A Holiday Gift Idea From The Boutique of Low Goals

by phonaesthetica

-cover edited for truthfulness-

What would life look like FOR MEN if feminism succeeded? Liberal doods have a brand-new book that purports to reveal the mystery: The Guy’s Guide to Feminism by Michael Kimmel and Michael Kaufman. The Michaels – known for Guyland and the White Ribbon Campaign, respectively – have written “a fun, quick read that makes the case that feminism is as good for men as it is for women.” An excerpt:


Do you believe that women should have the right to:

• Vote?

• Go to college?

• Drive a car?

• Open bank accounts in their own names?

• Enjoy sex?

• Work in whatever occupation they might choose, and get paid the same as men when they do the same work?

 Did you answer yes?  Then you better lie down…You’ve probably caught feminism.

Well, no. Believing these things doesn’t make you a feminist. It makes you “not totally batshit,” or “not the leader of a fundamentalist splinter cult,” but I don’t award cookies for that. Giving a shout-out to basic human rights in a democracy doesn’t make you a feminist, because that’s not all feminism asks of you.

Feminism asks more.  It asks, for example, that you consider the risks PIV poses to women: disease; pregnancy; mandatory childbirth. That if a woman cannot choose the manner and timing of her own reproduction, she is not free. That you can’t become a woman if you weren’t born a girl. That porn – even the fair-trade, free-range, shade-grown “female-oriented” variety – has devastating consequences not only for the girls and women in it, but for the girls and women who live in a world where female bodies are commodities to be bought and sold.

A small voice in my head is wavering: Just be happy that men are writing about feminism at all. They’re on your side, right? It’s Seal Press! They’re having a launch party at Bluestockings! The White Ribbon Campaign is great! Why not focus on honor killings; female genital mutilation; fertilized eggs’ Mississippian legal status? And maybe I should, but I smell something funny right here in mainstream feminism’s vegetable crisper. Even if Gloria Steinem did write a blurb for The Guy’s Guide, calling it “a relevant, inclusive, funny, and straight-to-the-point explanation of how and why feminism improves life for the male half of the world, too.” 

But. Read the book excerpt again, carefully. Do you smell it? The ironic, aren’t-we-clever-boys funk that seeps in sometimes when men “ally” with us? Do you smell it in the tone; the way they’re making the fight for our lives fun and accessible and optional and toothless? Do you smell the insinuation that, if it’s good for men, then it matters? That we need men to sign off on our Full Human Status permission slip? Or is it just me?

Sitting there in the middle of it all, of course, is the “enjoy sex” part. There’s the bait, low-hanging and ripe for liberal doods. And liberal doods do not disappoint, as illustrated by this comment from this Feministing thread (bold type mine):

The big thing that turns men off from feminism are the extremists that hate all men. That is a very common stereotype with guys I know and they think if a guy is a feminist then he is giving in. I believe in equality but still don’t say I’m a feminist because there are so many unofficial definitions. As a young guy that loves to have fun I am thankful for feminism because women are more comfortable in their sexuality. When I was in Montreal, Canada and Stockholm, Sweden I was amazed at how open girls were to sex. In Stockholm they would approach me at the clubs. That is extremely rare here in California or most of the US for a girl to approach a guy. I admire Swedish girls and the French Canadian girls for taking action instead of waiting for a guy to make a move, there is no doubt feminism allows women to not feel “slutty” because she wants sex. Also Swedish girls wouldn’t let me buy them a drink! Growing up in the US that is a typical thing to do at a club so it was awkward for me when they would not accept me buying them something even though they wanted to hang out. They will not be “bought” so to speak.  I have so much respect for them.

Yeah! They won’t be “bought.” Not like those American whores who accept a glass of wine at a bar. Mad respect to the Swedes and French Canadians! This guy’s Feminism to Liberal Dood Dictionary is obviously in good working order –“feminist” translates to “sexually available.”

-the 'real' cover-

Anyway. The Guy’s Guide premise, while great-sounding, is disingenuous: Feminism is NOT as good for men as it is for women. If it were, women’s status in every inch of the world – from Afghanistan to Zimbabwe — would look drastically different. Patriarchy serves men well; ergo, they have a vested interest in it. That’s why feminism has to be made palatable and fuckable for men, with cool graphics and ironic hipster tone. That’s why men will never get on board with real feminism — any gains they’d make would be dwarfed by their losses. What, exactly, would be different FOR MEN AROUND THE WORLD if feminism succeeded? Some would lose a little (“my wife now does half the housework/childcare, instead of the 90% she did before”) or a lot (“I’m no longer allowed to sell my daughter as a child bride or rape with impunity”) but all. men. would. lose. Conservative men, liberal men, straight/gay/bisexual men, single men and married men, men in Brooklyn and San Francisco and Karachi. They’d lose a little or a lot of our labor, our time, our focus, our support — because that energy would then be spent on WOMEN. On OURSELVES.

We’ve got to stop being so invested in men’s participation in feminism. Is this where 10+ years of pomo fun-feminism has led us — focusing on men? Worrying about what men think and what they do? Asking them nicely to stop treating us as second-class citizens/members of the sex class, and hoping they’ll be generous? Taking the hard political parts of feminism out so we can sweet-talk them into cooperating with the interpersonal, domestic stuff?

Today, an e-mail conversation with easilyriled started my thinking in a new direction. She wrote:

‘…What the fuck is this whole ‘feminisms’ thing — we don’t have ‘capitalisms or ‘socialisms,’ and feminism is no less a political movement than those, but if we add an ‘s’ to it, we can make plain the disintegration and diffusion of the movement and the ideology. It’s a capitulation to neo-liberalism and to patriarchal domination. We can’t have our own fucking movement, we have to have feminisms, each of us sitting there, separate from each other, fiddling around with performances of gender.”

Yes. THAT. I think we can have our own fucking movement, without so much disintegration and diffusion and masturbatory, circular academia-speak — as long as we focus on women. While some men are willing to make some changes, their idea of what a just and equitable world looks like is VERY different from ours. And when more women realize that, when their realization hits critical mass, we’ll have an opportunity to re-focus again. On women.

Feminism is only good for everyone if everyone values what feminism values; if everyone wants an equal power structure where half the human race isn’t obliged to do most of the crap work; if everyone agrees that sex trafficking shouldn’t be a 32-billion-dollar-a-year industry, that “the second shift” sucks, that breast implants are bullshit and that women’s Olympic lifting is better than pole-dancing.

