I shame the matriarchy

The ironic thing is that many sex-positive feminists perceive that the radical feminists are the ones who sided with those who hate us, by allying with the Religious Right, as far back as siding with the Meese Commission...

What goes around comes around...
 

as Pogo Possum might say "we have met the enemy, and she is us!"

who the hell is "us" anymore?
 

Well, that's the question, isn't it.

I've been going around informally asking self-described feminists how they define feminism, to see if we can't find *some* consensus, but it's definitely a challenge.
 

Am I "us"? Am I "them"?

frankly, I think I'm just not smart enough to define feminism, all bumper-sticker sloganeering aside.

"the radical notion that women are people"? sure - but so what?

there's got to be more to it than that. what kind of people? better people? stronger people? more aggravating people? more useful people? and once one can scientifically prove that homo sapiens sapiens includes both males and females (i.e. people), does feminism just evaporate in a puff of logic?
 

Cute. I don't hate you, I won't. I was there once too, but I kept digging, kept learning, kept questioning. I have no problem with kink as long as people don't try to dress it up as anti-patriarchal.
 

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
 

@lost clown: "there" where?

if it's not me personally whom you hate/feel guilty about hating, then who?
 

I was there once too, but I kept digging, kept learning, kept questioning.

I see an undercurrent to this that those who disagree are somehow ignorant and less enlightened.
A notion that once we educate ourselves, we'll agree with you.

It's a common logical fallacy, and a personal peeve of mine, which is why I'm pointing it out.

People can conduct equally extensive amounts of research and come to different conclusions. That doesn't mean either is necessarily wrong, it's just the fuzzy nature of the soft sciences.
 

mmmm...soft, fuzzy science...
 

"The radical notion that women are people" meaning, to me, this:

that women are subjects, not just objects. which means we have voices. which means we have our own perspectives, our own thoughts, our own feelings. EACH of us. ALL of us.

As per kink: it is, can be, an infinite number of things. Which is partly why I enjoy the world of kink: life's rich tapestry. I 'm not turned on by things *because* they're "anti-patriarchal" (or not). I don't know anyone who is, frankly. I am awfully fucking tired of explaining till I'm blue in the breasts *why* I like what I like--hell, even that yes, I like what I like, and it doesn't make me any less of a feminist than you, goddamit, to people who are bounda and determined not to listen.

And, I am tired of the attitude that erotic desire is or should be something that fits itself to a sociopolitical ideology. if anything I'd say it's the other way around; or, they're intertwined.
I'm sure that, for instance, my desire to put makeup and dresses on boys is/was shaped by the early perception that this was a big Taboo, and it was a way of getting power; which is/wax sexy. however, I am quite sure that at the time I first evolved that particular fetish it wasn't any rational process shaped by dogma going on; as I recall, I was five years old when that one first popped up.
 

and personally I'd rather be honestly hated than patronized. I mean, assuming those are the only options.
 

>The ironic thing is that many sex-positive feminists perceive that the radical feminists are the ones who sided with those who hate us, by allying with the Religious Right, as far back as siding with the Meese Commission...

Exactly so.

And while I am uncomfortably aware that there is a certain element of "butbutbut SHE STARTED IT!" to this whole thing, I'll say it again: comes down to it (and frankly, it shouldn't have to), I'll take Larry Flynt over Phyllis Schlafly, any day of the week.

>kept learning, kept digging, kept questioning."

so, does the past tense there mean now you've stopped? 'cause I sure haven't.

and yeh, the notion that you're "ahead" of those who aren't on the same page as you is, well, patronizing; don't be so sure we're reading the same book or even in the same library. I could name a number of people who'd say the same thing, but from the opposite direction. Susie Bright, for one (yes, she was a big fan of Dworkin's, and never forgot her debt to her. and yes, I am one of the ones who think that was a damn good tribute she gave her, all things considered).
 

...you know, it occurs to me that there is an ultra-simple reason *why* I fear Schlafly more than Flynt. Normally I don't like to make things this simple; but, well, maybe it is this simple.

Because I'm queer.

Because Flynt may want to exploit me and misrepesent me, but Schlafly effectively wants me annihilated. And she and her ilk are busy making up more laws, *not* just saying mean things or even making magazines of dubious ethics and taste, which *will affect me directly.* Assuming I keep dating women and pursuing my sexuality, which I plan to. Because, kink, schmink: I was ALREADY feeling like sexually, I didn't have a right to exist. And I have never taken the right to pursue my desires for granted. Ever. So, I don't minimize the freedom to pursue them. Ever.
 

Ahh that's not what I meant per se. I knew it sounded condescending a little while after I posted it, but I'm kind of annoyed. If y'all think we have our heads so far up our asses, why keep visiting our blogs?

I just meant I don't hate women for liking porn/BDSM/etc. I used to. I just realised how many women were hurt by it and how much richer my life was without it. YMMV
 

Also belledame, I was including Schlafley and Coulter, and their ilk. My post wasn't just about porn apologists. It was about the whole gamut.
 

yeah, ymmv, exactly. that's kind of all that really needed to be said there, you know. (mine's richer with it, and I know a number of women and other-gendered folks who feel similarly enriched).

well, then...not so far off, perhaps. except that i see someone like Sheila Jeffreys as a lot more allied with the likes of Schlafly than I do, say, Susie Bright.
 

and, I don't particularly have any qualms about hating Coulter, or Schlafly, simply because they have the same chromosomes and naughty bits (as far as I know) as I do.

in theory I could have some degree of sympathy for either of them, did I know their full story, I suppose; but that goes for pretty much anyone. hell, I think Hitler had a pitiable childhood, as far as that goes. doesn't really change the fact that he became a monster.

(yeah, yeah, Godwin's Law, but I'm just rambling here anyway).
 

> If y'all think we have our heads so far up our asses, why keep visiting our blogs?

Depends who you mean by "we." I don't know that I especially think you have your head up your ass, in general; the reason I was at your blog in this case was because I wanted to see if there was any sort of meeting point.

with some other peoples' blogs, I suppose it's possible that I hold out hope of communication at some level; but mostly I think it's my own sadism and/or masochism coming to the fore.

which is, again, why I'm really a lot better off working it off with a willing partner.

or, well; I think one could make a good case that a good flame war is a form of consensual BDSM, albeit perhaps not formally negotiated for. still the physical workout does me good, I find.
 

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
 

no, that was flip. I'm learning as I go. sometimes I read people I strongly disagree with because it helps me crystallize and articulate my own thoughts and feelings. it is meant as a dialectic, even if it does end up rather vehemently and vulgarly expressed.

in a few cases, I admit it, I'm mostly in there to gawp and laugh. not a particularly healthy habit of mine, but: we all have our little indulgences.
 

"Ahh that's not what I meant per se. I knew it sounded condescending a little while after I posted it, but I'm kind of annoyed. If y'all think we have our heads so far up our asses, why keep visiting our blogs?"

because a lot of the time I agree wholeheartedly with what y'all are saying. often I'm part of the choir you're preaching to.

which is why, after loyally reading and following everyone's journeys and feeling like I get to know some folks almost personally, it's such a punch in the gut when the subject of those horrible BDSM people comes up, in their tacky little outfits and their foolish little power games and their obsession with high heels and fishnets and don't they know they're hurting the revolution and not even feminists?

and don't say that never happens because it absolutely does.

I read the radfemblogosphere religiously, even obsessively. what am I supposed to do when the circle that I thought welcomed and included me, and appreciated the work I did, shuts me out deliberately and with extreme prejudice?

"I just meant I don't hate women for liking porn/BDSM/etc. I used to. I just realised how many women were hurt by it and how much richer my life was without it. YMMV"

I have to say, having been in a porn-heavy relationship and porn-mostly-non-existent relationships, I can't say it makes a difference in my daily life.
although I can see where someone would see a difference.

so which women do you hate/feel guilty for hating, exactly?
 

That was pretty much my reaction to Twisty's site in particular. spent several months there. love(d) her writing, her style, agreed with a lot of things she had to say. and yeah, that did feel like a deal-breaker. The sex business. Not just the BDSM stuff (her own posts on the subject were annoyingly dismissive and smugly ill-informed, I thought; but there was a shitload of astonishingly hateful stuff in the comments section which really left me feeling like shit), but the whole attitude.

I go back *there* occasionally partly because I am trying to confirm whether my (gradually acquired) impression is/was correct: whether she is in fact of the opinion that the main problem with the world, the reason for the Patriarchy, is because *there's too much emphasis on sex.* As in, people--*men*--want too much of it. I have to say, the more I read there, the more it does seem like that's her worldview. Which, she's welcome to it; but, I really REALLY disagree. Like, a lot. How can you miss the millenias' worth of institutionalized repression for the thin overlay of capitalist-infused strip clubs 'n' such? How can you minimize the *importance* of it?

Yeh, I know: the whore/virgin thing, they both come from patriarchy, six of one, half a dozen of the other, tastes great, less filling, yadda. Except in Twisty's case, I really do get the strong impression that yeah, there is a not-so-subtle upholding of the Virgin archetype and a not-so-subtle denigration of the "whores" and "sexbots." Which: this is different from traditional patriarchy, how?

I mean, it may just be Twisty's own personal thing, which again: fine, more than fine, if she'd only own it. But she does have this rather from-the-mountaintops way of Pronouncing things that, well, gets under my skin (and probably would've done sooner or later even without the sex business, tell the truth). Sometimes I see her as a kind of Spinster Aunt Paul or something, especially after her whole "do it till you're satisfied" business:

"Yet I would that all women (and men) were even as myself. But if they have not continency, let them do as they will; it is better to marry (get spankings) than to burn. If thou must. Ew."
 

anyway, I'm glad for it, in a way, because in the interim I've been doing a lot more research and going farther afield than I might have otherwise, had I stuck with the amen chorus. I've become a lot more knowledgable about the history of various strains of feminism, along with other frameworks. And I do see patriarchy-blaming as overly simplistic and frankly, not very theoretically *or* practically useful in and of itself; and at this point it does go far, far beyond the "sex-positive" thing, even though I still do agree with certain radical feminists' *goals* (protect reproductive rights, much better education /awareness/activism around rape and sexual abuse). So, like I said: helps me hone my own views.