The way I now analyze oppression

What I avoided in my previous post called “Intersectional Freedom” is the origin of oppression and the role of history in determining the problem, and its solution. Well, prepare for a paradigm shift.

Because I am an anarchist and because I am working class, sometimes I don’t know who I hate more: men, fascists, or the ruling class.

To be honest, there is no difference between the three. Whether men dominate sexually, or through racism, or economic exploitation, it is still patriarchy.

There are a few different ways to think about oppression:

  • That all wimmin are equally oppressed regardless of other characteristics (this doesn’t pass evidence)
  • What is basically “kyriarchy” theory (cringe) in which all people are equally oppressed and these aren’t examined too closely for fear of making people, probably men, feel bad (wait, how is this a hierarchical system again? This sounds like we are all equally oppressing each other)
  • Economic class analysis in which Marxist class analysis is the backbone of the class system, where there the system is a “patiarchal, racist capitalism” instead of “capitalist, racist patriarchy” and all racism and sexism are merely ways of preventing the working class from uniting to fight capitalism. So, white men being at the top of that pyramid is merely incidental to the system — it could be anyone and anything in the service of capital, it just “happens” to be men.
    • This is more nuanced and is usually what all socialists, anarchists, and self-described “anarchafeminists” seem to believe, since they can get away with being inclusive of wimmin and people of color without making any fundamental changes. I guess it’s not a terrible analysis but it does completely ignore radical feminism, female separatism, and never answers the ultimate question: why there is capitalism in the first place, and whether patriarchy will really be ended when capitalism ends. So…I guess it is a terrible analysis.
    • The major conflicts that we run into with this is that it leads to conclusions that essentially blame patriarchy on capitalism. It’s not exactly class reductionism, because we are still allowed to say that patriarchy is also separate from capitalism and we don’t have to wait until “after the revolution”. But when it comes to practically dealing with patriarchy, capitalism, and racism, ignoring their relationship can lead to confusion and cognitive dissonance for a young feminist unsure of the best way to make change. And the very fucked up assertion that “poverty causes male violence” goes unchallenged, when there is evidence that male violence is ubiquitous and that wimmin living in the same conditions don’t fall to the same depravity.
  • What I am now leaning towards, based on reading about the witch hunts, is that patriarchy invented capitalism and racism as a way to divide wimmin and advance men’s competition for world domination.

Wimmin are the revolutionary class.

Patriarchy has created a complex class system wherein people are all divided into classes and races. Radical feminists have studied and learned that patriarchy preceded and invented both capitalism and racism in order to further entrench man’s hierarchy.

Wimmin’s class status and exploitation is determined and experienced differently from the way than men’s is; our class status is slightly mutated by us being wimmin. So a bourgeois womon is always in a suboordinate position to the bourgeois man, but can sometimes utilize her economic power over the working class man (which is likely the source of MRAs feeling oppressed and then blaming it on feminism, because they are not class conscious misogynists) while the working class man can fight back with his sexual status. Race would function similarly.

Some anarchafeminists and Marxist feminists these days will object to this and state that this is a highly eurocentric view, pointing at regions in the global south where wimmin have retained institutional or tribal power. While it is true that institutionalized patriarchy as we know it today owes a lot to white, Judeo-Christian and pagan “Western civilization”, we cannot ignore the Chinese, African, and Middle-Eastern patriarchies. Fine, let’s say we do ignore them — even if we do that, we are ignoring the reality of male violence against females (and our children) as a universal occurrence even across species.

The social structures wimmin build can only serve to mitigate harm. It can be speculated to what extent the harm reduction is successful, but as radical feminists we should recognize that even with the correct socialization, men will always be determined to fuck. As wimmin we don’t go through our lives trying to stop ourselves from raping, whereas men do.

Man’s perverse need to fuck at all costs explains why hierarchies have been pursued in the first place. It is not just that they need our sexual and emotional “labor”, although it is true that wimmin are expected to satisfy man’s every whim and we should seek to disappoint him at every possible moment. Male perversion created men’s imaginations, making them sexual conquistadores. This answers the question of why hierarchies exist everywhere, as a “solution” to social problems. Men tend to organize into more rigid hierarchies than wimmin do, and men tend to lead more cults, and of all the cults, men’s are more destructive. Men create cults as an extension of their perversity. Wimmin create cults as an extension of men’s perversity — often they are modeled after religious patriarchy, so that even man reigns over them as the incorporeal Holy Ghost. At the root of all this is that men are passionate abusers, because they are passionate about fucking, and will abuse to get there.

Could it be that men are wired for sex addiction, or are they actually necrophilic as Daly suggests? I have seen addicts of other sorts behave in the lowliest of ways in service to another “hit”.

You can call me a biological essentialist all you want. Whatever. I’m largely a social constructionist except for this one thing for which there are clearly mountains of evidence. Sometimes you have to go with Occam’s razor and accept the least complicated explanation: that males are fucked up, and no, that males are fucked up doesn’t excuse their behavior. Human males are otherwise intelligent creatures with the capacity to think and create nice things, but they are also raging perverts. And no, it is not their mother’s fault.

I have known enough of them to know why they are the way they are. One of them told me something to the effect of, “I went on these meds just to kill my sex drive, because it was making me lose my mind.” This is a normal male wanting to kill his perverted sex drive, probably one of the best things he could do for himself and all wimmin. It makes me wonder if chemical castration is the humane thing here — if they can’t become radical faeries, and turn their urge to fuck upon each other. You can go and tell me that they make all this up, but I will never be a man and I think I would be concerned if someone told me he “thinks about sex every seven seconds”. I know of another man who drove himself into religious nuttery in an effort to escape his own darkness, and was the type of man to say those things as though his existence in this way tortured him. If you manage to get into the non-sexualized confidences of men, you start to learn how they think and feel differently from you as a womon, such as how they are like carnivores trying not to eat the herbivores next to them. Living with men means living as Pi Patel on the boat with Richard Parker. In my view, male socialization only exacerbates it.

While wimmin can and do form hierarchies, these are often in service to men either on an unconscious or conscious level, or it is simply mimickry of what wimmin have learned by living in this society. It is not that hard to undo this socialization — in fact, anarchafeminists say wimmin have been the first anarchists (even if they didn’t call themselves this) and the longest resisters of domination because we simply have more practical reasons to do so. Men “coin” things, name things, conquest things, are obsessed with growth, and otherwise compete for the chance to leave their mark on the world. We simply never received credit for our inventions, but such energy-wasting on competition for recognition is something that womon culture originally never really felt the need to pursue. Wimmin live for our own sake.

So, to recap:

  1. Men are sexually depraved.
  2. Men pursue hierarchical modes of organization over wimmin in order to get their “fix”.
  3. Men work together to produce more complex hierarchies (patriarchy) over wimmin until a state forms to protect their private property.
  4. The state patriarchy gives men the power to regulate sexual practice, including to punish lesbianism and homosexuality.
  5. Men also compete with other men and introduce racism as a way of drawing lines of “ownership” of “their” wimmin.
  6. Men produce capitalism as a matter of course in securing super-power above all men and wimmin.
  7. Men close the loop by allowing token wimmin to participate in capitalism and the state to hide the truth in order to keep it going.
Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s