Concession Stand April 6, 2011

Posted by FCM in feminisms Tags: julie andrews

i am currently reading joanna russ’s “how to suppress womens writing” and its inspired another “creativity” post…but i am not in the mood for scanning. so…i decided to open a radical feminist concession stand, instead. radical feminist concessions! get your radical feminist concessions here!

see…because radical feminism is theory-based, all its facets are consistent with each other (ie. internally consistent) and the conclusions drawn using radical feminist theory are replicable by other people. ie. they are demonstrable. for example, the observation that rape and PIV-for-pleasure both cause the same result for women (but not for men): unwanted pregnancy. see how easy that is?

so in the interest of maintaining consistency, i hereby make the following concession: post-op MTF transsexuals are less dangerous to born-women than are genitally-intact MAABs, because post-op MTF transsexuals cannot impregnate women against our wills.

okay? there, i said it. now, i am *not* saying that SRS makes MAABs into FAABs, or anything of the sort. in fact, the problem with post-op MTF is STILL twofold: the MAAB problem, in that all post-op MTF are STILL MAAB, and therefore were groomed as oppressors of women (and rapists) since birth. even if we concede that MAABs without their dicks are less dangerous than MAABs with them (or lets just say they have one less trick up their sleeve?) there is STILL a legitimate complaint here on the part of FAABs, who dont want to be subjected to misogynist hatred from the oppressor class, perhaps particularly in FAAB-only spaces and (yes!) the restroom.

second is the problem of schroedingers rapist. among MTFs as a group, we dont know who still has their dicks and who doesnt, and we shouldnt have to guess. AND in addition, the FACT that MAABs, as oppressors of women and rapists, rape with things besides their dicks, all the time. its a rather MAAB thing to do actually.

and now for the fun part! we all know that fun-fems, self-identified male feminists, trans, and the mainstream (not coincidentally) all do not consider “unwanted pregnancy” to be an issue, for women. they dont care about it. they literally (literally! its stunning!) cannot accept that unwanted pregnancy is a female-specific harm of PIV. and “feminist” discourse regarding equality does not apply, when speaking about the inherent inequity of PIV. no, it doesnt. at least, to the extent that anyone cares about “equality between the sexes,” or equality within the context of het partnerships, they do *not* care about it enough to STOP FUCKING HAVING PIV. no, they dont. the only ones who are saying that PIV is inherently problematic are radical feminists. we all know this.

whats hilarious about this, of course, is that if fun-fems and trans etc cannot accept that unwanted pregnancy is a female-specific harm of PIV, then they also cannot accept that MAABs are are BY DEFINITION specifically and particularly dangerous to FAABs. they do not buy the argument demonstrable fucking fact that the penis is threatening to women, in particular. fine! they dont buy it. however. they also cannot make the concession that *i* am making here, can they? where i say that post-op MTF transsexuals are less-dangerous to women than genitally-intact MAABs are. no! if the presence or absence of a penis means nothing to them, they must believe (mustnt they?) that post-op MTF transsexuals are JUST AS BAD as regular men. which means post-op MTF are a problem. just like men are. oops!*

and now for my second radical concession (its a twofer!): penis-in-ass and penis-in-mouth, even when perpetrated on women, do not cause female-specific harm. okay? it has to be said. i have maintained all along that unwanted pregnancy is the ONLY female-specific harm there is. this is, i believe, beyond debate. BUT. we all seem to get that PIA and PIM are degrading to women, at the same time. right? its degrading to women, but its not female-specific harm. so what is this about, and why are these acts and others that *dont* cause pregnancy featuring so prominently in misogynist, male-identified PIV-pozzie rhetoric, BDSM, and modern heterosexual porn?

well…first of all, PIV is always implied with these *other stuff too* faux-sexual-diversity peeps. isnt it? so their sexualities are STILL PIV-centric, and STILL likely to knock a woman up. even in porn, where PIV isnt explicitly shown, its assumed. the “other stuff” is essentially meaningless in this context.

but specifically regarding PIA and PIM, and not-likely-to-impregnate rapes that are pretty obviously degrading to women, i have heard it suggested that when men abuse each other this way, they are essentially degrading a man “like a woman” is degraded. but i dont think thats true, is it? women can get pregnant, and men know this. men cause unwanted pregnancies in women, deliberately, all the time. thats the entire fucking point of raping almost universally women (and not men) and its the entire fucking point of PIV-centric sexuality, engaged in when the woman does not wish to become pregnant.

really, i think that degrading women with PIA and PIM is actually kind of a triple-think scenario…and (believe it or not!) can be illustrated by julie andrews’ character in victor/victoria (for anyone unfamiliar, julie andrews plays “a woman pretending to be a man pretending to be a woman”):

basically, men are abusing women like they abuse other men, when they abuse other men “like women”. WTF? i might write more about this later.

well what do we expect really? and this is all brought to you by MAABs, the same fucked-up assholes who simultaneously see women as sterile fucktoys for men, and vaginas as sheaths, at the exact same time they are also sticking their dicks into women, with the deliberate intention of causing female-specific harm (via unwanted pregnancy).

what about teh menz, indeed. and, do you want fries with that?

* i fully expect a chorus of “we blame the kyriarchy” here, but i’m not buying it. even fucking fun-fems know there is something seriously wrong with MEN, in particular, or we wouldnt need feminism (ANY feminism, even theirs) in the first place. DUH.