Feminism-it’s for everyone!

One of the best things about writing a radical feminist blog which is read by about eleven people on a good day is that I can say whatever I want. Fuck it, no one’s reading. The only people who will be are other radical feminists and the occasional hate-read from radiqueer sparklefucks, and as these people are internet people, and not real people, I don’t particularly care about how these ideas are received.

This is markedly different from real life, where I am subject to censure and sanctions for speaking my mind. Where I often find myself appealing to less radical female friends or the occasional dude that “patriarchy is damaging for ALL of us” and “men are damaged too under male supremacy!” and other things that I honestly couldn’t give a third of a shit about.

Women are expected to do this Dance of Appeasement whenever they express a thought which does not revolve around men and their feelings. If we don’t, we’re mocked, attacked or just ignored. Witness the flaccid fauxminism of Emma Watson or famous idiot Lena Dunham, or any notable woman who has a feminist thought cross her mind but knows she needs to tread carefully for fear of doing a Greer or a Bindel and exposing herself to mass hatred. “I’m a feminist, but of course, I love men. I care deeply about men and how patriarchy hurts men. The concerns of men are my concerns too. I have a feminist boyfriend and I love him. In fact, his penis is inside me as I say this. Men men men men men.”

I really couldn’t give a fuck about men, couldn’t give a fuck about the Dance of Appeasement, which is really a St Vitus dance brought on by the anguish of being silenced. I don’t care about the nice men and I don’t care about making them the centre of my concerns. I don’t care about individualising my analysis of men as a class. I don’t care.

Did you know that 31% of 18-24 year old women in the UK are CSA survivors? You did? I wonder who’s doing that? Lovely, cuddly men? Men who are on the whole so nice and so hard done by within patriarchy? Men who, as a class, can’t seem to let girl children grow up without raping nearly a full third of them? Poor men! Let them in our movement, I say!

I don’t care, am past caring, am feeling increasingly lighter as I shed the burden of giving a single toss about caring about men’s feelings. I’m not interested in playing Schroedinger’s rapist with the men that I meet day to day. I don’t care that your boyfriend is a nice guy, or if your friend sometimes makes sexist jokes but he’s a okay really, or your work colleague who looked down your shirt a couple of times stood up for you in that meeting so isn’t he really a feminist, really? Deep down? No. Fuck him.

I don’t care about my bloke acquaintances’ universally worthless opinions on feminism down the pub and I don’t care about the article on feminism and Marx that they just read in the Socialist fucking Worker. I don’t care! At all! Whee!

Which is why it’s infuriating that feminism-which you may remember as the movement dedicated to the liberation of women and girls from patriarchy-is now, apparently, for everyone. And by everyone, we obviously mean men and men who think they’re women. Feminism is in fact “intersectional” and for “all genders.” Deeply moved and upset by the plight of fellow men who are no longer the centre of a conversation, it has been brought to women’s attention that patriarchy creates men who are emotionally stunted half-humans, completely out of touch with their emotions. Men’s response to noticing this is to ask feminists to centre their needs and fix this state of affairs with our own movement. Fuck you buddy. Fix it yourself. Make your own movement.

At least MRAs and meninists don’t have to throw their own groups wide for everyone and can be clear about the intended beneficiaries of their movement. Hint-it’s men. And not “men who happen to be born with vaginas” either. Actual men. Because men don’t have to do the mental gymnastics required to be gaslit into saying a vagina is actually a strangely shaped cock. They can just say “fuck you, this is ours.” Like everything else.

If the liberation of women results in an improved quality of life for men too, then that’s all for the good. But it’s secondary to the immediate aim. And in the meantime, until then, and not before, I don’t care about men. At all. You shouldn’t either! They have a whole world to do that for them already. I care about women. Precious few people do.

And now all eleven of you reading this can agree or call me names as you see fit.

Advertisements
Feminism-it’s for everyone!

Misgendering is violence

How many times have you heard this? Murderer of insight, closer of discussion, “misgendering is violence” is bandied around every time a person-usually a woman-has the temerity to state that a man with a fully intact male body or a surgically created fistula remains a man, and no amount of lipgloss will change that. In their libfem starter kit, every good partiarchy-appeasing handmaiden receives a handy flashcard containing this information, along with “transwomen are my sisters” and “478329 transwomen have been killed THIS YEAR ALONE {citation needed}.” This aids in drawing false parallels between the radical feminist critique of transgenderism and male homophobic violence.

Whenever this argument is trotted out, radical feminists will point out that calling a bloke in heels Mister is hardly violent, and attempt to refocus the attention on the perpetrators themselves-inevitably other men-who are committing this violence. This doesn’t go far enough. What needs to be pointed out, in detail, is that the language of social justice is being hijacked to defend the most privileged: honky arse fucking white men, who happen to get boners when they wear lingerie, and are pissed off at everyone calling them weird for it.

When a marginalised group is facing systemic abuse, it comes from every angle. A modern example here in Britain would be immigrants. Newspapers write disgusting, dehumanising articles about them, governments legislate against their inclusion and far-right groups visit actual violence upon them. When establishment figures and institutions write defamatory articles about marginalised groups it gives credibility to the violent acts these groups face on the streets. We saw this recently when two men beat a homeless man in America, invoking the anti-immigration rhetoric of Donald Trump.

When transactivists say “misgendering is violence,” they are invoking this. They are saying that trans people, particularly MtTs as the most visible examples of transgenderism, are in danger of street violence and discrimination. They therefore don’t agree with ideas that are critical of transgenderism, and will violently oppose and protest any media source, academic or individual that puts forth these “violent” ideas.

Violence isn’t always hitting people in the face. Structual violence is violence. Exclusion from society is violence. Radical feminists are fully aware of this. So why are we still promoting these “violent” ideas? Don’t you know that calling a man in a dress a man is exactly the same as calling for these men’s extermination?

This is fucking nonsense. We’re supposed to believe that if everyone ignores what their senses tell them and treats trans women as natal women then they will magically be treated much better, as natal women are never the victims of violence or sexual assault-that particular axis of oppression is specific to trans women only. We are also expected to believe that radical feminists have a unique position of influence over violent, entitled homophobic men. This is reflected in statistics, where over 70 percent of men arrested for violent offences against MtTs cited Sheila Jeffreys as the main reason for their crimes.

Take Germaine Greer’s recent kerfuffle with Cardiff University and the usual sewage-pipe outpouring from the mealy mouths of they-them queers and vajazzled libfem handmaidens that occurred as a result. Violent! Transphobe! TERF! But what did Greer actually say in that interview? She said:

-She is not opposed to sex reassignment surgery
-She would use female pronouns for MtFs
-…but MtFs are still men.

This is not a violent position. It poses no danger. MtFs will experience no harm to their physical person because a small and increasingly marginalised group of women refuse to distort their reality in favour of fetishistic, misogynistic men. They’re just men doing what men do-pitching a shit-fit when someone tells them “no,” like the deluded toddlers they are.

Gender non-conforming people get misgendered all the time. An example of this is Brandon Teena, the subject of Boys Don’t Cry, who was beaten to death when her sex was discovered in a homophobic, misogynist attack. Once again, men were the aggressors. GNC women face violence-actual violence-for acting outside their assigned gender role. So do GNC men. Radical feminists know this. This is why radical feminists are gender abolitionists. It is the idea of gender and the strict policing of gender roles which leads to violence. It is misogyny and homophobia. Radical feminists say “you are a gender non-conforming man. You should not be subject to violence for being a gender non-conforming man. But that is what you are.”

The truth is inconvenient dudes. But women know the perpetrators of violence. It isn’t us. Men are not a marginalised group, and no amount of mascara is going to change that.

Misgendering is violence