I find it so weird that they’re women with radfem knowledge who STILL want to include dickhavers in female-centered feminism and feminist spaces.
We’re talking about radfem-informed women who have read the studies proving that men have a pattern of dominating and controlling conversations and spaces. That men have a documented pattern of cutting women off/interrupting women in conversations and a history of taking credit for women’s ideas & work.
We’re talking about radfem-informed women who understand how men being present in spaces with women increases women’s sense of self-surveillance and self-awareness about our appearance, and makes us self-censor and modify our tone, speech, and behavior out of fear or concern we might offend male sensibilities or “provoke” male anger.
We’re talking about radfem-informed women who have read many reports and statistics on male violence and understand that once men occupy a space that they immediately pose a threat to female physical and sexual safety in a way that women collectively never have and that this male threat/male presence causes women to alter ourselves, our consciousness, and our behavior which ruins the authentic and open experience that feminist spaces should give women and can only be really given to women when the feminist space is female-only.
We’re talking about radfem-informed women who seem (on the surface) to accept the arguments against male-inclusivity in feminism because of how male-inclusivity sabotages and undermines feminist movements by weakening them and redirecting feminist activism in a way that causes it to focus on being palatable to males, resulting in the watering down, deradicalizing, and defanging of feminist politics. This inclusivity and palatability to males helped give us the trash that is third wave/liberal ‘choice’ ‘sex-positive’ feminism.
And yet, even with ALL this, we get women in radfem female separatist circles – with all this background of information and knowledge and research – who still want to reopen stale debates about male-inclusivity in feminism that should be a closed case at this point.
If they want male-inclusivity so damn badly, then why insist on participating in a movement/community (i.e.: radical feminism) that has not, does not, and will not accommodate males in such a way?
After awhile of seeing supposed radfem women push for male-inclusivity in radical feminist female separatism, it begins to smell like attempts to sabotage the movement/community from within with an “issue” that shouldn’t even be one since female separatism is a very fundamental organizing strategy in radical feminism.
this is amazing and important
Reblogging this because it's the TRUTH
