About this blog

This is a feminist blog, but blog entries are typically written from a radfem standpoint: radical feminists challenge, undermine, resist, dismantle, and generally fuck with the patriarchy, wherein the male/masculine is privileged and the female/feminine is subordinated.

That said, and notwithstanding the title of this blog, I have to say that I find it unfortunate that the described perspective is called “radical feminism”.  “Feminism” and “feminist” sound pro-female, even pro-feminine.  I am no more pro-female, let alone pro-feminine, than I am anti-male.

What I am is anti-gender.  More specifically, I object to:

(1) gender conceived as a dichotomy, masculine on one side and feminine on the other side

(2) gender aligned with sex: male=masculine and female=feminine

(3) sex as the basis of a hierarchy (so I’m definitely anti-sexism too)

(4) gender conceived as a bundle of attributes

(5) people who accept and perpetuate (1) – (4)

Note that reconceptualizing gender not as a bundle would, of course, dissolve the concept altogether: if one could be aggressive and sensitive or like weight-lifting and knitting, then ‘masculine’ and ‘feminine’ would no longer have any meaning.  (Which would render the first three objections moot.)  This is why ‘gender outlaws’ or androgynes are so threatening.

Guest posts are welcome; contact me.

1 comment

  1. Where are the SJWs on heightism? Also, why feminist hypocrisy over male height?
    We hear social justice types rail against every -ism out there related to human traits: sexism, racism, heterosexism, but you never hear the SJWs complain against heightism. Heightism hurts short men, who like non-white men, didn’t chose to be non-white, or like women, didn’t chose to be women.

    In fact, short men are less likely than normal height men to get jobs, get paid less, have a far tougher time finding sex and love than normal height men, are taken less seriously, and have a high rate of suicide.

    Unlike living as a transgender, either thru surgery or just dress, which are elective acts, being a short man is not elective and there is no elective act to become normal height. And there is nearly no surgery for short men at all aside from an extremely risky and ineffectual bone extension, which is known to only add an inch or two and cause severe physical problems, short and long term.

    Unlike gays, who can “act straight” when they’re in a position they feel uncomfortable being out, short men cannot “act tall.”

    Also, unlike people who might not like their skin color and can get it dyed (which can be done and is sometimes done) or lightened, short men can’t make themselves normal height.

    Also, given how feminists wail against the gender roles, why aren’t they wailing against the idea that the man also has to be taller? Why do they complain about every hint of sexism out there, but never that a women in media is almost always portrayed with a man who is taller?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.