And this kind of identity-only criticism can be used upside down by reactionary forces, which basically reinforces the idea around men that feminism is only about hating men, and not about how patriarchy negatively affects all our lives. And we also have the reverse of anti-men identity politics movement, with anti-women identity politics by incels and red pills, which itself is a reaction against liberal feminism.
This is just victim blaming, it’s not even remotely useful commentary. Women do not have to be perfect paragons of social justice who must do all the emotional labour in the world so that men can’t twist their words. There is no sincere misandrist movement anywhere and feminism is in no way to blame for incels. Again, this is just victim blaming.
The other problem regarding this type of politics, is that it isn’t actionable. Yes, men are terrible, but can you get rid of them? Is it a desirable thing to have a society with women-only? What are you going to do with the existing men? Are they just going to disappear?
This is where both your comment and your thought process should have started. Valerie Solanas is maybe one of the only thinkers to take this line of reasoning to its conclusion, and her writing is incredibly revealing with regards to why it’s an inherently flawed standpoint.
This is just victim blaming, it’s not even remotely useful commentary. Women do not have to be perfect paragons of social justice who must do all the emotional labour in the world so that men can’t twist their words. There is no sincere misandrist movement anywhere and feminism is in no way to blame for incels. Again, this is just victim blaming.
I’m not blaming liberal feminists for having incels. What I am telling is that every political progressive movement will produce a political reaction, as socialism and communism produced fascism, which is a bourgeois political mass movement. Identity-only progressive feminist movements now have a correspondent in identity-only reactionary anti-woman movements.
And as a materialist I am completely aware that many of the grievances of the incels were not caused by the feminists, but simply because of the material conditions of capitalist patriarchy that increasingly alienate men and women from society and social relations.
But political reaction relies more on aesthetics and identity than on actual material conditions. For these reactionaries, anti-men idpol serves only as propaganda material for recruitment, as many of these disenfranchised and resented men won’t find a place in the anti-men movement, but there will be plenty space for them in reactionary anti-women movements. So there isn’t even a dispute over hearts and minds.
This is where both your comment and your thought process should have started. Valerie Solanas is maybe one of the only thinkers to take this line of reasoning to its conclusion, and her writing is incredibly revealing with regards to why it’s an inherently flawed standpoint.
I don’t know Valerie Solanas, so I ask you to state here her reasoning instead of just citing her name if you want to have further discussion.
This is just victim blaming, it’s not even remotely useful commentary. Women do not have to be perfect paragons of social justice who must do all the emotional labour in the world so that men can’t twist their words. There is no sincere misandrist movement anywhere and feminism is in no way to blame for incels. Again, this is just victim blaming.
This is where both your comment and your thought process should have started. Valerie Solanas is maybe one of the only thinkers to take this line of reasoning to its conclusion, and her writing is incredibly revealing with regards to why it’s an inherently flawed standpoint.
I’m not blaming liberal feminists for having incels. What I am telling is that every political progressive movement will produce a political reaction, as socialism and communism produced fascism, which is a bourgeois political mass movement. Identity-only progressive feminist movements now have a correspondent in identity-only reactionary anti-woman movements.
And as a materialist I am completely aware that many of the grievances of the incels were not caused by the feminists, but simply because of the material conditions of capitalist patriarchy that increasingly alienate men and women from society and social relations.
But political reaction relies more on aesthetics and identity than on actual material conditions. For these reactionaries, anti-men idpol serves only as propaganda material for recruitment, as many of these disenfranchised and resented men won’t find a place in the anti-men movement, but there will be plenty space for them in reactionary anti-women movements. So there isn’t even a dispute over hearts and minds.
I don’t know Valerie Solanas, so I ask you to state here her reasoning instead of just citing her name if you want to have further discussion.