hi this is just me wanting to know more i don't support radfem ideology at all but im trying to think critically
cis men are the perpetrators of the majority of gender based violence right? so wouldn't the whole concept of lesbian separatism be effective in reducing violence? how do we respond to that argument if we're of the opinion that lesbian separatism is bad, because ofc it would make a difference to reduce that much violence by alienating cis men from society.
what's a productive response to someone who thinks eradicating men from society is a good feminist cause? i don't know if this is a separate question but: how do you logically explain that getting rid of men won't get rid of the patriarchy?
This is... a weird line of reasoning.
âOf course it would make a difference to reduce that much violence by alienating cis men from societyâ is such a bold claim.
First of all: why would we assume itâs only cis men being alienated by lesbian separatism? If the goal here is for women to only interact with other women, trans men and other trans folks who otherwise do not consider themselves women should not be included. If the logic is that this is a TERF movement (it is) and the intention is to include or exclude people on the basis of their AGAB, then trans women and trans AMAB folks are going to be excluded.
Second of all, cis men alone make up almost half of the world population. So where are they going? If theyâre not getting uprooted and placed somewhere else physically, how do you plan on creating a society where all cis men are just Not Interacted With except for other cis men, and functionally, how does that work- in terms of jobs, families, partners, loved ones?
And... what metric are we using here? Is it how people look, how they act, are we checking everyoneâs genitals and birth certificates? Do we need to put trans people on a registry, do stealth and cis-passing trans people need a badge or something that marks them Part Of Society?
On a global scale, there is no reality where All Cis Men are peacefully alienated from society so that lesbian separatism can happen everywhere. What youâre looking at here is mass genocide: âKill all menâ is an extremist lesbian separatist slogan, the idea being, very literally, that all men must die so that women can be safe.
I am taking for granted that any reasonable human being understands that mass genocide is a bad thing, which means this becomes a personal choice. Which is what lesbian separatism typically is; itâs about forming separate, distinct communities devoid of men. Communes and stuff.
And look, Iâm not gonna tell people not to go make their womanâs-only commune or whatever. But I will ask these questions:
How do you determine who is Sufficiently Woman to be welcome at the commune?
What is the necessity of dis-including everyone else?
If theyâre not a TERF about it and they decide trans women count, but trans men donât, what threat do trans men pose to cis women that they must be barred from entry? What about non-women nonbinary folks?
What is it about women, specifically, that makes them uniquely safe and non-threatening? Why can that quality not apply to other genders? Are there exceptions to these rules? What do you do about them?
When a woman abuses, harasses, hurts, assaults, or rapes another woman or a young girl, what do you do about that? Does it âcountâ? Do you get rid of that person?
If women can be dis-included on the basis of being dangerous, or if non-women can be included on the basis of being safe, what is the necessity of making this space women-only in the first place?
Whatâs happening here, especially when the reason is something like âsafetyâ, is gender essentialism: the assumption that certain genders possess certain inherent, immutable qualities. Like being uniquely safe, or posing a unique threat.
Cis men are responsible for a good amount of intimate partner violence against women because we live in a society where that violence is encouraged and excused. Cis men are also not the only perpetrators of intimate partner violence against women; this is a broad statistic, and by no means a rule.
If you want to reduce the rates at which cis men abuse and hurt their female partners, you should attack the systems enabling that violence.