We don’t all share that vision. Not even close.

69 Responses to “A Holiday Gift Idea From The Boutique of Low Goals”

  1. Fabulous post, phonaesthetica, and so insightful. I especially like this, “Do you smell it in the tone; the way they’re making the fight for our lives fun and accessible and optional and toothless? Do you smell the insinuation that, if it’s good for men, then it matters? That we need men to sign off on our Full Human Status permission slip?”

    Very, very true. If it’s good for men then it matters, but if all feminism is good for is improving women’s lives, then it’s not important.

  2. thanks phonaesthetica! i have to wonder, how many men are even going to read this? i predict that 99.9% of users will be women, who then line up to give cookies and head-pats to the dood-tastic “good guy” authors. it literally sickens.

    and this is the crux of it isnt it:

    but all. men. would. lose. Conservative men, liberal men, straight/gay/bisexual men, single men and married men, men in Brooklyn and San Francisco and Karachi. They’d lose a little or a lot of our labor, our time, our focus, our support — because that energy would then be spent on WOMEN. On OURSELVES.

    we cant JUST look at the alleged GAINS to men if feminism succeeded (as dubious as it is that they would gain much at all) we MUST also consider how much and what they would lose, if women were actually free. being that they would lose, BY DEFINITION PIV and womens sexual, reproductive and domestic servitude, men stand to lose a hell of a lot. being that women would no longer fawn over them and vie for their attention, in short order the ENTIRE WORLD would look different to them and this new reality would shatter them. they think women are looking at them lovingly because we really love them? wrong, doods. its a survival mechanism in many cases. thats all. it would be like they took off their rose-colored glasses (stained pink with womens blood) and then were simultaneously stabbed in the eye with a pencil and kicked in the dick. it wouldnt feel good. AT ALL.

    try selling that to teh menz. THAT book wouldnt make a dime, but i bet this pile of shit will do pretty well. OFF OF WOMENS HARD-EARNED MONEY, NOT MENS.

  3. oh sorry, did that sound ANGRY? aaaahahahahaha damn straight. feminists-for-profit make me fucking sick, especially (ESPECIALLY!) when they are male.

  4. “Oh, but it’s funny…Stop being such a frigid, manhating Amazon! Get drunk and suck dick, while your Nigel reads this book! Hooray for male-approved, empowerful feminism!”

    Ugh! And you *know* there are fun-feminists out there who will gloat about their Nigels reading a “feminist” book, by a “feminist” bro…so you know, I guess we can all go home now, because feminism’s mission has been accomplished! (eyeroll)

    I’m ready for a Second Wave re-boot, void of any male, pop-culture, and capitalistic influences, now.

  5. Gloria seems confused. Why would she support this????

  6. and OMG that quote from the PIV-positive dood! ugh.

  7. That graphic is hilarious! Love it and the post is so right on.

  8. Phona, I laughed so hard that I cried. And I cried so hard that I laughed. What a gift! Thank you 🙂

    Leslene, Gloria Steinem, to my knowledge, has never claimed to be a radical feminist. That is why she would support a male-centric take on feminism.

  9. “In Stockholm they would approach me at the clubs. That is extremely rare here in California or most of the US for a girl to approach a guy. I admire Swedish girls and the French Canadian girls for taking action instead of waiting for a guy to make a move, there is no doubt feminism allows women to not feel “slutty” because she wants sex. Also Swedish girls wouldn’t let me buy them a drink! Growing up in the US that is a typical thing to do at a club so it was awkward for me when they would not accept me buying them something even though they wanted to hang out. They will not be “bought” so to speak. I have so much respect for them.”

    Do you think this was written before the Assange extradition case? Didn’t Assange call Sweden the Saudi Arabia of Feminism? You can’t have it both ways guys!

    Yes!! The funfems will be glad while de fuzzing in the shower, popping the birth control pill, and putting on the make up (fun fems don’t have time for children), that their nigel is so spesheeeelll. That is until they have to put the bin out, or wake up to find him gropping her.

  10. “enjoy sex” was the real tip off for me. Imagine MLK saying “enjoy sex with white people” as a primary goal of a civil rights movement? That’s the tip off.

    And yes, all men would lose if real feminism took hold and women had true freedom worldwide. What if women were completely economically self-sufficient and that interesting and engaging well paid jobs were very very available, and women could easily get this work? What if all corporations were taxed for manditory reparations for all of women’s time?
    What if there were countries where women were the only inhabitants, and that these were well planned, well financed places? How many women would move to them?

    Feminism is not about men at all, it is about women defining and controlling the means of reproduction 100% of the time, it is about laws written by for and about women, not just the cut and paste method we are stuck with under male authored texts.

    Even young women are afraid of the “F” word, and can’t identify with feminism… my theory is that if they are young and straight, they are really afraid of being called lesbians, so it is somewhat of a homophobic response. another topic.

    But the real reason men so oppose feminism and have to add “enjoy sex” in a list of human rights that even all men don’t have worldwide, is simple. Men don’t win on this. It really has nothing to do with them all. Women’s liberation is about the freedom of women. It will be a giant economic loss for all men, a giant loss in bullying status, it will mean a veritable erasure for them because when they lose 90% and have to settle for 50% they are going to howl at the injustice of what true equality looks like. They already get mad enough at every high level job a woman gets now, and this is when women are about 1% of the CEOs in America? Just think what 28% would look to men, they’d freak.

    Men have never seen equality, women might be unnerved a bit too. So this book is fake feminism, and I don’t want to waste my valuable time trying to “get men to” do anything at all other than get out of my way, shut up, and let me continue on my delightful radical lesbian feminist journey! Thank you very much…. all aboard… choo chooo

  11. P.S. When I first looked at the book cover on this post, I actually thought it was another one of FCM’s SUM-O-RAMA jokes, I really did. It took me awhile into reading the post where I realized it might be real men who wrote a real book!

  12. P.S. Supporting women’s right to vote does not make men feminists. Men go along to get along, and if women win a legal change, they go along because they have to, not because they really care. Losing 50% of women’s energy and attention alone will send them into a tail spin.

  13. Yes…love all the posts! This is such a refreshing place! And, yes, true about Gloria. Though she has said some good things, I have always felt she was “there” for men–which is why she has such a visible profile as the poster woman for feminism–men approve of her. Once again, all about men, which radical feminism is not in any way whatsoever.

