jump to navigation

More Separatism By Default. Happy Valentine’s Day! February 14, 2013

Posted by FCM in porn, rape, thats mean.
Tags: ,

love, me.  ❤

we talked previously about the idea of separatism-by-default — if there are logistical problems getting in the way of women separating from men in a direct, forthright way, there are other ways of getting there that are worth exploring.  this isnt an “ends justifying the means” kind of post, no.  this is a “take a deep breath” kind of post.  this is a lets reconsider.

what kind of rapey shithole are we living in, afterall, if we would have separatism by default if men were (finally) punished with jailtime for raping and contributing to men raping women.  i mean if all men who were guilty of the range of offenses between actual rape and not adequately protecting women in their own communities and proximities from rape, were actually sent to jail, including every man within a 20-mile radius (say) of any and all instances of a boy or a man raping a girl or a woman, within just a few minutes there would be no men left in many places in the world.  justice for women, in other words, would create female separatism by default, where all male offenders were separated from us, and allowed to do their male-culture thing with each other and not allowed to do it to us anymore.  we would be alone.  because justice.

what kind of porny nightmare is this, where if any of us were able to divorce ourselves from a woman-hating perspective, say by refusing to engage with patriarchal media images anymore, by default, we would be left in a female-only space.  no men and nothing any man ever thought, dreamed or created would be there.  because no.

and what kind of violent hell is waiting just beyond the horizon, what is it, exactly, that we are actively preventing from happening with our female blood, sweat and tears, when women put their energies into placing and enforcing social controls on men and male behavior, including mens violence against other men?  and, why do we bother doing this at all?  this is a serious question.

(re)consider: how many men would just kill themselves voluntarily if left to their own devices?  how many resources in the form of suicide hotlines, drug rehabs, DWI checkpoints and the like are being actively put towards preventing men from killing themselves, and is this really the best use of these resources?  says who?

(re)consider:  how many men would kill each other if they werent prevented from doing so, both actively and passively, and how much energy is dedicated to achieving that ends daily?  weekly?  annually?  is it worth it?  this is a serious question.  what would happen if we just let men do to themselves and each other what they do, unabated?  im not talking about *us* doing a fucking thing to hurt men at all.  im just talking about not stopping them from harming — even eliminating — themselves.  do we owe it to them or something to save them from themselves?  really?  because we are acting as if we do, but why?  i dont think women owe men a fucking thing.

and sure, women have our own interests in preventing male violence against other men, but our interests here are complicated, and worth parsing.  for starters, women and girls often get caught in mens crossfire, literally and more literally.  when boys and men are killed, so is the gynergy of the mothers, grandmothers and others who spent their lives and their very selves in raising and nurturing them.

perhaps our greatest fear is that if men are allowed to do what they do, and if “culture” — otherwise known as patriarchy — were allowed to be as hellishly brutal, as bloody and awful as it would be if men were allowed to just be men, unmodified, that men will simply and finally go mad, unleashing an heretofore unimaginably lawless, vicious violence, raping and slaughtering us all.  and this is a realistic fear, i think.  but obviously it begs the question, doesnt it — why are they worth saving, again?

what if we just got out of their way and let nature (or whatever) take its course?  im just asking.  we likely wouldnt have to do it for very long — i think even *i* could stand the trials and tribulations of “womens land” and passing the communal nut butter (or whatever) for the five minutes (or 5 years) it would take for men to render themselves, well, dead.  after that, we could all go our own ways if we wanted.  or not!  either way, aaaahhhhhhh.  heaven.


1. FCM - February 14, 2013

today i am engaged in the happy task of reviewing archived blogs to see if they made “goodbye” posts, or if they just stopped posting. i was just curious. heres a link to the archives (via lolliguncula)


2. Nobody Wins - February 14, 2013

i’ll take any separatism i can get. the only separatism i’ve been able to get for the last many years, though, is right here in my little hovel. there could be 10,000 others in this same town, each thinking that she is the only one, and waiting with resignation for the end of her days. and how would any of us even know that?

♥ ♥ ♥

FCM - February 14, 2013

i experience separatism in my own mind (at least!) and here at this blog. actually, because i have to also perform modding duties, *you* all probably get more of a separatist experience here than i do, but even for me, modding and all, its better than anything i get out there.

as far as the point of this post, i find it comically tragic that at this point, mens “value” is a negative benefit only — meaning, when performing a cost-benefit analysis, leaving them to their own devices to kill themselves might fail, but NOT because men have any objective worth at all, but because the COST *to us* and what they could take away from us if allowed to do so is so great that ensuring mens survival via social controls seems like a good idea to us.

FCM - February 14, 2013

btw, the “first generation” of radfem bloggers were really *nice* from what i can tell from scanning their final posts. seriously! its like they were speaking another language. its fascinating.

FCM - February 14, 2013

ok im done reviewing the final posts. i can report that most are not “goodbye” posts. obviously i cant address those which didnt make the list due to being made private, or being deleted once the blogger decided they were done.

3. femmeforever - February 15, 2013

there could be 10,000 others in this same town, each thinking that she is the only one, and waiting with resignation for the end of her days. and how would any of us even know that?

This is a very good point. Given that we can’t dare speak of our separatism IRL lest we be in even more imminent danger than we already are. But given how ubiquitous is Stockholm Sickness, I think our numbers, if not our ideas, are negligible.

4. Sargasso Sea - February 15, 2013

I’ve looked at/read about 80% (and have at least heard of another 10-15%) of the blogs listed on the link. Yes, they were *nice* and now they’re gone or under-cover…

5. Sargasso Sea - February 15, 2013

Also, since I don’t do tumblr, I’d like to add “Ball Buster” to the list if lolliguncula is watching.

6. WordWoman - February 15, 2013

When I read this, what comes to mind is how much effort is put into harm reduction. Around the globe, in many cultures, women must always consider safety at every moment of every day. How to avoid harm. Harm from men.

What you are saying is that, if segregated and left to their own devices, men would harm each other instead. Sounds ok to me. Their choice, as it always has been.

7. WordWoman - February 15, 2013

I wanted to add: They still have the same choice, as always. But women would not be there when they made that choice.


8. WordWoman - February 15, 2013

That’s why separatism makes sense. (Damn, my touchy computer
keeps posting before I’m done writing.)

FCM - February 15, 2013

yes wordwoman, but its not just “harm reduction” in the traditional or straightforward sense, like advocating for contraception or DV shelters for ourselves. we do that *and* we also pour so many of our resources into reducing the harm between men because we think we benefit from it on the other side — that if men were allowed to go batshit on each other with impunity, it would have drastic consequences TO US, that it would normalize their violence even more, and they would harm us even more, which is probably true. we help them survive, *because* they dont deserve to live, is what it seems to come down to. which is pretty fucked up isnt it?

FCM - February 15, 2013

it would be less fucked up if we helped them survive DESPITE their not deserving to live, that would be compassionate of us wouldnt it? but its not just a case of “despite” — there is actual causation there. we do it BECAUSE. it kind of boggles the mind.

9. femmeforever - February 15, 2013

Speaking of harm reduction and separatism, I just got canned for making a comment about Pistorius

FCM - February 15, 2013

hilarious that they apparently think that men are capable of “empathy” isnt it? particularly when you were talking about male privilege, including all men thinking that they own women like chattel — even the least manly men have male privilege and wield it over women 24/7. thats a bit too feminist for shakesville obviously. i despise that blog.

10. Sargasso Sea - February 16, 2013

About saving males from themselves:

It’s complicated. As a woman who has been pregnant 3 times (two abortions, one *conceived* and birthed and alive and thriving lo these many years later) we have only the stars to thank that the kid was/is female. We did not have the option of choosing her sex although we wished we could have.

That said, as a birthing woman, I can’t imagine having had a male child because my intrinsic NEED to try to mitigate harm to The Kid can not be taken away. I can only imagine the anguish I might feel had I born a male child especially knowing what I know now – seeing the world for what it is. There’s no way out of it.

My mom, although she always blamed (even ridiculed) my dad for *coddling* my brother, took over that role the minute my dad died. A great portion of her retirement years have been spent trying to figure out how to make a now 50+ year old MAN live independently. Her best idea to date was that he would be lucky enough to find a woman… on the internet. And that it’d be okay if she was “fat” and had kids. I guess the point was that at least SHE wouldn’t have to be responsible for him anymore, some OTHER woman would.

And so it goes.

11. femmeforever - February 16, 2013

It’s amazing (-ly sad) isn’t it that murderer never registered. Apparently, I should have been sensitive to the misogynist murderer’s disabled status. Ironically, the post was about the media and family minimizing the murder, disappearing the victim, and sympathizing with the perpetrator.

12. GallusMag - February 16, 2013

You’re a rich white woman partnered with a rich white man that you spoon every night.

13. sara - February 16, 2013

It’s a dreadful blog anyway, yet another cringing handmaiden who considers herself a feminist but has no idea what feminism really is. Not worth your time.

FCM - February 16, 2013

thanks for reminding me gallus. ive been meaning to put duct tape over my webcam (and write and imagine alternate ways of getting to woman-only space besides imagining myself sharing the communal nut butter *forever* with women who go out of their way to make me miserable — since i dont think im the only one who sees this as a formidable obstacle). thanks for illustrating my point perfectly, and enjoy your mixed space on your blog.

14. Chonky - February 16, 2013

Well…..the toaster oven will be looking for another home. Can’t recruit more lesbians with THAT attitude Gallus. Sheeesh.

FCM - February 16, 2013

ok chonky, that just went totally over my head, but i will publish it anyway. for gallus? i guess?

FCM - February 16, 2013

we have discussed this before, that “separatism” will have to include plenty of space and privacy for women to be alone if they want to, or its not going to work. i have heard women describe womens land or alternate living arrangements failing for this very reason — women living literally on top of each other doesnt work, and its not fair to assume it would. why would it? 10 women sharing an apartment made for 2 (for example) would be inhumane living conditions, but this is what we are looking at if we really want to insulate ourselves from homelessness, where poverty and unemployment of several of us at any one time wouldnt take any of us down. i think we could make that work for a very short period of time, if we knew it wasnt permanent — at least its another way of looking at it isnt it? thanks for reading, i will be here all week!

15. Sargasso Sea - February 16, 2013

Lol! It’s an old dyke joke that the Lesbian Recruiting Department would give out toasters as quota prizes 🙂

And, yeah, it’s such a treat to be (unpleasantly) tongue-lashed by the all seeing, all-knowing Gallus Mag who knows all of us better than we know ourselves.

Witness: http://radicalresolution.wordpress.com/2013/02/11/reading-comprehension/

16. bugbrennan - February 16, 2013

Women practice separatism every time they refuse to make eye contact with a man on the street, every time they decline an invitation to make small talk, every time they focus their thoughts and energies on women. We all are living in this world; we all do what we can to make “this world” bearable. We should support women where they are at, in the circumstances in which they find themselves, because we all are living in compromise.

Sadistic butch lesbian feminism that demands all women bow down to the brave butch sounds like another hierarchy. Fuck that noise.

Also, Gallus is white. Like, she’s a white woman. Whitey McWhiterson. And she’s engaging in the eversopopular pomo tumblr tactic of demanding you check your privilege.

Oh how the mighty have fallen.

17. luckynkl - February 16, 2013

My youngest brother was found dead in his apt last week. One of a growing number of casualties in my family. The family is large enough (over 100 first kin members) that some noticeable patterns are emerging. Few males in my family reach 50. Most die in their 30’s and 40’s with little to no warning. What I found particularly interesting was that most of these males were single and by choice, never married or had children. IOWs, there were no female caretakers. Coincidence? I think not. It jibes with the statistics. Married men live longer than single men. No other info is given. Which makes me wonder, how young does the average singe man die? If my family is any indication, pretty young. Less than half the life expectancy of the average married man.

It’s the opposite for women, btw. Single women are generally much happier, much healthier (physically, mentally, emotionally), and live longer than married women. Interesting, no?

In many parts of India, female fetuses are routinely aborted. This resulted in a scarcity of women in many villages. Twenty years after it began, the effects of what happens when females are eliminated became apparent. The young men packed like wolves and roamed the streets attacking other men, each other, and and the authorities. It became enough of a crisis that the gov’t was hard-pressed to find a solution. The solution? Import females by the truck load. Huh? Import? I’m not sure what is meant by that. Is that code for kidnapping females from other areas? Whatever the case, their thinking was that with enough women, the young men would turn their violence on the females, instead of men. Insidious, no? Now we begin to see some of what’s behind compulsive heterosexuality and just one of the things men use women for.

In short, men and their system will never end the violence against women (or children). Because violence against women (and children) protects men from other men. It’s not only intentional, it’s a downright strategy.

FCM - February 16, 2013

maybe i hurt someones feelings by not inviting them to my cocktail party to discuss the ghost whisperer and contract intestinal parasites over raw fish? none of that was real btw. i have never thrown a cocktail party in my life, and i dont even have a tivo.

FCM - February 16, 2013

also, my stats just spiked after i published gallus’s comment. coincidence? get the popcorn, drama trolls.

18. Sargasso Sea - February 16, 2013

It’s so very strange the way that happens…

19. Nobody Wins - February 16, 2013

From what I’ve observed, nobody wins. *deletes her popcorn*

20. Chonky - February 16, 2013

Living in inhumane conditions IMO would be domiciling with ANY man. An apartment built for two holding 10 women? That would be, for me, more of an inconvenience. With a good stage manager, it could be okay.

FCM - February 16, 2013

interesting that you can see the patterns lucky (and im sorry for your loss). my family is large too and i can see some interesting patterns too. my moms side of the family is almost all girls, and the few boys are “runts” for lack of a better word, or in poor health.

21. Nobody Wins - February 16, 2013

What Chonky said. 🙂 ^^^^^

FCM - February 16, 2013

you are right that domiciling with a man is oppressive. but living on top of each other like animals is inhumane. they are definitely different, and i dont think women living on top of each other would be oppressive, but it doesnt mean i would want to do it. a good stage manager would help….maybe outdoor spaces would help too, where some could safely hang out or even camp/sleep outside if they wanted to instead of sleeping in shifts? just thinking outloud.

22. Chonky - February 16, 2013

My 341 year old perv father unfortunately is in good health.

23. Nobody Wins - February 16, 2013

i don’t think we’ll have a helluva lot of choice. by that time we’ll be doing it to survive. we’ll be feral, and hiding ourselves from gangs of marauding males.

24. Nobody Wins - February 16, 2013

Chonky: that’s bcuz he has you taking care of him. 😦 😦 … and other females who are paid to do so.

FCM - February 16, 2013

ugh, sorry chonky. 😦 that is so unfair.

the temporary vs permanent aspect was one of the main points of this post, and i think the idea of whats oppressive versus whats inhumane is very relevant to that. my idea of “separatism” isnt really communal, since i am an introvert and want to be left alone most times — the thought of having to eat in a group for every meal makes me lose my appetite for example. although i have suspected for some time that my social anxiety disorder-like symptoms are really patriarchy-anxiety, and that i cannot bear being objectified constantly which is what happens when i am in a mixed or nonradical group. i have had these “symptoms” since i was 4 years old and went to school for the first time, and came home sobbing. that might go away if the conditions were right.

if the man-problem took care of itself while we waited it out elsewhere, we could safely “go our own ways” afterwards and the oppression would be gone, along with the constant threat of being raped and murdered by men, and i would be more or less ok with whatever was left, even if it was unpleasant or inconvenient — even if i was homeless. maybe i would have to wander for a bit to see if the “social anxiety” went away or not — if it didnt, perhaps i would be “fucked” but for once in my life it would only be figurative, and not literal.

on a related note, in one of her books, sonia johnson proposes that women would more or less naturally adopt a “gift economy” if left to our own devices, which is different than even a barter economy, economics being another reason womens land fails. in a gift economy, women would make sure everyone had what they needed, and would do this willingly rather than a quid-pro-quo. in practical terms, this means we would all be ok even if we didnt have any money or barterable materials or skills. i thought that was a very interesting idea/observation.

FCM - February 16, 2013

yes thats what we would be looking at isnt it — we would be forced to live on top of each other or whatever as a survival tactic, and would have very little choice in the matter. hopefully this would be temporary, but it might not be. this is what we have to look forward to, not “if” but “as” the man-problem takes care of itself, and it is taking care of itself isnt it, as the known genetic decay of the human male is really happening in real time. things are getting worse, and we might have to band together anyway, even if it is not mindful, or communal (IOW not optimal, or even “feminist” — i guess?). womens survival, in other words. which is what it comes down to, and (again) we end up here when taking radical feminist thoughts to their logical ends.

