pass it off as their own in one form or another and *they* get the publishing deal because they’re men.

102. maggie - April 15, 2011

I’m so glad TBW that you included Swift’s modest proposal, which is one of my personal favourites.

103. maggie - April 15, 2011

Oh Cherry that happens in science all the time. I have posted earlier about the rejection Mary Shelly faced after the publication of Frankenstein.

104. SheilaG - April 17, 2011

Back to books: lesbians have always been closely tied to bookstores and publishing, and created presses worldwide. I work with lesbian scholars all the time compiling original sources, interview subjects etc., and am always credited in these works. What often frustrates me, is when I contact radical lesbian feminists from the past… women I’ve known for decades, they tend to drop out, and not want to save their works, or work with the lesbian scholars. Men have a very clear hierarchy for “honoring” previous generations of males, but somehow radical feminism continues to erase its own, or to trash the pioneers or simply not give much of a damn about them. We wonder why men perpetuate male thought and male books, but women have had a very hard time getting the fact that patriarchy is always on permanent erase of women drive… and we still are stuck in reinvent the wheel mode. How would it be possible for women now in their 30s NOT to have known about Mary Daly or even Andrea Dworkin? Why wouldn’t all women in their late teens and 20s now be reading this work, especially since it’s all over the Internet? It frustrates me no end, but I go on slogging on aiding the PhD candidates in original research, and original sources. Some of it literally in my garage, when all other sources were thrown out, or lost. It was scary realizing that I was the only one who saved the photos from the 80s, the cassette tapes of meetings and events etc. It’s sad for me to read this blog sometimes, because it makes me realize how much fun fem stuff just retards scholarship and knowledge. Just think how much farther ahead so many women would have been had they read a Daly or a Dworkin or Johnson or even Carter Heyward, but somehow, all of this disappeared–maybe women born in 1968 to 1972 say just were out of the loop. Radical lesbian stuff was so much harder to get in 1978 and 1979 compared to the 80s, but still, despite this, straight women got sidetracked into fun fem anyway. Maybe I just take herstory more seriously, because to me, it is essential that I read radical lesbian work as an antidote to het-domination worldwide.


Sorry comments are closed for this entry