  14. Wait, Leslene, now I’m confused.

    You said first that “Gloria seems confused” but then say that you’ve always “felt” that she was male-supporting, so I have to wonder why you would ask why she would support a male authored, *self-help* book about feminism. ?

  15. Yes, I can understand why you are confused. It is what I have personally felt about her. However, when I read this:
    “And maybe I should, but I smell something funny right here in mainstream feminism’s vegetable crisper. Even if Gloria Steinem did write a blurb for The Guy’s Guide, calling it “a relevant, inclusive, funny, and straight-to-the-point explanation of how and why feminism improves life for the male half of the world, too.”
    I got confused–the “even if” next to “mainstream feminism” meant to me that perhaps some of us here might be viewing her in a different way than I do, like her word about feminism is something we should be listening to, so I asked the question why would she be supportive in the hopes of hearing from others who share my view. Perhaps a too round-about approach, but there you have it. Sorry for causing any further confusion for anyone else.

  16. Of course the author of the post can speak for herself, but I think the portion you quote was meant as a bit of sarcasm.

    Again, this is a radfem space and it is kind of taken for granted that Ms. Steinem (for all the good work that she has done) is a *liberal feminist* and gladly includes men in the feminist movement.

    We don’t. I thought that was understood. 😐

  17. I think even the icons want to believe the myth that “men benefit too” about the feminist movement. Just how do men benefit from women’s full equality? What’s in it for them? And the truthful answer is “nothing.” Feminism is a movement for women, and it has nothing really to do about men at all.

    When I fully got this, I felt such a sense of true liberation I can’t even explain it. It was just so freeing to say that feminism was for me, and not for men, and I didn’t even have to convince men of anything anymore… I simply wanted to be and create as much women’s radical space as possible. It was that simple.

    But Gloria has to put the myth out there, because she just does this. In private, I would suspect she tells more truths.

    What few seem to realize is what is the most difficult about radical feminism or the real movement for women’s freedom or liberation is convincing women that this is the road. Women are the toughest customers so-to-speak. It’s such a shocking thing for women who have been so oppressed for so many thousands of years to really want to focus 100% on the progress of women. We have been owned for so long, and programmed to put all other needs ahead of our own, that it just is very hard to get the Titanic to turn around.

    So even Gloria has to mouth the platitudes that hey, it’s good for men too. Feminism, the radical kind, really ins’t about men’s health, wealth, it is the movement to get their boots off our necks, to get their penis out of our lives… it is about a world where women’s time is not for sale to men anymore.

    We really don’t know how that world will look… well actually I get brief glimpses of it now and then.

    If we can get enough women to take off the patrirachal glasses they wear, to get women to fully wake up we will have the revolution of the 51%. And it doesn’t take much to do this. Get 10% of the world’s women to understand this and you have incredible change. And men know this, that is why they are fighting tooth and nail with everything in their power to prevent this great awakening.

  18. Talk about not going to the ends of your thoughts. If anyone wonders what the net gain (or loss) would be for men if women were free, just make a list. Gains on one side, losses on the other. Sadly, many fun fems seem to be unable to even imagine what it would be like FOR WOMEN if women were free, or they pretend they can’t imagine it. Piv would be the first thing to go. Anyone who denies that is living in a racist, classist, sexist, western la-la land, and they clearly aren’t even thinking about women in other places. And ultimately, if they are unable to conceive of “women as a sexual class around the world” they aren’t thinking about themselves either.

  19. I love the net gain/net loss FCM…. and point well made that women in western nations just don’t get that PIV is killing women who don’t have access to prenatal care, and that it decimated women in previous generations, and still men insisted on having it. Elizabeth Cady Stanton comes to mind. That is the history of that sex act. Did men get horrified at what they had done to their wives?
    Nah, they just found a new model a year or so later, just like they do now. maybe it was a way for men to actually commit murder in the 19th, 18th and 17th centuries. Get the wife pregnant a 17th time and maybe see would die. Perhaps not call the midwife soon enough…. now of course no phone calls or 911 would be tracable to the husband, but in the past, childbirth as murder weapon PIV as murder weapon happened. Clever huh, the guys are clever cleavers.

    Put the balance sheet P & L Statement down on paper women. This idea that women need men has got to come to an end, or the idea that feminism is about men at all. It isn’t. I assure you, when women wake up to the balance sheet and see how little they actually get in this “stock trade” they’ll really get it.

    Think of what PIV really does to women without any health care in America. Think of what it does to single women with children… the biggest predictor of bankruptsey in the U S OF A— Elizabeth Warren’s book “The Two-Income Trap” should be required reading. Warren is no radical feminist but she has done the economic research, and she told these truths in 2003 before the blow up.

    Women on other so-called feminist blogs are saying right now… they have the child care duties, their husbands will always make more than they do, even if they finish the expensive advanced degree… they know, and yet they still go for the PIV, the husband, the child care…deluding themselves that their husband loves them and that this is an equal relationship! Now that’s a river in Egypt if there ever was one!!! But still they delude themselves and actually openly tell this on feminist blogs thinking this is feminism….

  20. ‘Do you smell the insinuation that, if it’s good for men, then it matters? That we need men to sign off on our Full Human Status permission slip? Or is it just me?’ No Phonaesthetica it isn’t you – it’s the men again blatantly declaring this core male supremacist belief which is ‘unless the issue affects or is about men then there is no problem. In other words women’s experiences under male domination and male supremacy are irrelevant because it is all about men, men and men!

    Equality is not equality when it is men setting the agenda and boundaries rather it is men’s definition of equality which benefits men never women. Feminism is not about men never was never will be because women do not dominate or oppress men.

    I read Michael Kimmel’s book Guyland and I’ve read other papers and articles he has written. Kimmel consistently fails to recognise how male power operates and why if real feminism (not the pseudo kind) achieves its aims then men will lose. They will lose their unearned power and right to dominate and control women and they will lose that most precious thing they see as their birthright – their right of (pseudo) sexual access to any female, any time, any where.

    But sadly too many women still view the world through the male gaze and believe the lies men tell us are truths. Women’s Liberation is fundamentally about the elimination of male supremacy/patriarchy and that is why pseudo pro-feminists such as Michael Kimmel and Michael Kaufman had to write this book. Because they are engaging in double speak – telling lies yet claiming them as truths.