25. Sargasso Sea - February 16, 2013

The *gift economy* is something I’ve been advocating for ever in my personal imagining of the world without men (or few enough of them) wherein we *work* at things we like to do and share the fruits of our production.

26. sara - February 16, 2013

The decay of the human male is proceeding at pace, why do you think the patriarchy is putting billions into sequencing the human genome? They may only have another two or three generations left anyway. they have polluted the earth with chemicals that destroy their own sex (how ironic?) and they know that they may only have another hundred years left at most.

FCM - February 16, 2013

does anyone know what this autism/aspies business is really all about? its interesting to me that it afflicts so many new births now, and that almost all of them are male. coming at this from several angles, it makes it seem increasingly reasonable that women would refuse to give birth to males out of sheer practicality if nothing else. i cannot imagine being legally and morally responsible for any male, let alone a disabled male who would require even more care, and especially one who was afflicted with “extreme maleness” as the autism spectrum has been described. its telling, of course, that this has been “pathologized” but not in the way that most people think — its interesting *to me* that its yet another way women are robbed of our gynergy and put upon to perform unpaid domestic and caretaking duties, and that this demand only increases as our alleged social and legal “gains” increase. they will come up with anything wont they? absolutely anything.

FCM - February 16, 2013

and re the gift economy, its entirely possible that “communism” has largely failed bc men were allowed to be part of it — “some animals are more equal than others” (like in animal farm) is an unintended hierarchy, and more or less naturally occurring (for men). and that womens land has failed — where it has failed — bc we were trying to use a barter economy instead of a gift economy bc we didnt know any better? i read about one aging lesbian community that knew it was doomed bc they were all aging and on retirement or benefits as income and it worked for them for years, but no young women were coming in bc the land was remote and there were no jobs there (among other reasons). really, a barter economy is just more of the same shit isnt it — if you have no money or materials or skills to barter, you end up having to give “services” (or nothing) and if you give nothing it creates resentment. voila, a hierarchy — services are the lowest of the low, and required. johnsons description of the “gift economy” was really optimistic, perhaps too optimistic (verging on “silly” again to my cynical eye) but its entirely possible that it would work, and that the only reason our willingness to generously “gift” our goods and services currently leads to our destruction and poverty is bc men take obvious advantage of it, and dont give anything back. because they are men.

27. Nobody Wins - February 16, 2013

“exchange” implies pre-established ownership. ownership cannot exist without the *defense* of ownership. by one’s own physical strength, or by societal fiat. (latin fiat : “let it be done”, “it shall be”). the societal fiat is, of course, male violence and/or threats of same. sonia johnson once wrote that all exchange transactions are adversarial transactions.

regulations ownership enforcement

the concept of “services” is based in ownership / enforcement / fear.

28. Nobody Wins - February 16, 2013

there should be a double headed arrow between each of the words in the second last sentence above.

the mathematical symbol for double implication.

FCM - February 16, 2013

yes! thats helpful, thanks. and not that i would presume to tell elderly lesbian separatists what to do (!) but i would think that when LITERALLY staring the end of their beloved community in the face, because no young women were coming in because they couldnt afford to, that the elders would consider trying a new economy amongst themselves, and one which didnt require every new resident to have a traditional “job”? im just saying. i wonder how or whether this was ever resolved. the article also said that they only wanted lesbians, and that it was the elders experience that younger lesbians largely werent/arent interested in female separatism, so theres that too.

29. sara - February 16, 2013

“autism/aspies”… the worst sort of males in many ways are geeks. At least ‘normal’ males you can see through their simplistic testosterone dominate brains. Geeks on the other hand are sly and hate women with passion, they try to deny us from being comfortable with technology. They invented the internet to distribute porn and hurt women, and they constantly invent new ways to degrade and denigrate women that ‘normal’ males are too stupid to do. It’s like geeks are the last sting in the tail before men are disposed of.

30. Nobody Wins - February 16, 2013

don’t think i ever read that article – – the bit that i remembered about exchange transactions being adversarial was from a book of hers (sonia’s) that i read in 1992. “the ship that sailed into the living room”. i’ve never met sonia johnson, nor have i been interested to join a separatist intentional community on land. (with or without her)

the reason i would not seek out an opportunity to live in a (current) lesbian separatist land community is because of the considerations of ownership, regulation, enforcement that i mentioned in my comment above.

the communities cannot be female-dynamic because of the stasis of being locked into the current money system. the web of lies having to do with ownership. the female-dynamic is hopelessly bound about by constraints of male regulation, and the *necessity* of accepting and enforcing the consequences of male regulation within the female group.

i have seen this play out in various female-collectivity situations. money and ownership are the final determinants.

logically, i cannot foresee the development of female strongholds until the collapse of the money system is complete. then they will develop through dynamics that are now impossible.

do you remember KatieS ? she talked eloquently about this. the thread *may* have been on the hub. i can’t quite remember. we were discussing possible scenarios.

31. Sargasso Sea - February 16, 2013

Very recently there was a headline proclaiming that folic acid reduces the chances of birthing an autism-spectrum child. I didn’t bother to read the article – the headline itself was birther-blaming enough for me BUT it makes me think of the way that men have ruined the food chain to the point that there is not enough nutrient in any of our *food* any more and, again, the blame is laid at our… female biology instead of at their profit grubbing malfeasance.

32. karmarad - February 16, 2013

Well, I don’t think all the women of the world can leave by cramming into some small apartments somewhere. I suggest we all move to Iceland, continuing to promote their policies regarding things like outlawing porn and prostitution. Iceland could hold a lot of us as a temporary expedient. Also, it is remote and male warfare elsewhere might not easily reach us. Fish products are a healthy diet – we could manage – there is enough food – it is a beautiful country, and imagine the wonderful time we could have soaking in the warm geothermal spring-fed shallow lakes, just women. I see you in a nice warm apartment of your own in Reykjavik, fcm, but with cafes and cinema nearby. For me, a cabin in the north, under the aurora and near the volcanoes. Perhaps only books and movies by women will be available, while we forge our new culture? Free college for any girl wanting and able to go into international law, agriculture, home-building, and defensive weaponry. Politically we’d pull a Switzerland. Immigration would require an XX gene. When the vikings arrive in their boats, we’d be ready this time, unlike the Irish women kidnapped by the Norsemen, the original involuntary inhabitants of Iceland. LOL!

33. karmarad - February 17, 2013

BTW, I often read comments from men about how women will come cryin’ back to them because we don’t have the technical know-how (and even more, the interest) in building tall buildings, extracting fossil fuels, building tankers, even keeping fast one-flush toilets and electricity and Corvettes going. There’s one little problem with that line of thinking. I’ve never had this conversation with a woman who didn’t say, let me live in a small hand-built house, use candles and composts and outhouses, I’d gladly trade insatiable consumerism and technology for peace. Where I live a lot of people live off the grid in the mountains. I’ve spent time in Nepal and the outhouses there in the mountains consist of a balcony with a hole. The waste drops into a lined small pit filled with straw that is regularly collected and taken to the landfill. It’s clean, no odor, aesthetic even under the moon at night. I have also participated in India in an alternative community where women helped each other build their own houses, made of straw bales or packed earth. Delightful, and no right angles anywhere. Each window is a different shape and of course no two houses are alike. Of course some women would still enjoy learning engineering and other skills for larger community needs. I imagine our medical practices would excel in preventive medicine and we wouldn’t torture people at the end of their lives with needless amputations and radiation and other drastic interventions. And so on.

FCM - February 17, 2013

thats exactly it karma — i would gladly trade mens rapey shithole and all that comes with it, including their necrophilic “technology” including medical technology for peace.

FCM - February 17, 2013

also, i have decided that this blog hasnt been very useful at all, and i hereby take back everything i have said here for going on 4 years now. instead of everything i have said here, i really shouldve been saying something else, and i will in the future. since everyone else gets to decide what my blog is about and how i should use my time and my talents (which i do for free) to benefit no one, lets put it to a vote. because i am really nice, i will let gallus mag vote twice!

so what type of blog would you like to see femonade morph into in the future:

1. privilege checking/self flagellation;
2. liberal reformism, including modified liberal reformism advocating legal solutions to everything in perpetuity (and then acting shocked/outraged when these “gains” do nothing to liberate women from male dominance);
3. horizontal hostility (which is really different from #1 “privilege checking/self flagellation” but im too busy spamming everyone on my shitlist to explain the differences. just kidding, there is no difference); or
4. guest posts on various topics, written by literally everyone except myself.

dont forget to vote!

FCM - February 17, 2013

if you are having trouble deciding, i always use this as a guide: the boring-er the better!

FCM - February 17, 2013

shit i forgot one.

5. men. theres hope for them yet! (male commenters welcome, of course).

34. Sargasso Sea - February 17, 2013

Yay Karmarad 🙂 Thank you!

(I have no time to vote because all my “leisure time” is spent trolling and tone policing… or so I’m told.)

35. SheilaG - February 17, 2013


36. Chonky - February 17, 2013

6. Lol Skunkz, as cute as kettehs, only better companions.
7. Butch women are to blame for everything, here’s why.
8. Standing up to horizontal hostility.

37. Feuerwerferin - February 17, 2013

I hope your mother is alright now.

FCM - February 17, 2013

thanks feuerwerferin. shes not though. i dont think i have ever seen her this bad off actually.

FCM - February 17, 2013

chonky, are you saying that “responding to horizontal hostility” is as boring as “men. theres hope for them yet!” if so, fair enough. 🙂

FCM - February 17, 2013

also, i cant tell who sheila is responding to with her cryptic, contextless “LOL” but its fair to assume IMO that she was responding to and supporting gallus and her het bashing. well played sheila. plausible deniability, yes?

FCM - February 17, 2013


the reason i would not seek out an opportunity to live in a (current) lesbian separatist land community is because of the considerations of ownership, regulation, enforcement that i mentioned in my comment above.

the communities cannot be female-dynamic because of the stasis of being locked into the current money system. the web of lies having to do with ownership. the female-dynamic is hopelessly bound about by constraints of male regulation, and the *necessity* of accepting and enforcing the consequences of male regulation within the female group.

fascinating, revealing, and absolutely true, as far as i can tell. imagine how different it would be if, for example, a group of women came together to live on public land, where none of them could throw any other of them out, or force them to earn their keep, or anything else? in the case of ownership, enforcement etc even if the power-over is never exercised, it is always there, and everyone knows it. its extremely destructive and unfair, even to the “owners” who might not ever intend to make a power play but whose “chivalry” is demeaning on its face to the other women who have lived under a similar regime their entire lives under male rule. i have a hard time even imagining what this would be like, if regulation and enforcement were not in play either — for example, could we live without restrictive “community rules” where the group could leave, and leave someone behind if they werent cooperating (but couldnt throw anyone out bc no ownership rights giving them the power to excommunicate anyone). this might necessitate very, VERY small clans (like families) or groups that were constantly changing membership to accommodate everyones interests and vision…

38. Chonky - February 17, 2013

FCM – Twas just being goofy. ‘Standing’ as in vertical. Being silly. Comic relief, if you will, to all the strife seemingly going on.

You are a very funny lady FCM, I saw it as Sheila G giving you a nod for making her laugh.

FCM - February 17, 2013

haha! “stand-up comedy” in response to horizontal hostility? that makes sense.

39. Feuerwerferin - February 17, 2013

I’m sorry to hear this.

“and what kind of violent hell is waiting just beyond the horizon, what is it, exactly, that we are actively preventing from happening with our female blood, sweat and tears, when women put their energies into placing and enforcing social controls on men and male behavior, including mens violence against other men?”

There are many men who first kill their families and then themselves. Thus humanity would be wiped out. This might be a reason.

FCM - February 17, 2013

indeed. so again, we are in the position of helping men succeed *because* they are so awful. i have said before that i think it might be too late to stop this runaway train, and this would be the reason. that they exist at all is unnatural — it literally would not exist in nature, and its taken an enormous amount of social engineering to make male survival a reality. nature is taking them (and all their rapey bullshit) back.

FCM - February 17, 2013

Sorry comments are closed for this entry

%d bloggers like this: