jump to navigation

The Manketplace of Broideas! February 18, 2013

Posted by FCM in international, liberal dickwads, MRAs, politics, porn, prostitution, radical concepts, self-identified feminist men.
Tags: , ,

i think we have all seen recently (and forever) that mens alleged “marketplace of ideas” really isnt.  men wax idiotic about their beloved “marketplace” which is interesting terminology in itself — if there is no “market” for it, it has no place.  and obviously they mean this literally — if men cant make money (or some other benefit) from it, its worthless.  they like to think this isnt true, and cite as evidence their made-up assertion that but but but their marketplace includes anti-capitalist dood-volutionary type material too!

in reality, mens “marketplace” includes allegedly subversive material, as long as its porny enough, and exploits women.  hello.  orwell himself once marveled about his own career as a writer that he had “somehow” convinced capitalism (or like, the establishment, or something) for a short time to pay him for work that was directly oppositional to its own interests.  a close reading of “1984” of course reveals that, whatever else it mightve been, orwells doodvolutionary work was also valuable PIV-positive, woman-hating propaganda.  mystery solved.

we have seen rampant censorship of womens ideas recently — funny that, since women have only recently been granted a voice in public, and been allowed to read and write for that matter.  the lucky ones of us anyway.  and despite a global policy and practice of silencing women, often via rape and threats of rape, we see men waxing asshole about “free speech” and how it doesnt count as censorship if its hate speech!  or, its not really silencing unless the government does it.  it doesnt count, when its done to us, by men, because this that and the other.  but specifically women dont need the government to silence us if we are shut down immediately by your average, male-privileged joe via domestic terrorism, including terroristic rape and death threats and men stalking us and promising to harm our children.  or if we manage to speak for a couple of months anyway, and later, when a major blogging platform shuts us down for alleged TOS violations (while leaving up all manners of woman hatred, including porn AND RAPE AND DEATH THREATS).

this isnt technically censorship they say, quite ironically, since they are saying it with the deliberate intention of shutting us down and preventing us from developing a theory about whats really going on — we are specifically prevented from conceding ok, this is not technically censorship AND YET we are being effectively silenced anyway, and then speculating on why and how that is.

so the average joe shuts us down, because it *is* in fact (largely) the average joe that oppresses women globally, every day, because patriarchy.  they do this with their dicks, and with the express and implied threat of using their dicks against us.  and, you know, their vicious murderous violence and threats of violence.  it works.  and they go right on believing (or pretending to believe) that their “marketplace of ideas” really includes a diversity of human thought, or that it should, and even that it could.  their idiotic assertions are laughable, making one question the veracity of certain “common knowledge” regarding what men really fear — legend has it, men fear women laughing at them more than they fear anything else in the world.  but they dont bother hiding their ludicrous hypocrisy, which tends to invoke a hiccup and half-concealed snort at least.  so while i believe that men hate (not fear) women laughing at them, their solution is to silence womens laughter.  notably, they dont try to not be funnySILENCE.

with this in mind, i would like to acknowledge that the program and registration materials for radfem 2013 have been posted.  here, there and elsewhere, women are bringing *our* ideas to the marketplace.  men arent proving to like it, but mens response certainly does not detract from or negate the value of those ideas, or speak (in any direct way) to the value of our ideas to and for women, as a sexual class, around the world.  in reality, radical feminism is the only idea and the only policy and practice that has any value at all.  its the only honest, rigorous discourse on the planet at this time, because its the only one that centers or even acknowledges the lives and the reality of 3.5 billion oppressed people globally — women.

for thinking, intellectually honest women, for women who acknowledge our own humanity and who want to be fully free, radical feminism — including female separatism, and organizing and gathering in female-only space — is all there is.  because women are a sex class, the rapeable class, sexual politics is the only political platform that holds any promise to free us, including liberating our female bodies and our minds from male dominance, and that is why we continue to do it.  historically, it seems that human beings want to be, and activate towards being free, and if it surprises (or enrages) men that we persevere in the face of their threatened and actualized violence, its only because they do not think we are human at all — but they are wrong about that.  in reality, everything men do and everything men think is wrong.


1. luckynkl - February 18, 2013

It’s true The Bill of Rights was only meant to protect citizens from the tyranny of the gov’t. It was never meant to protect citizens from the tyranny of each other. Nor has it ever meant one can say whatever one pleases. Libel, slander, threats, or yelling “fire” or “bomb” in a crowded place for kicks, for example, is illegal. All free speech meant was that we, the people, as well as the press, have the right to speak out against the gov’t without the fear of imprisonment or execution. How porn qualified is beyond me. How does porn speak out against the gov’t? Needless to say, our laws have since been bastardized.

This all sounds fine and good until one realizes there’s one itty bitty little detail that many seem to have completely forgotten. The Bill of Rights were special rights for white men only. Non-white men and women and children in any size, shape, color or form, need not apply. Women, moc and children are not considered human or people, you see. They are considered property. The property of the white man. Property has no rights. One can only infringe on the property owner’s rights. Which means white men only.

What we are seeing today is the continuation of this white male sense of entitlement and women and moc still being viewed as property and as such, as having no rights. Moc and women may have gained some progress since 1776, but white males have never mentally left the plantation and for them, it will always be 1776.

2. whitevalkyrie1988 - February 18, 2013

Love the article. Although one point- men don’t “think” we aren’t human. They know we are. They just don’t care.

FCM - February 18, 2013

its tiresome to me that anyone still talks about “free speech” and the legal aspects of it, the exceptions to the rules, and blah blah blah when really what people are talking about (perhaps especially on the internet) is THE MARKETPLACE OF IDEAS which they think is valuable and should be nurtured and preserved…EXCEPT WHEN RADFEMS SPEAK. honestly, it bores me to tears that the conversation around silencing is derailed and devolved into a convo about “censorship” (or the bill of rights — which only applies in the USA) when we are really talking about mens global marketplace of ideas, and how male-centric it really is. and how they wouldnt know diversity of thought if it smashed their fucking faces in — and especially if it didnt. you know, like radfems talking peacefully, using words, about liberating ourselves from male dominance. these count as IDEAS do they not? but the market is closed, as far as we are concerned.

FCM - February 18, 2013

you know, i think that saying “men dont think we are human” is a shortcut for a whole hell of a lot of theory, and that its probably not that useful bc its so super-condensed that it doesnt convey much at all about we mean when we say it. i probably shouldnt say it anymore, but i havent come up with anything better yet.

i think its shorthand for the idea that men are the default humans, and so since women arent men, that means that women arent human. also, we mean to say that men use women like all humans use objects — to achieve an ends after which the objects are discarded when they are no longer useful. to men, women are like a toaster, or a broom. and when we start burning the toast, or dont turn on anymore at all, or whatever, they get another one and dont feel guilty about it at all.

but yes, it also seems, the above points notwithstanding, that men lie constantly and they will use us and harm us no matter what, so *if* they saw/see us as human, it wouldnt matter much. we would just be the kind of human that always loses, while men are the kinds of humans who always win, and men will never change that bc they like it that way.

whitevalkyrie1988 - February 18, 2013

My point was, I don’t think that men are unaware we are human. They know we are harmed by what they do to us, and that we are not designed by nature to withstand abuse, but they don’t care.

My point is, it’s not like they “dont’ know any better.”

FCM - February 18, 2013

i think youre right. thanks for saying that.

whitevalkyrie1988 - February 18, 2013

welcome! Any time! It’s that I’ve noticed men always say, “we really didn’t realize you were human!” (or feign stupidity about other topics in life) to get out of admitting they knew they were causing harm.

SO glad to be blogging again!

FCM - February 18, 2013

in that case, let me clarify. when i concluded that “men are wrong” i didnt mean it was an accident, or not deliberate. does that help? 🙂 i was making a judgment. they are WRONG, as in “in the wrong.” if that wasnt clear before, i hope it is now.