    The biggest problem we real feminists face is the incessant chatter of ‘what about the men’ and the belief that feminists cannot do anything without first seeking male approval and ensuring men are accorded a special place at the front of any activism because ‘feminism is for everyone but especially for men!

    So another pseudo pro-feminist book will earn the authors vast sums of money and their male egos will be massaged by adoring women who continue to refuse to see the world for what it is – male domination over women – rather than ‘equal rights for everyone but that doesn’t include women because we haven’t even been accorded human status.

  21. If the point of the book is to cater to men, their lives, their experiences and choices, then it’s not feminist, whatever the content might be: there’s no need to read any further.
    Support women’s right to vote? To vote for what and for whom, for what gains, may I ask? To vote for patriarchy and maintain patriarchy in place? Bwaha that’s a nice joke.

    By the way, the fact that the writer even asks “do you think women should have the right to.. “…” is really insulting and humiliating (let alone the zero-levelness of the rights, none of which remotely adresses the core issues that affect women in patriarchy – related to PIV, rape and appropriation of women’s bodies, work, energies and reproductive labour through heterosexual marriage, prostitution, womb prostitution, etc etc)

    The writer assumes the point of view that these rights are questionable – otherwise he wouldn’t ask men, he would just assume it and tell them to suck it up. So this is the premise of his question: men can have the freedom to think women may not have these even very basic, zero-level human rights.
    By asking men’s opinion, he allows men to be in a position to decide for women whether they should have these rights or not. This totally fosters their patriarchal status and caters to their sense of power over women, their ability to decide what women are allowed to do or not.

    Really, there’s nothing we can expect from men, and their pseudo feminism just makes things worse (it’s totally a deliberate strategy), cause while they don’t change, they give some women the illusion they’ve changed. I always prefer up-front blatant patriarchy beccause at least it doesn’t confuse women.

    Imagine the same questions asked in a racial context? Do you think Jews should be allowed to ride a bus and sit on public benches?

  22. I used to try to convince men into feminism by saying “feminism is good for men too, they’ll benefit from not having to be masculine, etc”. But it’s useless, because once you give them the slightest opportunity to think about themselves instead of owomen, all they do is start whining about how much they suffer all the time and all discussion about women’s interests is lost. I’ve given this up for a while now, and it does feel really liberating not to care at all about men anymore, not to have to convince them of anything, not to give a damn and focus 100% on women for women, and for myself as women.

    However, I do believe that a biophilic organising principle would benefit all living beings, whether human or not, female or male. No living being benefits ultimately from destruction. So yes, men would lose everything they have under patriarchy if it were to be destroyed, but I’m still sure they’d be better off living in a biophilic world, in 100% at the service of women’s reproduction and life. Their patriarchal fight is vain, because if they win it means they’ve decimated all life, including themselves. They have nothing to gain from it, ultimately. But if they destroy themselves, it’s too bad for them. I just hope they won’t destroy us and the earth in the same process.

  23. Ah sorry I just realised my first post was merely repeating what you all said 50 times in this thread.

  24. Thanks for taking this post further — Witchwind, Hecuba, SheilaG, FCM, Smash Sargasso, all of you. I’m knocked out by your brilliant, spot-on analyses. So much I hadn’t thought of until you said it.

    I am so glad to be thinking and writing alongside you.

    (Also, I was indeed being a little sarcastic about Gloria Steinem).

  25. This is the last comment, but I just remembered a French feminist slogan I doscovered recently:

    “A women without a man is like a fish without a bycicle”.

    We don’t need them. Not even for procreation. Parthenogenesis is the solution ; )

  26. agree that a “biophilic” world would benefit all living things….as long as “life” were valued. sadly, and clearly, men seem to prefer death, disease and misery: they keep manufacturing it by the shit-ton.

  27. It is the asking of permission that so gulls me? “Do you think it ok for women to vote?” OK says who? Women getting the vote had nothing to do with men, nothing at all. Women fought for decades, men capitulated couldn’t take the relentless pressure of the suffrage movement itself. It is more when women get enraged, men back off. They don’t like it, but they can see the handwriting on the wall. That is the male mind in toto.

    And Witchwind, I too prefer blantant upfront patriarchy. I think so-called “Good Men” are just confusing to women because you know the “good” is just a strategy, just like het men pretending to “listen” to women to gain their trust so that PIV will happen.

    So why are women wasting time on trying to get men to do anything? It is a complete waste of time, and women are still going to have this idiotic idea that feminism is for men. Civil rights is not for white people. It’s just not. Ending slavery was not good for white people either. These idiotic notions of what “is good for people” drive me nuts.

    Men respond to pressure and the threat of PIV take away. If they’d blocked abortion in the past, they realized soon enough how beneficial it would be FOR MEN. That’s how patriarchy always works…. men own the law, and can MANipulate the law. The only power women do have is the power to take the attention off the boys, to focus on women, and to advocate for women’s revolution… and that is bloody hard. Because not only are we dealing with men, but we are trying to break through cult (PIV) indoctrination, male brainwashing of women… the old love bait and switch routine… the courtship routine before Marriage… I mean OWNERSHIP sets in.

    It is so blatantly obvious that men have no intention of every being feminist anything, and if we can’t figure this out now, when they are SO OPEN and in our faces about it….

  28. You know Witchwind, it wouldn’t surprise me if human parthenogenesis was biologically possible and has and does occur. But as with so many things– historical and contemporary– that could be that slightest bit liberating for womankind, it has been kept from us and erased from our history, thanks to your neighborhood patriarchs. There’s a plethora of knowledge out there– historical, medical, scientific, natural, philosophical– that could lead to womankind’s triumph over patriarchy, but the only way we’ll achieve such an enlightenment is to get women and girls to STOP wasting their time, energy, and resources domesticating and pornifying feminism for male-consumption. Cruising book stores for frat-boy approved “feminist” books to give to their “good” men, won’t liberate us from male tyranny…but I often wonder if it’s liberation these Third-Wavers and liberal women want or patriarchy-lite.

  29. its interesting to think about the possibility/concept of human parthenogenisis, but overlapping with the PIV paradigm. under the current paradigm, it would be very difficult to tell if parthogenesis was happening wouldnt it? i mean, if it was happening would we even know it? im just saying.

  30. Oh without a doubt it would be difficult to tell, FCM. Your sample, if you were to make this into a scientific study, would have to be separatist-women. Never-heterosexual lesbians come to mind. Either way, the phallocentric/rape culture needs to be eradicated and getting women and girls to decolonize their minds of male-wants and needs is the key to liberation– not through male dominated politics and their legal system. Liberate their psyches, invigorate their willpower, and you’ll see revolutions around the world, as SheilaG mentioned above.

  31. What a brilliant post! Yes, men would LOSE if feminism succeeded. THere is nothing for men to GAIN from this movement at all, ergo if men are claiming that a political ideology will work out well for them, then they ain’t taking about feminism. THis is not to say that feminist are taking anything *from* men at all; we are merely insisting on our birthright by taking back the freedoms that have been stolen from us.

  32. And yes, these pro-feminist men make me cringe so much. Where is the integrity? Where is the honesty? It’s non-existent. At least with openly misogynistic men (right-wingers/ pro-BDSM etc) you know what you’re dealing with.

  33. Patriarchy is one of THE MOST adaptable oppressions on the face of the earth. Or maybe it is more like an incredibly adaptable retro-virus. No matter what you throw at it, it changes, developing new ways to resist women’s liberation.
    Men have adapted to the basic premises of contemporary feminism too; it’s why they can talk such a good line. Well women commenting here aren’t fooled, and we have the male attacks on our blogs to prove it. Men aren’t accustomed to women talking together where they have no power in the conversation, but watching, I can assure you they are infuriated by these insights… and I’ve noticed the discussions have become more and more powerful over collective time here and at other radical feminist blogs. The body of work is staggering and yet….

    You have to watch the patriarchs over a long period of time to understand this. They know they can adapt slightly, and that makes girls reject the wisdom of mothers. It’s why even women who worked with Mary Daly actually don’t believe she was right, for example. She called patriarchy necrophilia and women’s liberation biophilia. Many feminists have talked about parthenogenisis, and like Margaret Sanger, we’d need a huge bevy of women scientists to focus on this research, and also document when it occurs.

    Men actually believe they are feminists. It is this belief that makes them dangerous. And women so desparately want to believe men….it is the mass delusion of most straight women in the west, I’m afraid. And it’s why a lot (not all) but an awful lot of het women come to radical feminism so late in life…. Mary Daly’s books have been in print since 1968, and still they remain unread by het women who know something is going terribly wrong. It’s a lengthy process and much harder to figure out when you’re young and having PIV with men your age.

    But then the lifelong lesbians of whom there are legion… Bev Jos, SheilaGs and others… het feminism poos poos our insights. Perhaps we might know something because we have been in resistence to this pestillance known as patriarchy for much longer. You develop a kind of sense about the world when you don’t have the oppressor so closely “supervising” your every move under your own roof.

    That’s why we know patriarchy is so adaptable, and het women want to believe… it’s tempting… the search for the “exceptional” man…. time wasting but understandable. Kind of like a Vegas slot machine… lots of bells and occasional wins, but the house wins every time… the illusion of winning remains. That’s what het women do… the illusion is very powerful, and it’s why revolution is extremely hard to maintain, that and having women even read the material that is all over the internet, in print for so very long. Mary Daly explains her discovery of feminist foresisters who were erased during the first wave, so this is a pattern.

    Remember, patriarchy cons women, and has been at it for eons. Don’t take it lightly, it knows what it’s doing, it knows how to manipulate women, and to give just a little bit under pressure so that women stay safely in the PIV fold, safely living with the men… safely working on every cause under the sun except the true cause of women. They’re clever…hey, I’m outside that system…. never was “attracted” to these weird and dull beings… I just get to watch as woman after woman gets suckered yet again by another “feminist” man.

  34. Oh wowww… this book, for REALZ? ARRGH! I feel so angry I might puke. ‘Oh, you ladeez can be feminizz… as long as you let us prong you!’ HA, NO. FUCK OFF, DOODZ.

    I just got back from a cafe where I told a table of 4 younger women to never let a man prong them and NEVER marry and never have kids. EVER! It was after I overheard them discussing women who miscarry being CHARGED WITH A CRIME (article in one local ‘liberal’ rag). I think I might have made a dent. I gave them a link to this site. It is so obviously terrifying for these women to think of a life without a man! Shit, I still live with one. I cannot find work to support a life alone! Hmm. Wonder why? My eyes are wide open, now. FUuuck…

    Whileaway, what are your coordinates…?

  35. …an incredibly adaptable retro-virus. No matter what you throw at it, it changes, developing new ways to resist women’s liberation.

    Well said Sheila. This is the way I describe it myself.

    MRAs? M2F trans* lesbians? Who woulda thunk it…

  36. Oh I love reading what you guys say! You are a tonic to my soul! It’s all so true. How on earth do we get through to the young ones though? It takes a lifetime to escape for most of us so how can we stop them making all the same mistakes? They have to be reached because if you ask me this whole planet is at stake isn’t it now? This is about survival now. For all women and their offspring.

    Saying that I know it will take women to start again if these bastard men actually end up destroying the earth.and a few of us survive. We have to instil in some of them what you have been saying so yes maybe just maybe a better world can come about..

    I am a het woman but I love you guys. Thank you for that.

  37. i’m het and radfem too mommie’s girl. As was Andrea Dworkin.

  38. Yay! I love you too!

    And I love radfemhub. It feels homey like a warm blanket and hot chocolate : D

  39. “Adaptable retro virus” – yes, it simply absorbs every single blow that women strike against it. it’s like an ominous black cloud and no matter how much you try to hit it, it just moves around seamlessly.
    We need to find new strategies. Conjure the trees, the earth, the wind, the seas, the mountains and the universe to help us destroy and wipe out patriarchy. We need more help, we need do need to act fast.

  40. But I remember someone on here saying (can’t remember who, sorry!) that Radical feminism is like the terminator woman. NO matter what the patriarchy conjurs up over the centuries, radical feminism just keeps getting up, keeps moving forward. It can’t be crushed.

  41. One of the greatest dangers is when everything is feminist just because women do it. I swear, women are talking about being wives, doing the bulk of the childcare AND the husband gets paid more, and still they get offended when I point out none of that is feminist! Geez, if we can’t even get ideological clarity, what kind of movement will we have?

