Let’s talk for a moment about nice feminists. They come in a variety of flavors, but these are the ones whose goals, although pursued under the banner of feminism, are reasonable, and indeed, virtuous. The decriminalizing and normalizing of prostitution is an example. While many people both inside and outside the men’s rights movement dislike the idea of prostitution, it wont be done away with by keeping it illegal. It is simply thus made more dangerous and harmful for everyone involved, both for the provider and the consumer. Okay, great, and there are other issues. Porn, for example, is argued for as a legitimate form of employment – for surely it is every woman’s right to get naked and be paid to have sex, should she chose to do so.
Okay, that’s really the same issue, but surely from outside the camp of feminism – outside the radical camp, outlside the liberal camp, outside the “I want to be paid for sex” camp.
Now, from outside the camps all flying the flag of feminism – is it unkind, unfair and/or uncalled for to universally condemn the ideology as a monolith, without regard for just which of the 364 flavors we’re talking about when we use that endlessly flexible label of feminism?
No, and I’m going to explain for those who might pursue legitimately humanist goals why I will continue to talk in condemning tones about the ideology calling itself feminism, and why I don’t care what sub-species of that ideology to which you may happen to subscribe. And if what I’m about to tell you upsets you, too bad, woman or man up as the case may be.
I agree that there are self-described feminists whose goals are legitimate. I agree that de-criminalizing matters of personal choice and bodily autonomy are important and worthy goals. And to the extent that I can I will support and promote those goals, independent of whatever political label under which you or anyone else pursues them.
However, the humanist, liberal, sex positive, nice guy version of feminism you practice – and if i didn’t cover your particular flavor, go ahead and add it in — that humanist feminism is not the same ideology taught in university gender studies courses. It is not the feminism which informs the policies of United Nations aid agencies who render assistance to only women and children, and not to men. Your humanist version of feminism is not the one which specifically excludes male gang-rape victims from receiving medical aid, shelter and rehabilitation in places where male targeting gang rape are standard practices of war, such as in the Congo. That feminism is not your humanist feminism. Neither is your feminism the version of that ideology which informs a multi-billion dollar industry which produces egregiously and grotesquely misleading misinformation designed to acculturate hatred and fear in women towards men; which teaches girls to always be victims, and never be self actualized adults.
That is not your humanist feminism either. Your humanist feminism is not the ideology informing almost all domestic violence shelters, and public messaging on DV, selling a totally false story that domestic violence is just evil, violent men, beating on just sweetly innocent and decorative female victims. Your view is not one of demonizing men in our culture so as to guarantee to enable more domestic violence because it works from a totally broken model.
Your flavor of humanist feminism is not the one informing a collection of lawyers, social workers, educators, child care specialists, psychologists and other professionals to collaborate on a blog and cheer for plans to eugenically exterminate the male half of the human race.
So yes, I understand, your feminism has admirable goals. You are a teeny, tiny, unfunded, un-organized minority. Yours is not the feminism that informs domestic policy, writes white papers for the UN or eradicates due process on college and university campuses. That’s the other feminism; that’s the big, funded, established, and politically powerful version of the ideology. That is somebody else. Right?
But when you pursue your noble goals under the banner of feminism, even when you prefix it, and say liberal feminism, or humanist feminism, or sex positive feminism, you are giving cover to those who openly call for the extermination of men.
I’ll say that again. When you pursue your noble goals under the banner of feminism, even when you prefix it, and say liberal feminism, or humanist feminism, or sex positive feminism, you are giving cover to those who openly call for the extermination of men.
And that’s why I don’t care what flavor of feminism you practice. You’re using the same brand name as murderous, eugenics enthusiast, destroy due process sexual apartheid gender ideologue elitists for whom violence isn’t just an unpleasant option. Violence, when contemplated against children, or men, especially when doled out by state functionaries is what gets them wet. That’s the big, funded, organized and politically established collective with which you identify by name.
I know, you’re a humanist. You’re not murderous. You wouldn’t dream of using violence to attain your goals. However, your chosen ignorance of or indifference toward the depraved ideologues who have appropriated the label you share neither excuses nor exonerates you. So, fuck you anyway. If you self identify as a feminist, you’re flying under the banner of a totalitarian, violent, amoral murderous ideology of sexual apartheid and hatred.
If your goals are legitimate, pursue them. You’ll have my total support. But if you fly the flag of hatred and violence, do not expect me to pat you on the head and say that’s okay, I know you’re one of the “nice” ones. Fuck you, grow up, and stop pretending there’s no problem flying the same flag as those who use hate and fear and bald faced lies to advocate for eugenics, mass murder, elitist legislation, victim identity and the marginalization of men and boys.
I thank you for your kind attention.
- Substantive Equality, a golf handicap in the law - April 22, 2014
- Women’s Legal Education & Action Fund: The first rule of LEAF is don’t talk about LEAF - April 18, 2014
- Consent: You Don’t Have It - April 17, 2014
- What the fuck is infanticide? - April 12, 2014
- Danielle D’Entremont, Bellwether? - March 30, 2014