Becoming a Radical Feminist: On Male Violence, Cultural Femicide and Sisterhood

Submitted by Mastodon on Fri, 2013-05-03 06:22

Article here. Excerpt:

'I have always been a feminist. It is a label I chose for myself as a teenager, back before girl power was invented and when New Kids on the Block were cool. My original feminism was about equality: women were equal to men and all we needed was the laws to force misogynists to stop being misogynists. The older I get, the more I believe that 'equality' is nothing more than a smokescreen to prevent the true liberation of women. ...
...
My feminism, both the definition and activism, has changed dramatically over the past 18 years. Now, I self-define as an anti-capitalist, pro-radical feminist as I believe that the source of women's oppression is male violence which is perpetuated by the structures of our capitalist economy. The Patriarchy may predate capitalism but we cannot destroy it without destroying capitalism too. I don't always feel a 'real feminist' or a 'good enough' feminist. All I know is that I am a feminist who truly believes that women have the power to liberate all women from male violence; that feminism is fundamentally about the power of sisterhood.

My feminist activism involves privileging women's voices over men's voices. I now only read books written by women. I try to get my main news from women's news sites and women journalists like Soraya Chemaly, Samira Ahmed, Bidisha, Helen Lewis, Bim Adewunmi, and Sarah Smith. I follow only women journalists on Twitter and Facebook. I support organisations which are placing women's experiences at the centre of public debate: Women Under Siege, The Everyday Sexism Project, and The Women's Room UK.'

Like0 Dislike0

Comments

"I self-define as an anti-capitalist"

of course she does.

"women were equal to men and all we needed was the laws to force misogynists to stop being misogynists. "

got it.

Like0 Dislike0
Submitted by Kris on Fri, 2013-05-03 18:41

Why is misandry--the hatred of men--good? I guess men deserve it, unlike women.

Sort of a double standard.

Of course, the writer is at least being honest. Feminism uses terms such as "equality" but it's never really been about equality. It's about re-writing the social contract so women always have the advantage.

Feminism seeks to dehumanize or demonize anything not a woman. That includes children as well as men.

Like0 Dislike0
Submitted by el cid on Fri, 2013-05-03 19:43

I used to think the MRM was too tough on feminists but this feminist proves me wrong. She sees misogyny and "evil" patriarchy everywhere. According to her other writings, even Mother's Day is evil to her, and she blames men for it. She's right up there on the crazy meter with the feminist who see's the new college dog logo as a dog who wants to rape women.

I am wondering if she really is able to support herself by writing this stuff. I can't believe anyone would pay her.

I think currently she is in her forties or beyond. In her bio she mentions that in the past she was a single teen mom on welfare. She has a background in education. I hope to God she has never "educated" any boys in a classroom setting.

Like0 Dislike0
Submitted by Kris on Sat, 2013-05-04 19:14

... there's no limit to "paranoid crazy" a feminist can get to. But to be fair, has there ever been a time when there was ever a limit on that for any given human? If there can be ppl w/ mental illnesses that literally have them seeing things like fires, monsters, etc., that are not actually there, then her level of "nuts" seems positively moderate. (BTW, I don't want to seem unsympathetic toward ppl with the seeing-spiders kind of insanity; this is utterly beyond their control or will and should only illicit sympathy from others. Feminist delusionality is another matter, however.) At least she isn't seeing giant spiders, etc. But in some ways her kind of paranoid ideations are more dangerous than an hallucinating individual's. After all, paranoid dictators see or believe that there are conspiracies where there aren't and they act accordingly, persecuting innocent ppl or their own allies based on their out-of-control suspicions. History's rife with examples of this. If these loons had instead claimed to be seeing monsters where there were none, people'd probably instead have ignored them or they'd've been locked up in a psych ward long before they could cause trouble. Unfortunately for society in general, feminists fall more into the paranoid loon category than the hallucinating-insane category, so they actually do influence others who may actually take them seriously or believe them. Like I said, more dangerous even than someone seeing objects that don't exist.

Like0 Dislike0
Submitted by Matt on Sat, 2013-05-04 21:40