    It is women’s desire to be affirmed by women all the time that can be problematic at times. So we have to be clear… mainstream lives are not feminist… we have to state what is. And Sargasso, I believe that radical feminism has been around for a very long time… it gets erased repeatedly. That is the genius of patriarchy, it gets women to police other women into line, and it gets erased. Now we know for sure that we have 40 years of radical books to feast on, and build upon. We have these blogs to carry on the discussion. We are demonstrating how its done.

    Ever since men got booted out of a lot of these places, I can see that the level of commentary has really progressed. That was a valuable lesson of 70s radical feminism, you kick the men out, so women can fly. Good job women!!!

  42. That’s right, Sheila G!

    And if anybody’s following the lame campaign against me and some of you and this site by the Creepy Men, I have completed my work and it’s lookin’ good! avoiceforcreepymen.blogspot.com

    Take care,


  43. If the men are there….then it all about the menz..that’s why I prefer womon only campaigns….as with everything else they have to dominate because for them it is ‘their’ entitlement to do so..ordained by birth….

    ‘retro-virius’, OGoddess yes that’s a brilliant way to describe patriarchy……

  44. Men always ask themselves the wrong questions so they can give themselves the wrong answers.
    It is really quite tedious of them.

  45. Yes tbw. The one about equal pay stands out to me however, in that no, men DON’T want that, if they’re being at all honest with themselves. Where do they suppose all this extra money is going to come from? The gods of equal pay for equal work? Not likely. It’s coming straight out of the payroll budget, which means teh menz would make less if women made more. Do they really not understand this? Or are they lying when they say they support equal pay?

  46. Men can easily support equal pay because they know it ain’t gonna happen. They know that they control the pay and pay networks etc. in the men’s job market. They know most women easily throw in the towel.
    I actually came across women today who said women chose to be paid less because they “liked” the work… it just happened to be low paid work, but hey they chose it! And these are so-called long time feminists, and they are as brain dead as women less involved in the movement. They just had to defend the “choices” of a woman doormat, and got mad at me for pointing out the slavery. Not a good thing to do… radfem pointing out this stuff.

    So men tra la la la… we’re all for birth control (PIV intact), we’re all for equal pay… ha ha ha, we know women will “choose” the low paid support work anyway… they know the game is rigged. And they have no idea what “equal pay” would actually mean for them. It would be the end of free housework, paid sex slaves (married women in the home), free chauffer service (taking the kids to school). It would mean the end of free household servitude everywhere… men would have to pay for all of this. Women’s salaries would go through the roof instantly, men would lose all the free time, all the lazy goof off time on the golf course. Their huge salaries would come to a screeching halt, perhaps the whole economy would shut down to adjust to women getting paid fully for every damn hour they work… at home, at the flourist… you name it…corporate taxes would go up to 85% to compensate all stay at home Moms….

    Sure men support equal pay— like they do PIV (I mean birth control)… hey abortion … yeah liberal men love it, because it doesn’t affect them at all. But true equal pay? They’d lose 25-40% of their income instantly.

    And what is equal anyway? Equal to men? A female ordered world would give kindergarden teachers $150,000 salaries, and it would reduce football coach salaries by hundreds of thousands of dollars in this new world of female equality. Supreme Court— rape laws— well Herman Cain is getting a small dose of CHANGE we can believe in.
    You know, when women are anchors of major news organizations, and women are now lawyers by the hundreds, Mr. Chump Change sexual harasser just can’t quite silence women as much as he used to. A hint of the “equality” coming our way 🙂

  47. Male feminist is an oxymoron.

  48. Is it even possible for a man to be an ally; a ‘feminist ally’, even? I am wondering this. Is there a quiz I can make him take or something?

    I love all of you, too. And, yes, I am an insomniac.

  49. i would be willing to consider a male ally *if* he fully understood the implications of feminist success on himself, which would require a complete re-imagining of the future with men NOT at the center; and if he were willing to publically denounce PIV and talk to other men about PIV. below that might be room for men who believe in womens HUMAN rights….those intrepid warriors would be the anti-prostitution and anti-porn doods. and there are a few of those. not willing to call them feminists though, or even pro-feminists, really, although they do like to call themselves that. and those are the good ones!

  50. I’m a little bit confused about the PIV thing. I understand why it’s not in women’s interest because we don’t get off that way, and it exposes us to all kinds of things like STD’s, unwanted pregnancies, UTIs, yeast infections, etc. It hardly seems worth it. BUT, it is how human beings reproduce and it is how all mammals copulate. And even lesbians, or at least some lesbians, use sex toys sometimes. Women buy sex toys and use them on their own sometimes. Women have been known to enjoy penetration. So I completely AGREE that the penis-in-hole model of sexuality is very un-sensual and boring and patriarchal, but it still seems like there must be a place for it in the world. Without it, we’ll become extinct.

  51. There are more links on our “radical perspectives” page if you want background on piv criticism. It’s a cornerstone of radical feminism, and has been around since pre wwI.

  52. Cool. I’ll check it out. Thanks. 🙂

    I also want to clarity something I said, because it probably sounded contradictory when I said that women don’t get off through intercourse but yet have been know to enjoy it. I guess I’ll just speak for myself personally. I’m bisexual, so I’ve been with both men and women, but I’ve mostly been with men, just because I’ve had less opportunity with women. (However, I am becoming less and less interested in men.) Like virtually all women, I need clitoral stimulation to get off. Really, that by itself is enough to satisfy me. I would say that I don’t NEED penetration.

    BUT, as you may have heard or experienced, there are two types of orgasm for women, the clitoral and the vaginal. I have experienced. Vaginal orgasms are actually quite amazing when they happen, but they’re much more difficult to achieve, and most men don’t have a clue as to know to make one happen. But I don’t really blame them for that, because I have a hard time even give myself one, which is why I usually don’t bother. But when it does happen, it actually does feel pretty good, and it is different from the clitoral orgasm.

    Is a vaginal orgasm going to happen through having intercourse with a man? Probably not. In my entire life, I’ve had a vaginal orgasm while having intercourse with a man exactly twice. However, if men were better educated about women’s sexuality, and women were better educated about their own sexuality, and men actually CARED about women’s sexuality, then I’m sure that vaginal orgasms would be happening more often.