3. bugbrennan - February 18, 2013

“Free speech” and “censorship” and “reasonable doubt” and “hate speech” are all concepts that have been used to harm Women as a class. What else do Men as a class cling to? Those are the things that make me go hmmm. And Women should seriously consider what they are supporting.

4. whitevalkyrie1988 - February 18, 2013

Yeah. That’s what I meant. They treat us as if they do not realize we have human needs. they realize we have them, they just purposely ignore that.

I hate it when history professors at the colleges all say that “back then, men didn’t see women as human,” as if, due to their culture, they innocently didn’t realize it, as if just because they acted like it was true that they successfully fooled themselves.

5. SheilaG - February 18, 2013

Since women have barely had access to mass education in the U.S.–think what colleges were available to women in 1813, for example, compared to how many schools were available to men. We can get a good idea that all the “enlightenment” concepts of freedom, speech, liberty etc., were male concepts for males only.

Women’s free speech in its full power is the most censored and reviled on the internet. Radical feminism is the most hated ideology on earth, and shutting down women’s blogs etc. is just another day’s work for men.

The other day some campaign workers came to my door — a man and a woman. I just looked at them and asked them how a male candidate really represented me, given the war on women that men are waging worldwide now? Silence for a moment. They didn’t try to pursuade me further, I just said we have had enough of male government, and male political speech, I want real freedom.

Porn, trans access to private women’s spaces, control of the internet, rape and death threats against radfem bloggers, you name it. Women are so silenced everywhere you look, it just boggles the mind.

A lesbian group I am a part of has a policy of women born women only, and states this on its meet-up group. All hell broke loose, but we really didn’t care. Fortunately, many of the members had private homes, and we were not dependent on public “queer” spaces, where government regulations actually prevent women born women events now. If there was any reason for women to own property, this is it folks. We all found it such a relief to gather together free of the trans, bi gender queer craziness out there. We are women who love women, and want the full expression of this— freedom of assembly on our own terms no compromise. Had it been an “LBGT “Center” we’d be out of luck.

I see women shut down all over the place, and fearful of even naming the obvious like “domestic violence” is a cover up euphemism for men bashing the heck out of their wives and girlfriends. Just saying this to Jane Doe out there causes shock.

Good comments all. First amendment rights in the U.S.? Freedom of assembly? None of this exists for women even in so-called Western democracies.

6. SheilaG - February 18, 2013

P.S. I always thought the phrase “marketplace of ideas” was weird, but this post clinches it!

P.S.S. My LOL was over the list of ideas to continue this blog. Just hysterical as I sometimes get reading radfem blogs.

7. WordWoman - February 18, 2013

My first take on the title, I thought your post was about Boudicea (AD 60 or so), a warrior queen who kicked some ass. Not much is known about her, herstory is lost because she didn’t fit the manketplace of broideas. I’ve even seen women’s ideas/thoughts get lost in my lifetime.

I loved your take on Orwell. So true. Also that the whole censorship argument is just a stupid smokescreen that serves male interests. Different from silencing.

FCM - February 18, 2013

thanks for that sheila, and for your LOL. 🙂 i understand it now!

8. Sargasso Sea - February 18, 2013

“Marketplace” really does invoke some kind of free-trade atmosphere when the reality is that real life marketplaces are about as cutthroat as they can be – the *best* spots are dominated by those who have been there the longest or are related to those who have been there the longest.

If on the off chance that a newcomer to the market has better/sought after/RARE product that makes the Established Goods look flimsy or cheap or fraudulent the newcomer then has political hell to pay.

FCM - February 19, 2013

seriously! its like these asshats have never had a real job before, or had to deal with politics at all (or not as the minority voice anyway). gee, i wonder why the lack of perspective here…

9. WordWoman - February 19, 2013

I agree with Sheila, I always thought “marketplace of ideas” was a weird phrase. Like going to the supermarket and picking this and
that, no coherence to it. “No limes, ok, I’ll just get lemons.”

Also, I love the brilliance of radfem thought. Mary Daly, etc., nothing like it. The radfem blogs have the most brilliant thought online. Held up next to the obscurantism of postmodern “thought” radfem sparkles with that brilliance of mind. Pomo philosophy goes “thud.”

FCM - February 19, 2013

also, wordwoman its funny that you thought this post was about a warrior woman who kicked ass. 🙂 i thought about adding hyphens or something to set the title off more — man-ketplace of bro-ideas. but that actually looks worse to me. and i actually LOL’ed when you used “manketplace of broideas” in a sentence — well done. and thanks!

FCM - February 19, 2013

and i completely agree that there is nothing in the entire world like radfem writing — once you read some of the classics or even the snippets on the blogs, you can see how dank, dishonest and truncated literally everything else is. no small part of *seeing* that is understanding why that might be, and even that it might be, and that understanding i also got from reading radical feminism, which critiques culture like nothing else on earth (it does it for real, and as if its a matter of life and death — which it is). i can honestly say that i am deeply in love, or what feels like love when i read what these women have written and are writing. its magical, truly. nothing else comes anywhere close.

10. WordWoman - February 19, 2013

Yes, FCM, I have that feeling about it, too. I’ve read Mary Daly’s work aloud because it seemed poetry. I don’t know how she does it, poetry, amazing playing around with words, but clear as a bell with her analysis. Wow!

Her work doesn’t fit in the manketplace of broideas. It’s on a different planet altogether (which she conveys in her work/words). A new literary genre, too. Plus…..humor.

FCM - February 19, 2013

haha! you said it again. 🙂

11. SheilaG - February 19, 2013

…as if it’s a matter of life and death… re radfem writing, and that is literally true. I am convinced that I avoided rape or serious bullying to my detriment because of radical feminism. It’s a way to see through things, to see the truth, and it is a truth so threatening that it scares the hell out of the men, and it frightens women who are too tied to male interests. Just the concept of “false equivalency” alone and men do not equal women has been a powerful turbine in my life.

Since post modern stuff came later, it just seemed boring compared to Daly or Johnson or Janice Raymond. I actually think my life would have had so much less meaning without it, or feeling it as I compare woman only social spaces, and what men do to them. Just to know the erotic has power, and that within women defined spaces, this is about as close to eccstatic happiness that I have ever felt in life. Because I could feel the love of women in a rape free space!

And marketplace of ideas just is the dumb world of commerce that men create wherever they go it seems; they want to turn everything into a market- women’s bodies, schools, gardens, childbirth (surrogate motherhood), you name it, they want to make it a market. Privatization of the Pricks is my contribution to broideas 🙂

12. WordWoman - February 19, 2013

Good one, Sheila. They want to privatise everything. The entire food and water supply of the planet, for instance. Well underway. Genes that existed in animals for generations. Now owned by corporations.

Multinational corporations, that extend beyond countries, even. But what do these multinationals have in common? Hmmm, could it be they are all part of the manketplace? Could it be that the point of their broideas 😉 is to dominate every living thing? Privatisation of the Pricks, by the Pricks, for the Pricks 🙂

FCM - February 19, 2013

oh dear! the manketplace over at democratic underground doesnt value my work. utterly shocking!

FCM - February 19, 2013

its very revealing to discover that most people, if they have never read/experienced radical feminist or even female-identified work, that they have literally never read/experienced anything interesting at all. they have never experienced a great mind or a creative genius ever. this explains a lot actually, and completely contextualizes male intellectuals.

13. Sargasso Sea - February 19, 2013

“in reality, radical feminism is the only idea and the only policy and practice that has any value at all.”

Ha. I had that ready to paste since yesterday afternoon 🙂 And I must say that I absolutely agree.

Also: those DUh-mies sure do smell an awful lot like some othah brothahs we know! lol

FCM - February 19, 2013

i do appreciate mathematical genius though. 🙂 not a whole lot of room for misogyny there, and its useful for my purposes as well.

14. survivorthriver - February 19, 2013

I liked today’s Arundhati Roy comment today in Adbusters: “If there is any hope for the world at all, it does not live in climate-change conference rooms or in cities with tall buildings. It lives low down on the ground, with its arms around the people who go to battle every day to protect their forests, their mountains and their rivers because they know that the forests, the mountains and the rivers protect them.

The first step toward re-imagining a world gone terribly wrong would be to stop the annihilation of those who have a different imagination – an imagination that is outside of capitalism as well as communism. An imagination which has an altogether different understanding of what constitutes happiness and fulfillment.”

I think of radfem understanding as the closest ally to my own happiness and fulfillment!

Femonade, this blog proves that radfem imaginations can live outside capitalism and communism.


15. Feuerwerferin - February 19, 2013

The German constitution is also only about the protection of the citizens from the government. The threat of citizens against other citizens is not mentiond at all. It still isn’t whereas meanwhile men have recognized that the role of political parties had been neglected previously because they were not mentioned in the first constitution. The argument that the role of political parties goes without saying does not apply here. It least men did not accept it. But what about men’s violence? (just a retorical question)
With this in mind, it seems obvious that manarchism is just about men doing whatever they want without restrictions. The underlying hypothesis is that they can always shut women up. They just lie about it. It is some sort of male hedonism when they can enjoy rape without a 1% risk of goint to prison for that (in Germany). I’ve also noticed that many of them seem to be into bdsm – the most anti-oppression thing ever 😉 Because it’s anti slavery to play “master” and “slave” for fun for instance.

FCM, I missed the chance to comment on your previous post again. The other topic at hand was GallusMag. I just want to state something. If I didn’t, it’d seem that I agreed with what was said.

Butches are oppressed. It really is hatred propaganda to accuse them of bdsm. There was no proof for that and bdsmlers themselves don’t appear to be a reliable source. They lie a lot. (1. what they do is said to be sane and safe. 2. the bottom is more powerful than the top but at the same time a “dominant” woman is not controlled by the man whom she serves. 3. Everything is consent to them etc.)
We know that a small percentage of women does commit violence but where is the proof that it’s mostly lesbians or butches? I have been attacked by heterosexual women. The accusation of gender roles is unaceptable either. I can elaborate on this, if necessary. And to support butches does not equal to submit to them. I just give credit where credit is due. I’m not very feminine but I would be scared to look like an obvious lesbian in many places where i could be attacked by a bunch of men. Even though I don’t believe in femininity=fuckability either. I’m scared as it is already. It is very brave of them to be such open gender not conforming lesbians (=who don’t do femininity in real life). That is all.

Your work has a high value for women who like myself have dated men. It is very helpful to understand men since they are everywhere anyway… It was you who made me piv critical, provided good reading advice and many other things. Thank you.

FCM - February 19, 2013

gallus trolled and derailed the other thread. there was nothing said here on either thread about butch lesbians and bdsm, so im assuming you are responding on my blog to a conversation that took place somewhere else, which isnt fair, and threatens to derail this thread too. please dont. thanks.

FCM - February 19, 2013

survivorthriver, thats a great quote, thanks. link?

16. WordWoman - February 19, 2013

There was an article recently suggesting that the next pope should be a nun! It was a serious proposal. The only way to make the catholic church viable according to the article. Surprisingly written by a man, a journalist for the Washington Post, however, not surprising since it was inspired by things his daughter had said.

I thought about how J. Raymond wrote about women’s communities that were apart from men and how they were separatist communities, not just man-serving as were later portrayed. And how well they did. How women wanted to be there, not just being punished and put away by family, etc. No marriage was important to many.

Anyway, based on this journalists’ daughter’s volunteer experience, the real good in the catholic church was pretty much all done by nuns. The church manarchy is just a dead, frozen, dysfunctional, pedophillic culture. A hierarchy of dead ideas that interferes with the nuns, ofttimes.

The nuns are practicing harm-reduction mostly. But still, it gives an idea of what women could do if left to our own devices.

17. SaraClue - February 19, 2013

Here are some German manarchists who have created a movement called Camover in which they vandalize security cameras in public places:

They assert their liberty by destroying cameras on public transportation. Yes I know the surveillance state sucks and the police are often worse than useless, but the cameras probably provide at least some deterrent to violent predatory men. So many women rely on public transportation, particularly poor and working class women, and are vulnerable riding trains and buses (like the horrific case in India recently). So yet another example of male “freedom” that makes women’s lives more dangerous and restricts women’s freedoms to move about safely, get to school or work, etc.

18. SheilaG - February 19, 2013

The above camera destruction is about men not wanting their actions monitored. I don’t like security cameras everywhere either, however, they are a kind of deterrent on trains and subways.

19. Sargasso Sea - February 20, 2013

Surveillance cameras are tools that serve men only (curtail property damage/create revenue/sometimes, maybe, get lucky and identify a robber/murderer/rapist from a tape that has not been taped over or otherwise not paid any attention to – insurance purposes!), so I find it kind of hilarious that men go around destroying them when only a tiny fraction of them will ever have to *answer* to anything harsher than a stop signal ticket or jumped turnstile.

20. karmarad - February 20, 2013

Wordwoman, your info on the notion that that the next Pope should be a nun – that’s radical feminism, saying things that cut like lightning through the storm, that no one else is able to think of! Thank you so much, I felt myself extending when I read that. There hasn’t been an important female Catholic, aside from the self-abnegating servants like Mother Theresa, since Joan of Arc. Religion is our private lives and that is where all feminisms except radical feminism have fallen down. Thank you for that idea.

And fcm, I know what you mean by love…I picked up Shulamith Firestone, The Dialectic of Sex, for the first time…incisive like a knife through the fatty liver of patriarchy. Made me want to write her biography. Was it the hatred she experienced due to her writing that disabled her? How do we prevent that for those of us who are saying these truths now?

FCM - February 20, 2013

extending/expanding, yes. love, sparkling with brilliance of mind… 🙂

21. karmarad - February 20, 2013

That last paragraph you wrote, fcm, is inspired. I am going to think hard about finding the money to go to the Radfem2013 conference.

22. karmarad - February 20, 2013

Let’s make it real. A woman Pope. That’s right, a Nun. You have plenty of those, boys. Are they your equals, human like you, or not? Must they serve forever? For 2000 years Chinese women were forbidden to take the civil service examinations. Is this your 2000 year shame? That’s right, two millennnia with the idea of a woman Pope unthinkable. Well, think it. Think the unthinkable. A woman Pope. Yes. Think it, you fuckers.

23. witchwind - February 20, 2013

Men rarely have ideas of their own, most of what they do is a remake of male ideology in some form or another, whether in science, art, literature, or whatever – if there does happen to be genius in it and not just a garbage piece of male propaganda, there’s probably a woman behind it (or colonised people) whose idea was stolen and work exploited. When they do find out some interesting things, they always pretend to be the first to have known it, and make sure the knowledge is used in a way to increase their domination and the continued destruction of all life.

I don’t see the point of putting a nun as a pope. First, it would be pure tokenism, as religion and religious institutions are male, and it will stay so. I prefer when patriarchal institutions are more overtly patriarchal rather than covert, which is always more perverse. Also, we can be sure that if a woman reached the point of being nominated as pope, that she will be as male identified as one can be, her soul murdered and destroyed a long time ago.

24. Sargasso Sea - February 20, 2013

Thanks for that witchwind – have to say I agree.

FCM - February 20, 2013

i see what karma is saying though, in that just thinking about it is revealing, and has an expansive quality. we can imagine having a woman in that position, and we can imagine it however we want — a nun with her soul intact, for instance. the reality of it of course is as ww has said: anyone who would have risen through the ranks, and anyone the patriarchs would choose would not be the woman we imagine. this is true with politics too, and women “rising in the ranks” to attain political power. also, imagining and discussing it puts the patriarchs in the rather awkward position of exposing the glaring misogyny and hypocrisy of the institution, and that this is in fact their 2000-year shame — they cant even put a token woman in there can they? why not? i agree though that ultimately, it would be pointless, because the catholic church is hopeless and cannot be reformed because its entire point of existing is to oppress women. that cannot be fixed just like all patriarchal institutions cant be fixed, and just like “culture” (aka patriarchy) cannot be made less patriarchal.

25. Sargasso Sea - February 20, 2013

Oh, I dig what Karma’s saying too! “Think about it, fuckers!” Hahaha! 🙂

Obviously even just the thought of a woman as pope would scare them stupid even though they’d have nothing REAL to fear from simply THINKING now would they?

26. WordWoman - February 20, 2013

Yes, I agree that any woman who qualified as pope would have to be vetted by the males. On the other hand, this would be a potent symbol. I’ve watched Elizabeth Warren, who was elected Senator in the U.S. Massachusettes. They would not vet her for head of the department of consumer affairs, an agency she created. So she ran for Senate and defeated the incumbent, despite his then-popularity.

She rattles some cages, most recently giving the Wall st bankers, et al, a lot of grief. Ok, I don’t have any hope for real change here, but I just like seeing her attack these powerful men. She does it with panache, fun to watch. Like she’s having fun embarrassing them because they deserve it. I think she’s a former teacher or college professor. She treats them like truant kids. Ha, ha, ha. I loved seeing her in the recent encounter. Her work will be (is being) co-opted, no matter what she does. That’s how it works.

On the other hand, she’s a potent role model. She’s wicked smart, brilliant, quite obviously and she speaks up (within in her role). She may give young women a different script. A woman who speaks up to men, does it well, out-strategises them, etc. I think about women like Bella Abzug and Barbara Jordan, of second wave times. Not radfems, but not funfems, either. Different fems. Also unlike Hillary, not previously associated with a man. (I also like Hillary in that she breaks stereotypes. An older women with long hair (gasp!)) I have no illusions about any changes if Hillary becomes prez. But still, I’d like to see it. Just because she’s a woman.

FCM - February 20, 2013

i hear what you are saying wordwoman, i do. but being on “this” side of the sideshow, i can offer some perspective on what its like to BE the one taking men to task, and putting myself out there, doing something which often serves as a spectacle for other women. it feels like shit, and like i am being objectified by the women as well as by the men. its very stressful. im providing a service and i do it willingly, and i even enjoy it sometimes. and i am told that what i do here “matters” and that women benefit from it. but do most of them give anything back? in the form of comments, yes they do (the ones who comment, and spin with me and the others here — so thanks for that!) but many of them dont. i dont expect it either, but no they dont. im just stating a fact. and, when and if doing this work depletes me, does anyone in this “community” feel the loss or suffer any negative consequences at all? if they did, would they do something differently, or give more back, or take less? im just asking. i dont think its often worth it for the women doing it. that is one reason i wouldnt advocate putting a woman up there. it would kill her, or take something away from her wouldnt it? and for what?

27. femmeforever - February 20, 2013

Men rarely have ideas of their own, most of what they do is a remake of male ideology in some form or another, whether in science, art, literature, or whatever – if there does happen to be genius in it and not just a garbage piece of male propaganda, there’s probably a woman behind it (or colonised people) whose idea was stolen and work exploited.

THIS! ad infinitum.

I have come to realize that men are at their core NO THING more than pernicious, lying, unapologetic thieves. He exists to thieve. His conscious purpose on earth is to be born, thieve as much as he possibly can, and whomever dies with the most thieving loot – women’s time/energy/money/intellectual property – and the least, even basic self-care, effort wins the game. All of “civilized” society is based on this ethic. It’s why all institutions boil down to exploitation and thievery. Education, business/marketplace (which I have always thought to be a prettied word to impart legitimacy to charlatans), religion, sport, hiring/firing, etc.

28. WordWoman - February 20, 2013

Wow, FCM. You are right. I do think women get objectified in these roles and also it’s a burnout task. I don’t want to objectify you or any woman, particularly the brave ones I see with blogs.

Something important to think about. Perhaps a question to ask at the conference. What ways can we support one another? I mean really support.

When I first posted about the nuns I thought about them as a community, like J. Raymond describes in her book on friendship. Being in such a community would be a great advantage in having collective support. Not sure how to achieve that in current times.

When I see Hillary and see her health declining, I realize, no, I would not want to see her sacrificed on the altar of politics. It’s clearly a shit game.

Your brilliant thoughts have made a difference for me. I do look forward to your amazing posts.

29. Sargasso Sea - February 20, 2013

I often say that I wouldn’t have the job of POTUS for anything. Because I’d do the best job I know how (like I do with everything I do whether I’m *good* at it or not) and I’d get nothing but grief and exploitation for it. And other women/girls would end up getting (next to?) nothing for my efforts. So what’s the point?

Laws and lawmaking are men’s playground no matter how many women play in/at it. That’s a fact, too. Rape and peodphilia and trafficking are against the Law, but we know that those Laws offer (next to?) NO protection for women and girls. Trans have made a joke of Title IX, “equal” pay is a farce. Women who are sexually assaulted and/or raped under special military law are required to stand in line behind the men and wait for their aasaults to be taken into account first.

Yeah, it’s fun to watch women take men down a notch on their own turf, but they ALWAYS end up paying a price.

FCM - February 20, 2013

there are many variables in the statement i made too, so lets be clear about what those variables are. its a cost-benefit analysis, in other words, and we need to put the correct values on each side. i think that radfem writing has the potential to be a huge benefit to both the community and to the author — i “enjoy” this very much, much of the time, and i shouldnt minimize that. and radfem writing is incredibly scarce, and therefore precious and valuable. the same things cannot be said for anything women might be doing in other areas. but yes, there is a cost as well, and i think “how to support” women doing various things (including online) would be an excellent topic to explore.

30. Sargasso Sea - February 20, 2013

Not that (at least in my own experience) Title IX hasn’t been thought of as a joke since the beginning. I was one of the first girls to *benefit* from it and what we got was pervy and abusive male coaches and old, woolen boys uniforms – the boys got our re-allocated $$ for their new uniforms…

31. SheilaG - February 20, 2013

I think the heart of original radical feminism was the sense of real life community. It is still quite strong among lesbian feminists of a certain ahem age. We lived together, worked together and created change together. We couch serf to get projects done, and have practiced radical feminism in real life. The Internet variety is good, and getting ideas out there is excellent, but all of the truly great radical feminists, including the gold standard Mary Daly had vast networks of women who metm sparked ideas off each other, worked in protests together, and took care of each other at the end of their lives.

It is truly essential to find these communities of commonality in real life, because there really is something special about them. We have a lot of fun, there is a lot of shared affection in the struggle we have engaged in for decades now. I am happy to see a new generation of radical feminists coming up in the world, and they really do make me smile.

It’s why it’s a good idea to have conferences periodically, because online is great, but real live sisterhood is truly women’s most powerful estate. Otherwise it can get too lonely or too weird, with not enough give and take and testing out of what works and what doesn’t.

32. SheilaG - February 20, 2013

I think this actually might be easier for lesbians. It was in the 19th century and especially among older lesbians, we focus on each other, and there are no children around for the most part. There is something to be said about loving women erotically, beyond the concept of general love. There is the energy of that erotic love that I have always found uplifting and satisfying for its own sake.

It has a certain power and tenderness that really isn’t present in the same way with the struggles of hetero women. And if you look at who the founding foresisters were — Raymond, Daly, Anthony, Johnson, and so many more, it was this lesbian self that was powerful, and that only added to what Mary Daly said was the equivalent of the discover of fire Lesbian plus feminist.

I still meet women in their 50s and 60s who are coming out. You never know when this could happen, but somehow they fall in love with other women, and find themselves. After 20-30 years of being married to “jerks” as they refer to the ex-husbands. I don’t know what this could be like, but every over 50 lesbian group I am a part of has women who are still coming out. And radical feminism is our native land.

Again, Internet and blog radfem stuff is great, but I believe all women who are bloggers need to find a community of women in real life as a support to this. Even if it is only one or three women, the energy is essential to do this type of work. There are many women I have met online, but we do meet sometimes in real life; the two go together.

Sorry comments are closed for this entry

%d bloggers like this: