Tag Archives: lesbian feminism

Feminist Archetype – The Amazon

Advertisements

“It’s Just Socialization….” Revisited

Since the last time I brought up the topic of men raping animals as proof that male sexual violence is not a result of socialization I’ve come across more info about the phenomenon of animal brothels.  There’s another petition that has been more widely circulated regarding the existence of brothels in Denmark where men can pay to rape dogs.  On Facebook there were even pictures included of animals that had died from being exposed to constant rape.  Another one of those grim dark images I’ll never be able to wash clean from my mind.  That I’ll carry in my soul as long as I live.

So like every time I’ve read about child pornography or the rape of infants, so too I am burdened with carrying this knowledge of what men do to the world around them.  

Now I had some dissent from my previous post on this subject and let me be clear about one thing;  I don’t think every man rapes animals or infants or children.  Some may even find it kind of disturbing.  But like with “regular” rape we have to look at this phenomenon through the eyes of protection and self preservation.

All men are potential rapists.  This is a widely accepted feminist theory.  We know that it is impossible to distinguish between the “nice cuddly guys” out there and the sadistic rapists.  Because of this women have to be on guard 24/7.  Every time I’m out in public I am on guard.  Every man is noted because every man is a potential threat to me as a woman.  We also know that women are more likely to experience rape from a man that they know.  Hey men are lazy, don’t forget that bit of essentialism.  So therefore logically we can deduce that women must be suspect of all men.  Not all women possess the power to read men’s minds so we cannot know for certain what thoughts men hold.  Even ones we have a laugh with and have done mutually supportive things with.  Women can’t distinguish between the man who rapes animals and infants and children vs the men who do not.  Again the onus is put on women to be able to tell the difference.  Let me tell you right now.  There is no test you can take for this stuff.  As one woman recently discovered her own boyfriend not only raped her dog but filmed it.  Of course she was shocked.  Its not as if this is something men brag about like I’ve said before and they don’t have special badges they wear so that we can decide not to talk to those men because they might stick their dicks in our pets.

So I throw this vein of thought into the same category as Schrödinger’s Rapist.  As it is impossible for women to tell the difference between a man who is kind and loving towards women, who would never disrespect a woman’s “no” and would certainly never force himself upon her so too it is impossible for women to tell the difference between a man who is kind, loving and protective towards animals and a man who in his private time pays to go into a brothel and choose out which sort of dog he fancies sticking his dick into or while his girlfriend is away, sticks his dick into her dog.  We have to assume that therefore that because all are a threat we need to take the proper precautions to protect our children and pets.

All the “nice men” in the world does not negate the fact that there are very un-nice men that we have to contend with.  That we are vulnerable to.  

As adult human beings, women have choices to make that effect those in our care, those who we have power over, like children and animals.  It’s utterly our responsibility to protect and ensure their safety because this not something men can be trusted to ensure.

Its time women took back whats been stolen from us.  Namely our power to protect and defend those we love.

One of these things is not like the others

Biological essentialism is not gender essentialism and it is not biological determinism.

Or in plain speak – Believing that there are innate characteristics to both sexes is not the belief that the sexes are naturally inclined towards carrying out different roles in society and that one sex is therefore destined to dominate or be ruled by the other.

Yet when so many women hear talk about the fact that there is something about men which makes them act differently than women, something that exists outside of human social constructs altogether they immediately take up the charge of “gender essentialism” or “biological determinism”.  Now what “essentialist” radical feminist has ever in any way made the argument that men are destined to rule women?  Or that their system of patriarchy is natural?

These things don’t naturally lead into one another.

Most female animals organize their societies around females and their children.  The male animals are generally shoved to the periphery.  They are far less in number because they are not cared for by the female society (and you can sure as shit guess that the males aren’t taking care of each other).  The males that are on the edge interact with females for breeding purposes and in some cases act as a deterrent for other males of the species to come around.  The reason for this is that across the animal kingdom males are generally violent and destructive.  However there is no patriarchy among these animals.  They live in what is a female and child collective.  It is my belief as an “essentialist” that this is the natural order of things.  That patriarchy has taken men from the outskirts of society and thrust them into the center.  Turning the natural order of things on it’s head.

It makes sense that if males are inherently violent and destructive that patriarchy is therefore unnatural as they cannot be trusted to organize a decent society such is their lust for blood and destruction.

This does not mean I think women are immune to negative behavior, that they are incapable of horror.  But I seriously doubt any of the atrocities we as a species have witnessed throughout history would have happened if women were in the driver’s seat.

This also doesn’t mean I think men can’t bake cookies or sew, or like makeup and pink.  Confusing a biological understanding of male violence with a belief in the oppressive gender roles that have been thrust upon women since the dawn of history is just lazy thinking.  Confusing it with a belief that men are therefore naturally meant to rule over us is just absurd.

So much of women’s reality is hidden in plain sight.  We do not see the things that are right in front of us.  The distortions patriarchy levels have women chasing our metaphorical tails.  It is much easier to not see what is plain.  It is much easier to project humanity where there is none.  Project emotion where there is none.  This is how men are able so effectively to mindfuck women.  They can tell us to our faces (and often do) what they know they inherently are.  What they are capable of and we will argue with them until we are blue in the face that they are WRONG and that they’re really like us deep down.  They can openly treat their pursuit of women to fuck as sport and women will tell themselves that is not what is happening.  We have to, have to realize that our minds are not our own, that they’ve been accustomed to a lifetime of denying their own realities.

Radical Feminism requires that pursuit of women’s truth, women’s reality be primary.  As others have written before me, it requires us to follow our thoughts, no matter how scary, to their natural conclusions.

When I was a Marxist Feminist, a few years back I had this tendency to argue everything.  I had to be right.  I would argue with men about how they needed to change, how they were capable of so much more, how they denigrated themselves by being sexist.  I would have these blocks.  Like I wanted to go further but couldn’t.  Like I knew what I was arguing for was just bullshit.  But it was hard to let go of because of my own ego.  I had identity wrapped up in “not being like that”.  Meaning I wasn’t fucking crazy.  I was “reasonable”.  Basically I wanted men to validate that my feminist cause was just.  It took years to figure out that I didn’t need to argue anymore.  My cause needs no justification.  My boundaries need no justification.  My politics need no justification.  They simply are.  Real.  Elemental.

Male Violence Effects Us All

There’s been a lot of interesting news on twitter today.  Its started my wheels spinning.  Ian Watkins (lostprophets) has pleaded guilty to 11 counts of attempted rape of an infant girl.  Nigella Lawson’s attacker Charles Saatchi has been given license in the British media to slander her character despite the fact that he was photographically documented brutally assaulting her.  Oh and of course Karen Ingala Smith’s project “Counting Dead Women” has been taking off and been at the forefront of my mind.

Whats become even more clear to me is if a woman like Nigella Lawson, who is famous and successful, consistently in the public eye and many women in similar positions are subject to not only the threat of male violence, but to male violence itself, where does that leave women like you and me?  We become numbers added to body counts that only exist because some crazy feminist out there thinks our lives matter enough to count.  

Its also amazing that we still have people under the impression that being a child rapist is a “sexuality” and that we should all feel sympathy for men who brutalize children.  Erasing yet again the damage inflicted upon those who are raped in childhood.

Why do we hesitate to see male violence and the male sex caste for what they are?  Why do we not see that there is a war being waged against the female sex that has been going steady for thousands of years and that we are losing, badly?  Why do we not see that all women, no matter what they achieve are always under the threat of some man getting to define them (as victim) forever?  We desperately need to build communities that function away from men.  Refuges for our refugees.  We need to stop acting as if all of this is just a misunderstanding and get serious about putting an end to male violence, for good.

Racism During Woman-Objectifying Contest

Usually I ignore beauty pageants/contestants.  They’re generally nauseating and do very little to make me feel secure as a woman who doesn’t measure up to female expectations.  There’s also the whole issue of the inherent sexism of parading women around in various outfits like Barbie dolls and then voting on which is the prettiest and thus most deserving of a prize.

Image

vomit

But my interest was piqued because a lot of people are talking about this year’s winner Nina Davuluri.  Specifically talking about the incredible racism she’s been subjected to on social media sites like twitter.  Most people being unable to differentiate between Ms. Davuluri and an arabic woman.  Its pretty significant because Ms. Davuluri is the first Indian-American woman to win the title of Miss America.  I got to thinking “So how many women of color have been Miss America anyway?”

The list of Miss America title owners was easy to find.  The last Asian-American woman to win was in 2001 who was also consequently the only Asian-American to ever win Miss America.  There’s been a few black women to have won the title in the past 20 years but in the sea of faces of white beauty its still obviously an institution dedicated to reinforcing white standards of beauty and femininity.  This is a serious problem.  The United States is a very diverse nation and women of color need to be visible in all its institutions.  So often the case is that they are not.

So while it can be argued to be a good thing that there is more representation of women of color in these institutions.  Its begging an even bigger question.  Why do we have beauty pageants at all?  Why are girls learning that their beauty is something they must compete with other girls over?  Why are girls being encouraged to put so much effort into time consuming, harmful beauty practices that restrict their ability to move and be active, that restrict the type of work and jobs they can perform?  Why must women continually be in a position of one step forwards, two steps back when it comes to our ability to be public figures?

During the second wave of feminism, women went after Miss America and everything it represented.  Women as pacified, smiling (now with added veneers and bleach!) fuck-objects.  It isn’t a flattering thing to be Miss America.  Its like being the best trophy-wife at the golf club.  So why are we still being subjected to this insulting garbage every year?  The analyses I’ve read of this situation haven’t been asking that question.  Even on supposed feminist sites like Jezebel the analysis is “whoa look at those fucking racists.”  Which is something, but it isn’t touching on the misogyny of the situation.  Why on earth did it ever come to be that a young woman like Nina Davuluri decide that she wanted to enter beauty competitions in the first place?

All women suffer from the mythos of beauty.  Some suffering more than others.  We as women need to all stop participating in our own oppression, and consequently the oppression of other women by giving credibility to the concept of beauty entirely.  Image