The nice thing about lesbian separatist radical feminism is that it requires nothing from me.

[xiphias]

So, a bunch of people on my friends list have been linking to a post that someone wrote last year about the misogyny in Firefly/Serenity. And, y'know, there's actually a lot of interesting stuff you can do with that, but this post was written from a radical feminist point of view, by a lesbian separatist.

And I was just thinking about how EASY radfem is for me to deal with.

See, I'm a man. And so, by lesbian separatist radical feminist logic, I can never understand a woman's point of view. And THAT means that I have no obligation to try.

Now, the way I was raised, I can look at how society is set up, I can see in what ways the deck is stacked to give men more power for being men, I can see how society promotes some sorts of interactions, and values some types of personality traits more than others. In the forms of feminism in which I was raised, I can look at those things, and see if I can find ways to work around them, to change how I think about them, to work to change society to be more equatable, to allow people to be who they are, to respect the contributions of all sorts of people, to value cooperative and consensus-building interactions . . .

But, from a radical feminist point of view, the differences are not cultural, they're inherent, and, as a man, no matter what I do, I won't change.

And that's so cool. That lets me entirely off the hook. By the feminism with which I was raised, I have a responsibility to work toward a more fair and more just world. But by lesbian separatist radical feminism, I can do whatever I want, because, as I have no ability to be different than I am, I have no responsibility to try.

Comments

[redbird]

But you're willing to call yourself a woman, and not worry that people will assume you hold every controversial opinion stated by other women. Do you assume all Americans, or all Christians, hold the opinions of the American politican you like least, or the Christian preacher you consider craziest?

ok this is disjointed...

[mightydoll.livejournal.com]

see, given the millions of sects of "feminism" out there, I see the label as more potentially misleading than informative, wheras "woman" says all I need to say about myself (and I don't often have to say that, being quite obviously female)

Fact is: only I get to define what womanhood means to me, and any woman who prescribes to someone else's ideals of womanhood seems to me quite the opposite of what feminist might have originally meant.

The english language is flexible and mutable, but in this case, so many people have been pulling so hard on this word in all different directions that it has ceased to mean anything.

I honestly thought xiphias was joking when he added 4(!!) modifiers to the word feminist...it's beyond absurdity.

Re: ok this is disjointed...

[eeka13.livejournal.com]

I also identify as feminist, though certainly not *this* type of feminism. I also identify as religious, and other things that many people claim I don't live up to. For me, I think it's important to take back these identities and insist that they be inclusive. Not all religious people are fanatical or oppressive (or Christian...), and I like to remind people of this and insist that I be included. I like it when people get to know me and realize that I can be quite dedicated to my religious practice, but that I don't feel the need to ask others to share my beliefs or to judge people based on whether they follow my belief system.

Similarly, I like to remind people about what feminism really is. You've probably seen that handout that asks things like "do you think men and women should have the same right in terms of issues such as voting?" and then says if you've answered "yes" to half or more of these questions, you're probably a feminist. In other words, classic feminists want equal rights, not special rights. It's nice to remind people of this.

still disjointed (I'm not well today)

[mightydoll.livejournal.com]

Personally, i think I'm a feminist, but I've been told enough times that I'm not to really just wash my hands at the whole thing.

In terms of language, a word can't mean "everything" it needs to mean "something". Inclusivity is great for organizations, people, business practices, but it doesn't work with language. If a word has so many disparate meanings, it really has no meaning at all. But I'm kind of a hardliner when it comes to language.

I'm also loathe to spend my energy stressing about labels.

I am who I am and people are just going to have to invest the time to get to know me if they want to know who that is. I'm not a brand, I don't need marketing copy, I'm an individual who is as complex as the rest of them.

I might even suggest that in the battle against prejudice we really aim to reduce labels.

Re: still disjointed (I'm not well today)

[eeka13.livejournal.com]

Oh, I definitely get that. I like to reclaim labels, but I don't ask that other people join me in doing so if they're not into it.

Re: ok this is disjointed...

[mightydoll.livejournal.com]

incidentally, reasons I might not be a feminist, according to some (and I haven't seen the handout, is there a link to the text somewhere?):

I shave

I have reproduced (twice!)

I chose to stay home to raise my children

I breastfed

I didn't breastfeed until my kids were approaching adolescence

sometimes I even wear makeup

I have sex with men

I believe that it's a woman's responsibility to take charge of her sexuality rather than assuming that all the power and it's accompanying responsibility does/should fall to men.

I enjoy the company of men

I think men can be feminists too

Re: ok this is disjointed...

[eeka13.livejournal.com]

Grrrrrr to the people who think those things make you a non-feminist!

I'd say that having made those choices should make you quite the champion-for-women's-rights (or whatever label you do or don't want to use). Cuz, yanno, you CHOSE what roles you would and wouldn't take on based on your preferences and values, rather than feeling you were "supposed" to do anything based on your gender. I always liked the womenism movement, which basically says that women don't have to be firefighters with shaved heads to be respected -- rather, society needs to change so that makeup and ruffles and nurturing aren't seen as weak or inferior.

This sort of sexism appears all over the gender spectrum, btw. The people who say that you're anti-feminist for not falling into *their* gender ideals are really doing the exact same thing as classic sexism does, obviously. There are also folks who'll say that I'm not a true dyke or truly butch or whatever because I enjoy hanging out with guys, don't look like a biker, have a white-collar job, etc. In other words, anyone who doesn't fit the prescribed ideals for the gender identity isn't welcome. Sounds just like sexism, doesn't it?

Re: ok this is disjointed...

[mightydoll.livejournal.com]

I tend to agree. :)

Re: ok this is disjointed...

[firstfrost.livejournal.com]

Totally irrelevantly, I had to stare at "I didn't breastfeed until my kids were approaching adolescence" for quite some time until it stopped parsing as "I only started breastfeeding once my kids were approaching adolescence". :)

Re: ok this is disjointed...

[mightydoll.livejournal.com]

ROFL!

I can see that now, how silly!