new

Vliet Tiptree #sexist radicalhub.com

We have moved beyond palliation (negotiation, mediation, reform, compromise, engagement with the System) to exploring effective means of extirpating male pathology, including being open to biological explanations and treatment of such psychopathy. We are concerned with the overall structure of male oppression. We are open to going wherever the evidence and experience lead us.

In recent years, studies of male hormones and aggression, the development of the science of social dominance theory, primate studies, and genetics have begun in my opinion to take us very close to the etiology of the underlying sickness. This emphasis on looking at the pathology of male hormonal mechanisms is a new kind of “essentialism” that offers hope, because treatments can be developed to mitigate the death-drive of men, their hierarchical psychology, their insensitivity to the pain of living creatures, their pleasure in violence and intimidation, their acquisitiveness, their rape and phallic obsessions. It’s an exciting development, though the science involved it goes hand in hand with new dangers to women which must be resisted.

[...]

My own personal vision is that women will cure the sickness that ails men and that men will stay around, hunkered in their man-caves playing the ukelele, leaving us in peace at last. As to what that cure may be, my best bet is that what’s wrong with men is that their androgens need genetic modification.

I’m serious about this. If we can do it with corn, men ought to be easy.

Mary Sunshine #sexist #psycho radicalhub.com

“Sexism” is a word that I’ve never used. I use male supremacy, female-hating, and maleness. Male rule.

Male supremacy isn’t a feeling, it’s a fact: the slaughter of Female Being in all her manifestations. The destruction of the Daughter. Male parasitism. Females have powerful words that we can use. Not that the usage of words will get us anywhere until males are reduced to 20% of the “human” population. Then we can simply enjoy the usage of words at our leisure.

shemama #sexist radicalhub.com

For me, it is very clear. Women have our own culture, which has been nearly erased by patriarchy, men, (and yes, with the collusion of some women, who, as Sonia Johnson says have “terror-bonded” with their oppressor) as has been said here. We are our own sovereign biophilic beings. Our essence has nothing to do with men/maleness, which is on the decline–from 1000 genes on the y chromosome to somewhere near 45. Since we have experienced near erasure in too many ways to count for at least the last 5000 years, I see it is imperative and absolutely necessary to have as much truly women-only space as possible to re-memeber, to re-claim, to re-joice, to re-juvenate so that we may re-trieve and be re-stored–like re-storing a battery with its charge. “Transwomen” still carry that depleted y chromosome. They are not women. Anywhere they take up space–and it seems to me the nature of the y, as it has become, is to take–they want to own. The essence of woman is entirely different. I just completed a retreat in Ashland OR on “Uncovering the Biophilic Autonomy of Women” for women only. At one point in the retreat, a huge V appeared in the sky directly over us–chem trails, perhaps, but it was still a synchronous validation of our work in women only space and phenomenal to see.

Feuerwerferin #fundie radicalhub.com

BDSM is not only racist it is also antisemit. Black clothes and lethear are inspired by the Nazis (SS) and Foucault for example wrote that it turned him on to reanact the suffering of the Jews. The Nazis that still exist in Germany also seem to be above-average into BDSM and it’s women who are humiliated and of course not men. They don’t bother to lie about empowerfization unlike the self-proclaimed “progressives”. So, do male Nazis just not realize that they are indeed and consequently against their own very intention empowering women through their fetishes although they promote childbearing and housewives (conservatism)? *cough*

Mary Sunshine #sexist #psycho radicalhub.com

Females don’t have to kill baby boys. Just not nurture them. Females are forced to *birth* baby boys, but beyond that a female’s physical actions are her own.

Males will die without the constant infusion of female energy that they get from our wombs and from our lives. They are perfectly welcome to take the male infants from the hands of the midwife, and what they do with it from that point is *their* decision.

Females need to not be emotionally and intellectually invested in a male future.

witchwind #sexist radicalhub.com

["PIV" means "penis-in-vagina (intercourse)" among radical feminists.]

Well, PIV is natural for animals because they have hormonal drives which pushes them to copulate at given times, either during estrus or at given seasons, according to their biological needs. Since they copulate only when their nature/body tells them to, it can’t be rape in my opinion.

Humans on the other hand have no pre-ordained sexuality: there’s nothing in the human body that pushes us to copulate at any given time, we don’t have any hormonal drives during estrus that forces us to seek a mate for PIV and it’s not part of our basic and necessary body functions/needs like peeing or breathing. sexuality is completely social and learned. It’s been seen on some adults who’ve never learned about PIV not to know “how to make a baby” and it didn’t cross their minds to do PIV. PIV isn’t natural but socially institutionalised by men through compulsory heterosexuality, marriage and rape. It certainly isn’t a recreative practice either since men use it as a *weapon* against women to control them – and it IS a weapon of war given the harm it causes women. And as Feuerwerferin says, PIV isn’t even necessary for reproduction since sperm on the vulva is enough to cause pregnancy. Plus the trauma-bonding (trauma = survival mechanism to something wrong being done to you = that something needs to stop). Plus the fact that having something the size of an erect penis thrust into your body with a naked man all over you is in itself deeply invasive despite the genital stimulation that is most often just reactive or mechanically activated after years of grooming and is usually only triggered after some first seconds of pain. (PAIN!! that’s a normal body sign telling something’s *wrong!*). without counting that at the beginning of PIV grooming it’s most often just painful, irksome, or at best there’s not much sensation, and the girl usually feels she *has* to do it because she’s already groomed to believe her value lies in being fucked by men.

Anyway, these are many reasons that make me say PIV is in no way a natural human practice, and that women’s vagina isn’t meant to be penetrated at all, but only meant to expel a baby.

Maggie #sexist radicalhub.com

yes, they [men] are the problem, and womyn will have to realise this. Men are the carriers of a Y chromosome that makes them the way they are, I believe. Womyn have to be strongly aware of the posibility of men’s inherent sadism and cruelty.

Heterosexuality is NOT natural for womyn. It has been forced, imposed and indoctrinated upon them via malestream customs and culture. Womyn who want to be free seriously have to consider overcoming heteropatriarchal conditioning.

As a radical lesbian separatist, I tend to advocate that womyn separate from men as much as they can (either to become lesbians or spinsters). Considering the world-wide gynocides that are currently happening in pornography, prostitution, harmful ‘beauty’ practices of femininity, trans-politics, reproductive technologies, and (in the non-Western world) FGM, abortion of baby girls, etc, it is clear that womyn are safer without men.

Trust me, you feel a lot better and freer when you practise everyday separatism and womyn-centrism (while keeping an eye on what’s happening in the world). image (Of course I recommend this as much as it can be possible within the life of each individual womyn)

[...]

Personally, I often imagine that, maybe one day we could all live in an all-female world and we could somehow find a way to reproduce via parthenogenesis (e.g. as in Nicola Griffith’s Lesbian Utopia novel Ammonite, or Katherine V. Forrest’s Daughters of a Coral Dawn, another Lesbian Utopia). There have been compelling scientific proofs that men, because of their Y chromosomes, are doomed to extinction anyway—

radfem hub #sexist radicalhub.com

Necrophilia

In real life, and as mirrored in media images, boys and men are obsessed with death. Mary Daly referred to this obvious male preoccupation with death as “necrophilia,” meaning the love of death. Men’s necrophilic tendencies are not limited to literally sticking their dicks into corpses, although it includes that; necrophilia refers to men’s obsession with death and all things related to death and antithetical to life, including neglect and abuse, causing reproductive harm, rape, murder, torture, war, inflicting physical and emotional pain generally, and placing themselves and others in harm’s way in every way. Where women are interested in and indeed heavily invested in preserving and nurturing life, often because they have to, or face legal or social consequences if they fail, men are working very hard to undermine women’s efforts to nurture life at every turn.

Why? Because—

Necrophilia supports male power. Obviously, the power to take life or to cause extreme suffering is a form of power, and men embrace this power fully when they torture and kill animals, girls and women, and each other. Where boys and men are obsessed with death and creating destruction, women are left to perform damage control, utilizing all their time, energy and resources on mitigating the harm that men inflict; women are then left with few or no resources to use towards building a female-centered culture or to support our own interests. This diversion of women’s resources away from woman-centered and non-patriarchal ends is deliberate. The unusual man who is even slightly interested in nurturing or preserving life is the beneficiary of enormous false gratitude, but when women make a mistake or are unable to perform caretaking duties at a high level for any reason, we are severely punished by patriarchal institutions which place extreme controls on women’s lives and enforce our caretaking role with institutional violence, including incarceration. Of course, it is frequently men’s necrophilic actions such as PIV-centric sexuality creating unwanted or ambivalent children, or men harming themselves and others, that create the need for women’s usually unpaid, institutionally-unsupported caretaking labor in the first place, and opening the door to patriarchal institutional control over women’s lives. Granting men the power to open the door to institutional patriarchal control over women is critically important to and supportive of male power.