M is for Misogyny – Part II
This post is part of the ongoing Alphabet Series. Listen along to my recording on YouTube and/or read the article below ♥♀
Did you come back for more? Well, colour me impressed. This is dangerous shit I’m talking about here. Asking people to do a little self-analysis usually requires a bit of a cognitive walk on the wild side and can inspire a lot defensive anger in anyone whose personal operating system consists of the fragile schema demanded by patriarchy. This can include men, straight women, religious people, mothers, liberal feminists, and even some activists and self-proclaimed radical feminists. Anyhow, congratulations on coming back. I’m hoping that the crescendo built by asking the why-questions in the last post will find its way into some more concrete and problem-solving thinking or action-taking in this post addressing some how-questions. So let’s get started.
M is for Misogyny – Part II.
In the last post, I attempted to explain why the average woman hates herself, and by extension, other women. I suggested that early childhood programming to see females as the enemy and as less valuable by misogynistic societies and families; the development of an addiction to suffering; and the harming of other women as a proxy for self-harm and as safer targets for revenge than male oppressors played major roles in women’s interactions. In addition, for women claiming to live feminist lives, I suggested that their own acts of aggression and feelings of hate or dislike towards other women may stem from the blind spot that experience and awareness create, and the lack of agreement about what feminism is – in addition to the other reasons above. For the more self-aware feminists, realizing that one has seemingly misogynistic thoughts and feelings about some women can inspire feelings of angst, guilt and shame – or what we call cognitive dissonance. Then can come the why-questions – the ones that help with understanding one’s purpose, and the motivation and the mechanisms behind one’s own and others’ behaviour towards other women. And if, by this point, the woman in question hasn’t just ended up abandoning feminism altogether in order to make her feelings and actions match again, she starts asking the how-questions. How is about taking action or starting on a path. It’s about turning purpose into tangible goals and measureable outcomes.
So, I’m going to give this post a secondary title in the form of an important how-question:
How can I support women without becoming a doormat, a punching bag or a martyr?
This is a common point of frustration for women trying to figure out how to deal with patriarchy. And I think a lot of women start to get burned out after years of trying to help people who don’t necessarily want or feel grateful for female help. You may already have your own answers to this question and the others that I’ll include below. I’m going to talk about my own solution and how I have dealt with my own feelings towards the multitudes of women who make me angry and frustrated. Please remember that there is no single way to ‘do feminism’, and although many people will try, no one should be telling you whom to help, how to help, or whether you should even bother helping at all. Like I said in Part I, purpose is personal, and I’ll extend that by saying that how you pursue your purpose is also personal. Sometimes, those who think they are helping women and are shaming you for behaving differently are actually doing more to maintain patriarchy than they realize.
Here are a few other how-questions that may come up:
How can I call myself a feminist if I am selective about which women I help and feel little interest in knowing or even being around most women?
How do I know if so-called feminist activities are actually anti-woman?
How can I criticize anti-woman female behaviour in an objective way that doesn’t end up spiralling into misogyny?
How do I identify a definition of feminism that actually helps women when so much of what is out there just seems to be pro-male rhetoric designed to gain followers and male approval?
Yeah, tough questions, but the following guiding principles keep me grounded. I’ve thought a lot about where I fit in the feminist movement, and I’ve determined that these principles are the best way to women directly and indirectly.
Gynocentrism vs Feminism
If you ask around, or better yet, if you listen to what women say and then watch what they do, you will come to the conclusion that feminism is whatever the fuck you want it to be from moment to moment and place to place. I’m not exaggerating or joking. The label has lost most of its original meaning. This is confusing to people encountering feminism for the first time or looking for answers to why and how questions as they pertain to helping women. A lot of this so-called helping of women is actually helping men and hurting women (or specific groups of women)
If you actually give a shit about women, a good rule of thumb or place to start is this: Ask for or look at the mission statement. If a feminist or feminist web site gives you more than one sentence and if that sentence includes anything besides or instead of the liberation of females from male oppression, then you are not dealing with woman-centred feminism. There shouldn’t be vague or euphemistic language. There shouldn’t be a focus on anything other than female liberation. Feminism is not about fighting all the phobias and isms in the world, nor is it about the environment or animal rights. All of those have their own movements, and believe me, animal rights or any other activists are not including blurbs about liberating women from men in their mission statements. So why must feminism do this? It’s like trying to order high-quality food off a 12-page menu with 300 main dishes.
Of course, everyone has the right to abuse language and to change accepted definitions to suit political agendas. It’s a human right, right? So, while I use the word feminism, or even radical feminism, I actually no longer consider myself to be either of those things. They’ve become practically meaningless, and in many cases, just another word for androcentrism. If you’ve been following along on my site, you already know that I consider myself to be a gynocentrist and a female separatist. And I highly recommend reading or listening to my post G is for Gynocentrism to get the deets on that.
Gynocentrism is clear and simple in its principles or mission, and I think is it possibly what radical feminism was supposed to be before it began to over-focus on inclusivity and all the other side issues. Simplicity is how you stay focused and united in a cause. It is easy for people to know right away whether they agree with it enough to join. When you sign up for any of the feminisms, you can pretty much guarantee that there will be in-fighting, hierarchies, schisms, a focus on men, and the kicking-out of members who get too offensive or speak too much truth. These days, you can’t just be a woman in feminism. You have to bring all your other baggage filled to the brim with your wardrobe of identities.
The bottom line: give a group, individual feminist, book, or other material the old Occam’s Razor test. If you can’t see a clear focus on female liberation from males and from female self-harm behaviours, then turn around and walk away. Or maybe run.
Self-Preservation vs Self-Immolation
A lot of feminist activists tell us that we have to love all women even if they are the worst kind of patriarchy-supporting people, and that the sympathy and empathy must flow unconditionally. Kind of a love the sinner, hate the sin kind of thing. And I say stop. Feminism ain’t no religion, and I am no longer willing to be abusive women’s doormat, punching bag or token sacrifice. I do have a limited amount of empathy and sympathy for women who have suffered, and I don’t believe women and girls deserve what happens to them because of men. I’ve said before that I don’t believe suffering is a necessary part of the human condition. But I do hold women responsible for their decisions and behaviour, especially once they are old enough to be in charge of children’s well-being and to use their brains to regulate their own behaviour. Having a bad life is never an excuse for abusing other women or girls. I’ve been put into some very bad situations by women I was trying to help, and I finally came to realize that I was wasting my time, and my efforts weren’t helping women as a class at all. On the contrary. I was, in fact helping men by depleting my energy, by putting myself in danger, and by enabling and empowering woman-hating women. I realized that I, myself, as a woman didn’t deserve to be destroyed or abused by men or women acting on behalf of men.
The take-home message here is that like in an emergency situation on an airplane, you put your own oxygen mask on first. It is both perfectly fine and perfectly logical to put yourself first before you attempt any heroics. I think any of us women over the age of 40 can tell you what happens to your body and mind after decades of putting others, especially antagonistic, parasitical, or stress-inducing others, first.
Strategic Help vs Patch-Up/Clean-Up
Given that there are limited resources for women in this world, and that an individual woman only has a limited amount of gynergy to fuel herself and whatever other people she helps, it makes sense to be strategic. I used to be indiscriminate, running from fire to fire before I realized that it was both unsustainable and pointless.
Feminist attention and efforts seem very much focused on the women who already get most of the limited resources and attention available – mostly mothers and partnered straight women – and the fact that it never seems to be enough and seldom, if ever, solves any of the problems these women face, let alone women as a class face, should really be telling us something. It’s not working! We’re focused on the wrong things! We’re pouring our money and energy into a bottomless pit of neverending suffering.
The goal of activism, although no one would ever admit this, is to patch up wounded women and clean up the most recent messes that men make of women’s lives, and then send the women back into the world to do it all again. I see activism as sort of the ER of the healthcare system. The bulk of the work is reactive, not preventative. I’m sure there is the occasional small and underfunded feminist activist group that seeks to do preventative work, but it is not the norm. Prevention is sooo much harder and more long-term than putting on band aids and offering crisis counselling. Am I advocating for stopping all of this? Well, no, of course not. Short-term after-care is always needed. But I can’t personally participate in this because I see it as ultimately helping men and maintaining patriarchy, although I know activist women rationalize their contributions differently.
Myself, I help individually, spontaneously and strategically. I help women who both want and need help and who are on a gynocentric path, and whose needs won’t be addressed by The System or by feminist activists. By helping them, I believe my contributions make an actual preventative difference and ultimately help all women by empowering those women who don’t uplift patriarchy. That is the only action that makes sense to me. And it is these women who are more likely to pay it forward, which is how feminism should work, but seldom does.
Integrity vs Inclusion
I don’t think the majority of women can handle gynocentrism, or even weak forms of feminism. I’ve heard a lot of women in the scene say that feminism is for all women – it is inclusive. And I’ve never really understood that because no other movement welcomes people who don’t agree with the basic principles or who behave in ways that completely undermine what the group is trying to do.
One of the biggest problems is the inclusion of men in pretty much all feminisms, including radical feminism. Most feminists are partnered heteros, and many are mothers of sons. How can you see and accept basic truths about an oppressor class when you are willingly fucking one or more of them and acting as a servant to at least one of them in multiple ways? In any other movement, this would not be a question inspiring the kind of rage that women direct at people like me for simply asking them to self-analyze. Heck, this type of question probably wouldn’t even come up. Imagine someone asking the following: How can you eat a steak every night and work in an abattoir an call yourself a vegan activist? Well, imagine defining veganism as “whatever the fuck you want it to be”, and I guess these behaviours would be totally cool and the question would come off as irrational.
So like I said, there is no confusion about whether you are walking the talk if you adopt a clear and simple set of principles like in gynocentrism and female separatism.
Putting It All Together
I’m not going to give explicit answers to the how-questions listed above, but I’ll tell you what works for me in approaching these types of issues.
First, keep it simple. Simple definitions, simple principles, simple reasons. If you encounter things that include too much, involve complicated or vague or euphemistic language, or seem to involve reasoning that doesn’t jibe with what you are seeing happen, there is probably something wrong.
Second, anti-woman activities and behaviours are always more popular and approved of than pro-woman stuff. A case in point: my most watched video in the Alphabet Series has received 259 views. Make-up tutorials get millions and millions. Guess which videos are pro-male/pro-patriarchy?
Third, pro-male patriarchal women as well as pro-male feminist women do harm to women as a class by diverting time, money, energy and resources to men. Gynocentric and female separatist behaviour helps women as a class. Even if you are very selective in whom you help or associate with, your assistance ultimately helps women as a class. Never let any feminist or activist make you feel like you are biased or mean. You may actually be helping women more than they do, and besides, at the end of the day, your energy and resources are yours to allocate according to your principles.
Finally, you absolutely can be critical of anti-woman female behaviour without devolving into misogyny. You can also feel angry and disappointed with women who betray and harm other women, including you. Channel the rage into man-hate – they are the main reason these women are so damaged. Support your critiques, if you choose to voice them, with evidence and logical arguments. And don’t launch ad feminem attacks by calling women stupid, even if their behaviour may indeed be stupid. If you can, find other women you can talk to about your specific experiences. Most of the time, you’ll end up realizing that what you’re feeling isn’t true hate, but frustration. But frustration can fester without a healthy outlet and chance to speak freely without judgment. And that is why men put so much effort into isolating women and policing them when they manage to congregate. You see, they depend on keeping us feeling like we hate each other.
♀️ If you care to support Story Ending Never, we are appreciative. ⚢
Posted on October 15, 2023, in Feminism, Misogyny, Separatism, The Alphabet Series and tagged critical thinking, gynocentrism. Bookmark the permalink. Comments Off on M is for Misogyny – Part II.








You must be logged in to post a comment.