    But I also agree with you that if we weren’t under patriarchy, PIV would happen less often because it mostly comes from the male drive rather than anything inherent to what the female wants. When young girls masturbate, they usually manipulate the clitoris rather than stick up the vagina. That’s what comes naturally do us, because the pleasure center is in the clitoris. The idea that women usually masturbate by sticking things up the vagina, including random odd objects around the house, fruit, door knobs, whatever, is mostly a male fantasy that does not reflect reality. I once realized how ignorant men are when I revealed to a male friend that I had masturbated with an electric toothbrush, and he exclaimed, excitedly, “You put an electric toothbrush up your vagina?!” I was like, “No, stupid, I turned it on vibrate and held it against my clitoris.” He was like, “Oh,” and he sounded deflated. It just wasn’t as exciting for him anymore.

    In fact, a lot of men consider it a boring, burdensome chore to have to service the clitoris when they’d rather be poking. In servicing the clitoris, there’s no “action,” no “excitement” for them. It’s “boring.” Of course, for the woman experiencing effective clitoral stimulation, it is definitely NOT boring. For her, that IS the action! It might LOOK boring according to the pornographic imagination, but it doesn’t FEEL boring to the woman who is experiencing pleasure. And just because she’s not making noise like a porn star, that doesn’t mean she’s not enjoying it. But men fail to approach sex from the point of view of pleasuring the female, purely for her own quiet (or loud) enjoyment, because they’re selfish. They think that the sex act revolves around them and their penis, and that’s what pornography has taught them. And they also fail to realize how completely, utterly dull and BORING it is for us to constantly have to service their penis. How many countless, boring, soul-numbing hours have women spent lying there, staring at the ceiling, getting poked?

    Even vaginal orgasm comes from stimulation of the clitoris from the inside, at least as far as I can tell. The “G-Spot” is placed right behind the clitoris, right at the base of its roots. Based on my own experience, I would say that’s where a vaginal orgasm comes from. Most men are completely ignorant to this. Then of course, there are theories about there being 72 different “G-Spots” (I’m exaggerating.) inside the vagina, but I personally have not experienced any evidence of that, and I have no motivation to go excavating through my vagina. My guess is that I wouldn’t find anything except my cervix. For the most part, there’s really not much of interest up there. The male fascination with the interior of the vagina seems somewhat rude and intrusive in and of itself. Get out of my vagina! What do you think you’re going to find up there, buried fucking treasure? Put the flashlight away and rub my clitoris!

    Anyway, those are just my thoughts. 🙂

  53. yes, the demonstrable fact that PIV is not most womens preferred sex-act (because) the clitoris is implicated in womens sexual response *is* part of the PIV critique. but its only part of it.

  54. Like I said, I’ll check out the resources because I do want to learn more about this perspective. Thanks.

  55. “BUT, it is how human beings reproduce and it is how all mammals copulate. ”

    That’s the patriarchal myth, all right, and what they’d like you to believe. But false. Sure it’s natural. In animals! But humans are not animals! Humans are in a category all their own. Unlike animals, humans do not live by instinct. Nor are men even necessary for women to reproduce. The sperm/egg combo is just one way women can reproduce. Even by this method, there isn’t any reason under the sun for a man to be sticking his dick into any woman. It is sperm which impregnates, not penises!

    Sperm is easily applied without any need for penetration. It can be applied by your finger, ffs. Digital penetration isn’t even necessary. Sperm is mobile and will crawl right up there all on its own. The purpose of penetration is to violate women’s physical boundaries and reduce her into an animal – to be fucked like an animal and bred like an animal. The point of it is not only to dominate over her and degrade her, it’s to wrestle reproduction out of her hands. It’s called animal husbandry. It’s no accident that married men are called husbands and women are associated with barnyard animals and livestock ie: chick, cow, pig, bitch. Unfortunately, the patriarchy has succeeded in convincing women (and men) over the millenniums that they are animals and that this abomination called PIV is natural. It is not natural.

    “But, but, Lucky,” the nay-sayers say, “the penis fits naturally into the vagina.” Well it fits into the anus, mouth and down the throat too. Is it natural for penises to be inserted into anuses, mouths and throats? Where on earth did people get the idea that orifices, including vaginas, were naturally meant to be penetrated by penises? But only if you’re a woman, for some odd reason. That is completely absurd. But the patriarchs sure have a lot of people convinced of this absurdity and that it’s natural, no less!

    “But, but, Lucky, I like and get off on PIV.” Well hey, I know lots of folks who are into BDSM and some who dig being hung up on meat-hooks and sticking small rodents up their ass. Does “getting off” make it natural?!

    Bah, as far as I’m concerned, vaginas and anuses are exits, not entrances. Kindly read the sign: “Exit Only. Please Do Not Enter.”

  56. Yes, there is absolutely no valid reason for the continuation of the piv as sex paradigm. That is to say, there’s no reason not rooted in and supportive of male supremacy. Piv for intentional reproduction is another matter entirely. Considering how many pregnancies are either unwanted or ambivalent, I would say that piv for intentional reproduction is almost never used currently, and there’s no reason that same infrequent use couldn’t continue exactly as it is, completely unchanged. So why the upset at the thought?

  57. “So why the upset at the thought?”

    Maybe I’m reading you wrong here, but are you asking me what’s wrong with a little beastiality? That a little beastiality is ok if a woman consents and is intentionally trying to get pregnant?

  58. I wasn’t talking to you lucky. That was for the waht about teh babiez crowd who pretend its the intentional reproduction they are concerned about if there was no more sexualized piv. That’s an infrequent application as it is. They are lying, or being disingenuous in their outrage, and aren’t concerned about the population OR they don’t believe that pregnancies wanted by the woman are good enough, or that they would be numerous enough to keep the species going. Which means they are ok with rape, ok with all of women’s reproductive pain, ok with men impregnating women against our wills, ok with men making all the decisions under the current regime. And that the protestations of anti piv are not about sex for these people, at all.

  59. I would also like to see evidence on the health and other characteristics of babies conceived under all non piv circumstances before I advocated using them. I’ve heard that ivf causes mostly boy babies for example. It also utilizes male technology. I know you weren’t talking about ivf specifically, but what you are saying evokes ivf. And if the methods you describe would create more boys than girls, or would affect the health or wellbeing of the fetus at all, I would want to know about it. Wouldn’t you?

  60. And I didn’t say anything at all about consent.

  61. Wow. Well, this is definitely a different perspective than I’m used to hearing, and it’s giving me a lot to think about. I basically posted the same thing I posted above on my public FB page and I had several women come along and protest “But I need intercourse” or “that’s how I get off.” But one of them was actually married to a guy who was trolling my page; they were both trolling my page and had been for a few days, and the other two or three were I don’t know who. But, at any rate, I hear what you’re saying. It’s true that I probably could have lived my whole life without ever having had anything stuck up my vagina, and been perfectly happy. I suppose it is something you’re forced to conform to because it’s the patriarchal definition of sexuality. I guess it just seems natural because it’s how all mammals reproduce, but you’re right that the vast majority of the time when it happens, pregnancy is not desired. Most mammals actually only mate when they’re “in season” and they must reproduce to propagate the species, once a year or whenever, but humans can mate or “fuck” rather all the time which is supposedly what makes us “special,” but how much do most women really get out of penetration? Despite the protests of some women who almost always seem kind of hostile toward us for some reason and who often have asshat boyfriends, even studies have shown that most women don’t orgasm during intercourse, or if they do it’s only because of clitoral stimulation anyway.

    I don’t know. All of this has me thinking about all kinds of stuff. I’ve heard some new age theories that in the future human beings will reproduce by singing people into existence through our throat chakras, That’s pretty wild, huh? Lol. And I know that in some species, like some lizard species, they’re all female and reproduce without male sperm. And recently a friend of mine, surprisingly a male radical feminist of mine, quoted the quote that for women to aspire to be equal to men is not being ambitious enough. And suddenly something went “ding” in my brain, and I started thinking about how women have more genetic material than men, more nerve endings, more connective fibers between the two halves of our brain; the fact that we’re more resistant to most physical and mental illnesses; the fact that we live longer, etc. And then I realized that we are, scientifically, a more complex organism. Dare I say more evolved?

    The question I’ve been pondering lately is how do we overcome patriarchy when virtually all men in all cultures all around the world are so dead set on maintaining it? And they’re so much bigger and stronger than us in terms of size and muscular strength? Let’s face it, their larger size and strength is THE reason why they’ve been dominating us for so long. Religion, culture, society, government, everything else is just an outward manifestation of their larger size and strength over us. It’s a monkey world we live in and we’re just being dominated by monkeys; by gorillas. That’s why the earth is being destroyed and all of life is being destroyed. We are being dominated by lower consciousness that expresses itself through the male form.

    I believe that if the earth and humanity, or at least humanity, is to survive past this destructive phase, women must evolve past men. We already are more evolved in some ways, obviously, but I just mean that somehow we have to take control of the species. I don’t know what I’m trying to say, but I’m just saying that things are going in the wrong direction. I agree with what others have said here about how men have this violent, destructive drive that’s destroying the world. And we let them dominate us because we have no other choice really. But somehow we have to take power. We have to put a stop to this reign of terror.

    Lately I’ve been thinking about what it would be like, and if it would be possible, to phase men out through evolution. I mean, they’re actually not necessary for reproduction and they seem to only represent the defective y chromosome and over-abundance of testosterone which is destroying the species and the earth. All infants begin as female. All life flows from the female. Insect life, the basis of all life, revolves around the female. Females can reproduce without males, but not vice versa. The y chromosome is a broken, defective, mutated x chromosome that creates a muscularly stronger but neurologically weaker ape of a being that drags its knuckles across the earth while absurdly asserting that it has some right to dominate over us.

    And it does seem that the male sexual drive has a lot to do with it as they fire penis shaped bombs and shoot penis shaped guns and drill the earth with penis shaped drills and basically fuck the whole world with their one big giant penis.

    I don’t know, but maybe you all are right. I’m beginning to feel maybe I’ve had just about enough of penis.

  62. IVF causes lots of problems for the mother. There is an increased risk of pre-eclampsia and other pregnancy complications.
    But the ol’ turkey-baster routing is perfeclty fine as far as I understand it. The reason self-insemination causes more boy babies is because the mothers tend to inseminate themselves at the peak of their cycle. Male sperms swim faster, apparently, whereas female sperms are hardier. What this means is that if you inseminate yourself a few days *before* the peak of your cycle, the males won’t make it to the egg, whereas the females will just keep on swimming for longer.
    I know quite a few women in real life who say they planned the sex of their children by deciding when to have intercourse.

  63. Wow. Wow wow wow wow wow wow wow wow.

  64. Woman gave birth to man… and then man run amok.

  65. “I know quite a few women in real life who say they planned the sex of their children by deciding when to have intercourse.”

    Correctomundo. 25 years ago, my doctors, a husband and wife team, gave me literature from studies done at Columbia University and the “recipe” of how to predetermine the sex of a child. They had 7 children themselves and had predetermined the sex of all 7 by using this method. The ultrasound revealed I was having a girl and they thought maybe I’d like to have a boy in the future? I looked at them as tho maybe they’d taken complete leave of their senses. I had never wanted *any* children, much less wanted more! They started to put 2 + 2 together just through examination. Damned if I know what they saw but they knew. By the time “daddy” showed up, they already had his number. They threw him out of the office. They threw him out of the hospital too. Twice. They didn’t want that boy anywhere near me. It’s funny, but that boy could con most anyone – cops, judges, lawyers, shrinks, counselors, even my own friends. He’s quite the charmer. But the one group of folks he could never con were doctors. Doctors always had his number right from the get-go. I lost count how many offices and hospitals he’s been thrown out of. I just concluded doctors/nurses are psychic. :p

    But anyhow, according to the studies, yes, timing for intercourse matters in determining sex. CBL has indicated in part why. There’s a little more to it, but I’m not going to publicly post the recipe for obvious reasons. In short, due to the value placed on males in our society and its hatred of females.

    In tune with this, doctors like to perform IVF when a woman is ovulating. Which increases the odds of having a boy. I’m sure the IVF doctors also monkey around with a few other things, almost guaranteeing a boy. They know damn well how sex predetermination works. So does it really come as any surprise that more males will be born when the patriarchy starts monkeying around with reproduction?

  66. They even exterminate female children in a lot of countries either by infanticide or aborting the female fetuses. In some countries they’re “wife sharing” now. Great.

  67. But we can make girls. Lots of girls. 🙂 ❤

  68. that’s a great story luckynkl! The bit about them throwing “daddy” out of the office and hospital haha!


%d bloggers like this: