jump to navigation

Post-Modern Feminism Is A Dick-Centered Faith-Based Religion. That’s All It Is. December 8, 2010

Posted by FCM in authors picks, feminisms, liberal dickwads, PIV, pop culture, self-identified feminist men, thats mean, trans.
Tags: , , , ,
comments closed

pomo feminists are male-identified dick-pleasers. we already know that, what with their PIV-positive propaganda machine and marginalizing radfems, lesbians, spinsters, and everyone else who doesnt enthusiastically participate in their own destruction through dangerous PIV-centric sexuality.  but theres more to it than merely being pleasing, to dicks (and penises!)  pomo feminists (and pomo feminism itself) are so far up mens asses, that they are seeing out of mens eyes.  and never their own.

for example, the privilege discussion.  as undercover punk has recently and aptly described it, we (women) are all expected to acknowledge that we are wearing “privilege blinders,” and if it werent for our privilege blinders, we would be able to clearly see XYZ, whatever whomever is trying to sell us at the time, regarding the ways that we (women) supposedly oppress each other.  and the ways we oppress men!

yes, thats what it comes down to, in the end.  women oppress men, with all our gender-related power.  granted, radical feminists dont take it quite that far, but when self-identified radical feminists insist on calling each other out on their various privileges, and making accusations of privilege-blindness instead of explaining the mechanism of the alleged oppression and the demonstrable harms that flow from it, their reasoning is just as flawed, and in the exact same ways, as the idiotic “reasoning” of the pomos, who invented cis-privilege and uncritically insist that women can and do oppress men by hurting their feelings, and invalidating their experiences, and stuff, and things.  in other words, by being horrible bitches!  yes, its feminist to call other women bitches now, and to demand that they femininely pamper your fee-fees.  and its radical to insist that the source of womens suffering is…other women!  yes it is, shut up.

anyhoo, regarding pomo feminism being dick-centered: it is.  feminism has become a male-centered discourse now, or at least the pomo-version of it that passes as feminism in nearly every corner of the feminist blogosphere, and the mainstream too (thats not a coincidence).  how can you tell?  because it only makes sense when you look at it through mens eyes.  just like regarding non-PIV-centric sexuality as “prudish” and even “abstinence” in fact.  but i digress.

heres what men hear, when women talk about male privilege: something that doesnt make any fucking sense, at all.  they dont get it!  in general, men cant and wont understand what male privilege is all about.  they cant hear it.  they cant see it, smell it, or taste it.  and they dont understand it, at all.  the GOOD ONES will take it on faith, that these things exist: that men rape.  that PIV is dangerous to women.  that all kinds and manners of shit happen to women, because we are women, and these things are done to us by men, because they are men.  the GOOD ONES TAKE IT ON FAITH, that men are privileged, and that they exist, essentially, at womens expense.  for self-identified feminist men, feminism is a religion.  its faith-based.  and male privilege, like, hurts womens feelings or something, i dont know, but teh feminists are pretty upset about it.  the fact that what radical feminists say is also demonstrably true is beside the point.

enter pomo privilege rhetoric.  now everyone is supposed to just take everything on faith, because thats how men do it, and men are the default humans afterall!  self-identified feminist men are faking it, and now we are expected to fake it, too.  when we hear something that doesnt make any fucking sense, at all, we are supposed to just shut up, and believe that its true.  even things that arent demonstrably true, and even things that are, in fact, demonstrably false.  like cis-privilege, for example.  or, like young-privilege.  and hurt-feelings-as-harm is as far as anyone is willing to go, when analyzing the harms that flow from oppressive systems, and even from abusive people.  because when it comes down to it, MEN think that feminists are just big babies and are taking everything wrong, or that we are “offended” at various “inequalities”.  and not directly, demonstrably and seriously harmed, by misogyny.  see the difference?

now we are supposed to take it on faith, that women oppress other women…why, again?  oh yeah, because our various, demonstrable female privileges are demonstrably harmful…because we are causing the death, disease, pregnancy, and poverty of other women by acting out our privilege, and thats why its so important that we just listen to other women, and believe what they say.

wait.  no its not.  thats why its at least arguably tolerable that self-identified feminist men take this shit on faith: because they wont have it any other way.  because they dont or wont believe whats demonstrably true, about men, and about what they do to women.

but feminism as a dick-centered faith-based religion is not womens feminism.  womens feminism (ie. feminism) is based in reality, on things that are demonstrably true, and that stand up to serious scrutiny.  it has everything to do with actual, demonstrable harm, and nothing, really, to do with how we feel about it.  and its a fucking insult to reduce radical feminist concerns to such trite bullshit, but frankly, its the best men have to offer to women, and to feminism.  and we have to remember: thats all it is.  pomo feminism is not feminism.  its mens interpretation of it.  thats all.

The Fallacy of Cis-Privilege November 16, 2009

Posted by FCM in feminisms, self-identified feminist men, thats mean, trans.
Tags: , ,
comments closed

for those who dont know, cis- (meaning “on the same side as”) has been used by transactivists to describe people who “arent trans.” according to them, people who arent trans possess special powers, called “privileges,” parallel to the unearned privileges possessed by whites and men, who socially, politically and relationally oppress women, and people of color.

but when transfolk and transactivists use “privilege” in this context, i do not think it means what they think it means.  specifically, their concept of “privilege” does not match up with my definition, or with any accepted definition of the word.

when a transwoman laments to a born woman, for example:

I wish I could understand where you are coming from, but I don’t think I ever will. I never had the privilege of growing up as a girl, with people automatically calling me she, her, girl, woman, etc. without having to think about it. I never had the privilege of being 5 years old and not having your mother beat the living shit out of you because you were trying on her makeup. I say this will [sic] all respect that is due to you: from where I sit, you are the one with the privilege.

what she has revealed is that her idea of anyones particular social or political privilege is “i have something you want.” in the case of born-men thinking that girls and women had it easy or preferable in that they grew up being recognized as female, it would be more accurate to say their idea of privilege is further diluted to mean “i have something you *think* you want” because theres no way a born-male could really know if he wanted to grow up like a girl, because as a boy/man, he doesnt, and indeed *couldnt* know what it was like.

to take a little tangent here, but to illustrate and underscore that point, i was assaulted by 4 neighborhood boys when i was 5, because i was a girl, and they wanted to look into my underpants. so, they trapped me in a camping tent that was set up in the backyard and wouldnt let me leave, and they said i could either give each one of them a kiss, or they were going to look inside my underwear. does this sound like fun to you, transwomen? frankly i would take a beating from my mother on any day of the week, rather than ever be trapped inside a closed space by a bunch of sexually predatory boys who gave me such a disgusting “choice.” i kissed them all and they let me leave. luckily.

but heres the problem with “i have something you want” = “i have privilege”. if i had a candy bar, and you wanted it, i would not have “candy-bar privilege”. if i had a nice dog and you wanted a nice dog like mine, i would not have “dog privilege.” you cant just say that any old goddamn thing i have that you want is a privilege. privilege means that there is *power* there, and girls and women dont possess any kind of gender-based power. exactly the opposite.


Reflections on the Kennedy Memorial (It’s Not Too Soon, Is It?) August 30, 2009

Posted by FCM in liberal dickwads, politics, pop culture, thats random.
Tags: , , , , , , , ,
comments closed
Sen. Edward Kennedy

Sen. Edward Kennedy 1932-2009

we have been watching the teddy kennedy memorial on and off all day, and i had a few thoughts.  its not too soon, is it?

first of all, i am far from a kennedy historian, and i know you can look that stuff up if you want to.  someone else can analyze the problems of william kennedy smith and mary jo kopechne, etc., etc.  i have just a few things to say about the memorial itself.

now, it was striking to me that the kennedy family is not just rich, but have successfully amassed elitist wealth.  not that profound an observation, i know, but it was striking nontheless.  the memorial service was moving, as it was meant to be, but i wonder whether the family realized how they looked, to an ordinary, educated, working american democrat who was an absolute outsider, and not a part of the american aristocracy?

case in point.  if they had mentioned the beloved family pastime of sailing in nantucket bay one.  more.  time.  do they not know how fucking elitist that sounds?  that they considered it so endearing that teddy’s favorite hobby was…something only a rich, white man has access to, and a virtue that he was so privileged, and had so much leisure time that he could just drop everything without any consequence, and go sailing to satisfy his elitist craving for the sea – was repugnant, on many levels.  i was shocked that they kept referring to it, and how insensitive it sounded.