Skip to content

If FAAB were a meaningless distinction…

February 10, 2011
tags: , ,
by

i wouldnt be able to graph it, using actual criteria.  like this:

or, i could try, but it wouldnt make any sense.

also, it occurs to me that the MAABs only have one square.  this is probably why they think “gender” is unfair.  to them.  because they are always supposed to have moar.

thanks for reading!

Advertisements
52 Comments
  1. February 10, 2011 12:49 pm

    thanks to miska for letting me guest-post this graphic! i hope its SCUM-mmy enough. i just made it up just now.

  2. February 10, 2011 1:23 pm

    This was inspired by teh latest trans nonsense, most recently found at ibtp. Wtf? This is kinda basic. Four squares and done.

  3. February 10, 2011 1:35 pm

    also, it occurs to me that the MAABs only have one square. this is probably why they think “gender” is unfair. to them. because they are always supposed to have moar.

    Bwahaha! So true. This is why males (all of them, especially trans!) always try to minimize and downplay the significance of pregnancy, and potential pregnancy to the female experience.

    Also, welcome FCM. Great start!

  4. Sargassosea permalink
    February 10, 2011 4:46 pm

    Miska, your stuff at IBTK (!) is great – thanks 🙂

  5. Sargassosea permalink
    February 10, 2011 4:59 pm

    And FCM, “This is kinda basic.” it rather the understatement, isn’t it?!

  6. February 10, 2011 5:46 pm

    I was SO, SO, SO hoping to see something here about that idiot comment she made. THANK YOU, THANK YOU, THANK YOU FCM and Miska!!

    Oh, and the table is awesome, too 🙂

  7. February 10, 2011 6:17 pm

    Yeah, Miska, you KICKED ASS left, right and center @ IBTK!! Major ass. I almost want to comment in support of my beloved rad-FAAB sisters, but I’m not nearly as eloquent about trans issues. (Plus I’m trying to keep my dramaaaa quotient low this month. It ain’t easy.)

    Can I ask a possibly dum question, please? Thanks, sisters, you humor me so kindly. Does “likely able to pass as an impregnator through puberty?” = social passing as a male human such that one might enjoy the benefits of male privilege during puberty? Cause non-fem girls don’t get male privilege. They get SLAMMED with gender policing. But I think I must be mis-comprehending cause it seems perfectly clear to everyone else? Please advise.

    Also, I just want to say that “oppression is oppression is oppression” line is BULLSHIT. Female-specific oppression is DEPENDENT on our impregnability. NO OTHER form of “oppression” in the history of the fucking world can claim exploitation of this specific vulnerability! God damn it, people!! Having limited physical resources ($$) is NOT THE SAME AS being rape-able. Being raped IS physical violence, but it is MORE THAN physical violence. No other oppressed group in the history of the fucking world can claim to be vulnerable LIKE WOMEN ARE. What is the fucking problem with recognizing this CRITICAL DISTINCTION?? Oh yeaaaaah, misogyny!!

    Also, to tell you, Miska, as I believe someone did at IBTK, that your description of universal female oppression (using TV messaging as an example) is first-world-centric made me LAUGH!! As if obsession with gender-Id-entity itself isn’t a function of relative privilege! Trans politics (aka “I *am* whatever I *say* I am”) IS first-world-centric. 1> If we did not have advanced medical interventions that trans supporters claim can “cure” them, they’d need a different solution to their dysphoria. Duh. Technology literally ENABLES/creates transSEXuals. Not the underlying emotion, but the proposed RESOLUTION to the problem. And 2> sitting around navel gazing about your PERCEIVED gender I-dentity is a privilege of TIME and social education. Duh. People who are running for their lives rarely get OBSESSIVELY preoccupied with whether other people think their voice is deep enough, or their chest is flat enough, or their hands are dainty enough to “pass.”

    I’m telling you, if you’re alone in the woods, it matters not one iota what gender you are. It’s a strictly social phenomenon. END.

  8. Jilla permalink
    February 10, 2011 6:30 pm

    I just gave an award for the best “But what about the men comment” for this month. And what do you know, surprise suprise, fourteen seconds later there’s another contendah.

    “Why does there need to be one totalizing perspective that makes up woman?”

    From some dude on IBTP.

  9. Jilla permalink
    February 10, 2011 6:42 pm

    Can I move this here so I don’t have to go there to read it? There isn’t enough Gravol in the world for me to go to IBTP again. I hope Luckynkl is reading this. . She was our standard bearer. Before Lucky, no one had dared to call Twisty out on her particular brand of women-hate.

    Those posts over there? All men. And Twisty invites them in to rip. Why has Twisty been conferred with feminist credentials? I think for years many online radical feminists have been dazzled by her neologisms and didn’t see the simmering women hate from her. She’s cagey with it, but you can find it, in every mention of her mother.

    Miska:

    Saying that there is no standard experience of oppression for women is similar to how funfems claim there is no such thing as women as a class, because we are all individuals experiencing our individual oppressions individually. Incidentally it’s also why their brand of feminism has been so ineffective.

    There is such thing as a standard of oppression for women. That standard is being raised without male privilege.
    This is universal among female-assigned-at-birth people. No matter how privileged a woman is relative to other women, the one thing we all have in common is that we are still lower down on the hierarchy compared to the equivalent male, in the same way.

    It means that all women, everywhere, are raised to believe that we must prioritize male needs, opinions, voices and experiences before our own, and those of our fellow women. We are raised to believe that our role in life is to nurture and provide care-giving to males. And be sexually pleasing and available to them. And that our ultimate fulfillment must be found in these things. We are also raised with an onslaught of messages that will prepare us for what lies in store for us when we reach maturity – that our uteri belong not to us but to our future husbands, the government and the religious institution down the street. That our vagina belongs to our future husbands or indeed any man that happens to buy us dinner or gets us drunk. And that men can buy and sell our vaginas. Males on the other hand, get raised to believe in their inherent humanity, bodily integrity and entitlement to women’s bodies, servitude and prioritization.

    All of this gets hammered into us from the day we are born. It will be reinforced by thousands of interactions that occur during every school day and every family gathering, and in every TV narrative. By 8 years old this has already created two very different classes of people who experience the world and their place within it in very different ways.

    This shit matters. It’s significant. It’s why we’re all feminists, right?

    And re oppression is oppression is oppression. That may be true. But there are still oppressors and the oppressed. No oppressed person is obligated to accept a member of the oppressor class as one of their own, nor does an oppressed person owe their oppressor anything.

    And with that, I guess I’ll stop now. I’m a long-time reader but first time commenter. Frankly, I know how irritating it is when a first-timer introduces themselves to a blog by arguing about trans.

  10. xyz permalink
    February 10, 2011 6:49 pm

    love this site! your graphics are awesome. but i don’t get the horizontal yes and no at the top. shouldn’t they be switched around in order for maabs to be both non-impregnable and not-likely to pass as impregnable?

  11. February 10, 2011 7:11 pm

    Ok, the “passing as an impregnator” business. I might need to add an asterisk to the criteria (both of them.) The asterisk would clarify “based on the appearance of the child’s genitals at birth.” This entire chart represents how the MAAB/FAAB distinction is made, right after the child comes out of the womb, based on the presentation of the genitals. Does that help? Go back to the moment of birth, and trace the thought process. If you disagree, also, please share.

    If a child is obviously not “female” (impregnable) based on ambiguous genitalia, its only MAAB if it has enough of a dick to pass as male, as an adult. Otherwise, its FAAB. This is where trans appropriation of intersex gets really insulting, because most obviously intersex babies are FAAB, not MAAB. Being that females are just castrated men and all.

  12. February 10, 2011 7:46 pm

    Thank you, FCM! Yes, gender assignment based on appearance/reality of infant’s genitals at birth helps. Also, it seems that I am the only one having any confusion, so no need to change just for me! Thanks again.

  13. February 10, 2011 10:23 pm

    hey, this is concise and brilliant. Kudos.

  14. February 10, 2011 11:33 pm

    I haven’t written about trans for ages, and I had forgotten just how much this topic brings out the fucking stupid in people. Like this, from “crimorene”

    My experience as a white American cis-woman in terms of gender is probably far more similar to a white American transwoman than it is to a non-white, non-American cis-woman.

    Yeah, cool. But what about your experience of sex not gender? Cos you and the non-white non american woman are both vulnerable to pregnancy, but that transwoman isnt and never will be. When it comes to women’s oppression gender is just fluff. Biological sex is the main event.

    That whole thread is ridiculous. There’s nothing there that hasnt already been said and done to death over at fabmatters and elsewhere

  15. February 10, 2011 11:42 pm

    I blamed!! Because I can’t help myself. And because any mention of Julia Serrano gets me super heated. Twisty won’t publish it. Stomp! Stomp!! Censorshiiiiiiiip!!

    Ok, yea, been there, done that. Pssshhh.

  16. February 10, 2011 11:46 pm

    Xyz, read the horizontal axis again. You are right, but you are reading it wrong. MAAB is for non-impregnable children who are estimated to have enough of a dick to pass as males when adult. ImpregnatORS.

    Also, was I not supposed to do a trans post miska? Eeek! Want me to move it over to my place? I might cross post it anyways. Let me know. 😛

  17. February 10, 2011 11:54 pm

    In case anyone is wondering, if you are impregnable, whether you can or cannot “pass” is irrelevant. You are FAAB.

    Also, my main point was that there ARE CRITERIA. By definition, FAAB is therefore a MEANINGFUL distinction. We can talk about the meaning, but we cannot say its meaningless. And thats exactly where twisty went, and she’s wrong.

  18. February 11, 2011 12:12 am

    Naw, FCM, keep the post here! I was referring to the trans stupidity on the IBTP thread.

    As you’ve demonstrated, FAAB is indeed a meaningful distinction, which begs the question why so many feminists are hell bent on arguing that it isnt meaningful. I mean, we know obviously that it benefits maabs. But these feminists suggest that blurring the political lines between maab and faab is also beneficial to faabs and feminism. I’d like to know how frankly, because they cant even demonstrate that this is not harmful to faabs, let alone it being beneficial. How on earth do they justify it to themselves?

  19. kurukurushoujo permalink
    February 11, 2011 12:27 am

    Also, I just want to say that “oppression is oppression is oppression” line is BULLSHIT. Female-specific oppression is DEPENDENT on our impregnability. NO OTHER form of “oppression” in the history of the fucking world can claim exploitation of this specific vulnerability! God damn it, people!! Having limited physical resources ($$) is NOT THE SAME AS being rape-able. Being raped IS physical violence, but it is MORE THAN physical violence. No other oppressed group in the history of the fucking world can claim to be vulnerable LIKE WOMEN ARE. What is the fucking problem with recognizing this CRITICAL DISTINCTION?? Oh yeaaaaah, misogyny!!

    Right on! There was someone over there who actually conflated class oppression with sex oppression. I have no idea how it can be so easily forgotten that every oppression has its specifics. Oppression always serves to make one group of people subservient to another but how this is done and maintained can be pretty different depending on on oppressor group, social context etc. It’s suspicious that when it comes to trans-politics some people forget all this intersectionality conundrum and put everything in one pot. I mean, intersectionality exists but there has to be something intersecting– when everything is the same there’s no intersection.

    Also agreed that universal female oppression is NOT a 1st world persepective (seriously, what the hell?) and that intellectualizing about gender identities is 1st world (if I was an African woman having undergone FGM I very much wouldn’t think up long sophisticated comments about my identity, I would be concerned with more pressing issues).

    Personally, I’ve seen the thread over at IBTP and left two comments- in one I tried to explain that identities are constructs in and of themselves. Seeing as queer and liberal people like to be post-modern and relativist this should not be a problem but when it comes to transpeople they are relativist and materialist according to what is more opportune to validate trans-identities.

    I’m a little bit disappointed that this tiresome discussion is happening over at IBTP, tbh.

  20. February 11, 2011 1:49 am

    you all know my schtick by now! PIV- and trans-criticism overlap alot actually. this is not a coincidence, at all.

    the unique vulnerability of female bodies to male bodies (and therefore females being uniquely oppressed AS WOMEN, BY MEN) is at the heart and soul of everything that matters to women as a sexual class, around the world. it defines this class. it describes and defines a unique struggle, and shines a bright light on the ways that men ACTIVELY exploit women as women, because they are men. yes i said it! even “the good ones”(TM) do it, ACTIVELY. not “just” passively. male bodied persons ACTIVELY. UNIQUELY. HARM. WOMEN. they are a THREAT.

    FAAB itself, as a category, appears to represent all bodies that cannot cause female-specific harm. not all of them can BE harmed (if they arent impregnable). but NONE of them can CAUSE female-specific harm.

    thats left up exclusively to MAABs. now tell me that MAAB means NOTHING too. sure it doesnt!

  21. February 11, 2011 1:54 am

    PS. i tried cross-posting this over at my place, and it looked terrible. this is the place for this post miska. you have created a perfect environment for the stand-alone graphic.

  22. FAB Libber permalink
    February 11, 2011 2:10 am

    is at the heart and soul of everything that matters to women as a sexual class, around the world. it defines this class. it describes and defines a unique struggle, and shines a bright light on the ways that men ACTIVELY exploit women as women, because they are men.

    I would add to that, that the perception of being FAAB in MAAB eyes, is also ‘enough to do it’. Primarily I am thinking of intersex (and sterile FAABs), if they are perceived as being able to be impregnanted, then they get the same treatment by MAABs.

    Good point about the Nice Guys, FCM.

    There is a reason I chose the “FAB Libber” screenname – for the liberation (not ‘equality’) of FAABs.

  23. February 11, 2011 2:30 am

    I would add to that, that the perception of being FAAB in MAAB eyes, is also ‘enough to do it’. Primarily I am thinking of intersex (and sterile FAABs), if they are perceived as being able to be impregnanted, then they get the same treatment by MAABs

    actually, i see it the opposite. “enough to do it” literally means, when deciding whether a nonimpregnable child is MAAB/FAAB “is there enough of a dick there to be a threat.” YES = MAAB. NO = FAAB. the MAAB distinction literally turns on this: whether this person will pose a legitimate threat to FAABs. doesnt it?

    FAAB is a decision made at the time of birth (like MAAB) and theres no other thought put into it. this is what GENDER is. for FAABs, you are funelled into an oppressive female gender role…and i USED to think it was because you are assumed to be impregnable (which is almost always the case actually). but now looking at the graph, i am starting to suspect its actually “funnelled into an oppressive female gender role, UNLESS you are able to cause female-specific harm.” then you are groomed for that, instead.

    anyone?

  24. February 11, 2011 2:57 am

    “Biological sex is the main event.” Fuckin A. Has to be said.

  25. Rachel permalink
    February 11, 2011 4:13 am

    My comment will never make it out of moderation: “Bring back Luckynkl.”

  26. February 11, 2011 7:13 am

    Great insight fcm. It explains why the presence or absence of a penis is assumed to be the definitive sex marker. Actually, it explains so much. It also explains why far more intersex babies are assigned female.

  27. Mary Sunshine permalink
    February 11, 2011 11:44 am

    Luckynkl is alive and well in an undisclosed location.

    😀 😀

  28. February 11, 2011 12:59 pm

    FAAB itself, as a category, appears to represent all bodies that cannot cause female-specific harm.

    I’m having another FCM-induced light bulb moment!! MAABs, I mean penises, cause female harm. CAUSE. Everything else is female-assigned. Got it.

  29. Jilla permalink
    February 11, 2011 3:04 pm

    Thanks Mary.

  30. Sargassosea permalink
    February 11, 2011 3:24 pm

    How about this little gem from evie, Jilla:

    “How come cis women get to define what womanhood is?”

    Umm? I wasn’t aware that we did. I was always under the impression that MEN (and trans*women* – semi-redundant, I know!) pretty much had that one covered.

  31. FAB Libber permalink
    February 11, 2011 7:37 pm

    Whoops, looks like I stuffed up my tags. Will try again…
    actually, i see it the opposite. “enough to do it” literally means, when deciding whether a nonimpregnable child is MAAB/FAAB “is there enough of a dick there to be a threat.”

    I was approaching it from the opposite POV (FAAB pov), but sort of on the same track. It is that FAAB moment where the FAAB is assigned FAAB, and is assumed (because in the majority case, is) to be able to be impregnated. Most FAABs are able to be impregnated.

    I don’t really think of MAABs, whether or not there is ‘enough dick’ to be assigned MAAB. Because if there isn’t, they get chucked into the FAAB basket, and are one of us (FAABs).

    However, I acknowledge your point “funnelled into an oppressive female gender role, UNLESS you are able to cause female-specific harm.” which I think too is valid – it basically says “have you got enough balls to put those beetchez in their place?!”. I think it is both reasons – is the baybee potentially able to be impregnated (if yes, no further assessment required). On those iffy cases – will it/he be an “effective” member of the oppressor class? I was flowcharting it… 😛

    Upthread Jilla mentioned:
    [the] standard is being raised without male privilege. This is universal among female-assigned-at-birth people.
    And that is probably the key identifier that one is FAAB, and what binds us together. It is always a difficult stance to argue that ‘female’ is about periods (“what about menopausal or sterile women?”) or giving birth (“what about those who don’t give birth?”) sort of arguments, etc. etc.

  32. February 11, 2011 9:57 pm

    oh noes…this post has been twittered. as “transwoman hatred.”

    where, exactly, is the transwoman hatred? this post doesnt even mention transwomen. it mentions MAABs though.

    d’oh!

  33. FAB Libber permalink
    February 12, 2011 12:02 am

    How come it is labelled “transwoman hatred” … are they completely ignoring transmen now? Oh that’s right, transmen were born female… and transwomen were born male. Doh! Don’t look now girls, but your MAAB is showing.

    Handbags at eleven o’clock!

  34. Jilla permalink
    February 12, 2011 12:09 am

    Women aren’t defined by the fact that that their uterus *works* FAB libber.

    I just have to put this in here. Apologies for going out on a tangent, again.

    From the Guardian: Cnsensual sex as men define it:

    “”In so far as Mr Assange held her arms and there was a forceful spreading of her legs, there’s no allegation that this was without her consent,” he said.

    “Sexual encounters have their ups and downs, their ebbs and flows. What may be unwanted one moment can with further empathy become desired. These complex human interactions are not criminal in this country.”

    The argument that Assange used the weight of his body to pin her down “describes what is usually termed the missionary position,” he said.

    !

  35. February 12, 2011 12:30 am

    @Fablibber – LOL.

    Also it looks like my comments are being modded on the IBTP thread now. They were going through but now I’ve had one stuck in moderation for more than a day.

    miska
    February 10, 2011 at 6:29 pm

    Your comment is awaiting moderation.

    @ Mary Tracy9
    “The main “anti-trans argument”, again, from what I’ve seen, goes like this: “you were not born a woman, you are not a woman”.”

    It would be more accurate to describe the main radical feminist argument as a recognition that there are fundamental political differences between those who are raised with male privilege, and those who are not.

    It’s not semantics (as someone else suggested above). It’s politics.

  36. February 12, 2011 12:50 am

    I must say, since they were generally anti-sexploitation i always gave IBTP’s commenters more credit than the rest of the mainstream feminist landscape. This trans thread has been a real eye-opener. It’s all the same stuff – females are oppressing males! How DARE females exclude males! How dare females try to prevent males from defining womanhood! Cis Privilege! Blah blah blah.

  37. February 12, 2011 2:40 am

    FCM
    oh noes…this post has been twittered. as “transwoman hatred.”

    haha. It was that dude who commented on the prison rape post. He is just pissed off because he wrote another comment in response to sar and I deleted it. Because it was a fucking derail.

  38. FAB Libber permalink
    February 12, 2011 9:03 am

    @ Jilla
    Women aren’t defined by the fact that that their uterus *works* FAB libber.

    Not saying that. Saying that there is an ASSUMPTION it does (because in most cases true).
    But, that whole fertility thing is not the whole thing anyway, just part of it. The other part is probably as FCM says, “do you have the ‘balls’ to be ‘one of us’ in the oppressor class?”.

  39. February 12, 2011 9:13 am

    @sar

    How about this little gem from evie, Jilla:

    “How come cis women get to define what womanhood is?”

    Umm? I wasn’t aware that we did. I was always under the impression that MEN (and trans*women* – semi-redundant, I know!) pretty much had that one covered.

    I know right? I saw that too. Fucking ridiculous. So I have immortalized it in its own post.

  40. rhondda permalink
    February 12, 2011 7:50 pm

    Jilla, your mention of Assange is very pertinent here. For the mainstream press really dissed these women whom he’ allegedly’ raped. They were portrayed first of all as man haters out for revenge and then as ‘fun feminists’ who wanted it because he was famous. When I read that he forced her legs open, I knew he raped her. That his lawyer describes this as consent should really sent red flags and lightning all over the place. TV and movies, you know, she really wanted to be taken by the hero. Fuck. Hello! Harlequin romance anyone? It’s what women want. I now do not give a shit what happens to him.

  41. mercedes permalink
    February 12, 2011 10:08 pm

    Oh poor Daisy Deadhead, decrying the perfidy of the “cis” woman, those vain imposters who are huuuurting her trans friends.

    Daisy Deadhead the trans suckup who infiltrated by lies a closed, membership only website where radical feminists discussed in private their family relationships and took a conversation out between three women (she not one) and gave it to **ano*ymous (yes, of Ass**ge “free speech” fame) who then proceeded to shut down that website through DDoS attacks, just as they did to “protect” free speech for Ass**ge. They destroyed about a dozen feminist blogs, we lost years of women’s herstory and feminist discussion, it cost money for the website owners to attempt to set up again. Anonymous tracked women who had been posting there through their e-mails and sent out torture porn threats to cut us up and fuck us in every orifice, to track down our children. Some women fled the “democracy and free speech” (sic) of the internet in fear of Daisy’s loyal friends. One of whom who went after a radical feminist in a particularly vicious way and was a leader of the hundreds of males world wide who amassed to do this, was TRANS.

    Daisy Deadhead. Is upset. Her representative a CIS woman, is planning to do something that harms women. Golly. Oh my. Who’d a thunk a WOMAN could be such a TRAITOR to women?

    February 12, 2011 at 3:11 pm

    yttik: Think of all the time and energy women have put into this thread attacking each other …

    I was thinking the same thing, except I was wondering where all of this Major Feminist Fervor was during the Bush Admin. Why do trans people get the wrath that Republican warmongers never even earned?

    Have you blasted the Tea Partiers like Sarah Palin and Michele Bachmann? My state is about to have our public health care taken away by a CIS WOMAN GOVERNOR… do any of you give a shit about that? Wouldn’t you rather have feminist trans women who agree with you on your side, or cis-women like Bachmann and Nikki Haley?

    If being a cis woman is a guarantee of automatic wonderfulness, why is my state currently being looted by one?

    There are only a tiny few trans women in the world, and you are engaging in all this hoopla over them, when we have real problems propagated by blah blah blah blah blah… .

  42. joy permalink
    February 12, 2011 11:24 pm

    I really loved it, I mean, got so angry I wanted to laugh and puke, when Nails tried to conflate sex and race.

    “[If you don’t like teh trans, then] how do you feel about people of color who can pass as white?”

    For anyone who was wondering, she’s a rich white chick who also thinks PIV’s okay because “not all women are fertile”, “you can always take birth control”, and “[fucking] feels good.” In other words, a pomo/funfem. If anyone still thinks IBT… is a radical forum for radical people (not that anyone here does), they can think again.

  43. FAB Libber permalink
    February 13, 2011 12:27 am

    mercedes, where did you get the info that it was a TW behind the A attacks?
    I did not realise that DDH was so involved either. Miska can give you my email addy if you wish to share in private.

    Yeah, I was there, and some of the other places that got hacked. One reason I have to periodically change identities, as well as others.

    But, at least when you are targeted, you know you are doing the radical feminism right.

  44. FAB Libber permalink
    February 13, 2011 12:50 am

    rhondda, yeah, the description of what happened is textbook acquaintance rape – all radical feminists would definite it that way.

    What is happening more and more, is that absolutely anything and everything that happens in a rape is now defended as ‘consensual’. FCM always speaks of rape and PIV being difficult to tell apart, and these consensual defences are trying to erase all (remaining) distinction. We basically have a situation where rape = piv = rape. As in, now there is no such thing as rape, it’s all consensual PIV! Problem solved … for the patriarchy! And if some uppity female gets it into her ‘pretty little head’ that she has been raped, and dares report it to the police – if the rapist gets off, she can get charged with Perverting The Course of Justice – sending a clear message to all other uppity women.

    It’s a fuckin rape-fest out there. Date men at your peril.

  45. February 13, 2011 1:16 am

    @mercedes, I too would like to know more about who was behind the attacks. Feel free to email if you dont want to make it public. Frankly, it wouldnt surprise me at all to hear that a fucking transwoman was a central instigator. Males always behave like that.

  46. February 13, 2011 1:24 am

    What is happening more and more, is that absolutely anything and everything that happens in a rape is now defended as ‘consensual’. FCM always speaks of rape and PIV being difficult to tell apart, and these consensual defences are trying to erase all (remaining) distinction. We basically have a situation where rape = piv = rape. As in, now there is no such thing as rape, it’s all consensual PIV! Problem solved … for the patriarchy!

    Very true. And what we’re seeing increasingly is that ever more violent and dangerous activities are being normalized and reframed as “just sex”. BDSM, anal, deepthroating. It’s on par for the course of normal het sex now, so even if a woman is raped very violently it must still be consensual, because common wisdom holds that women love being brutalized during sex.

  47. mercedes permalink
    February 14, 2011 2:53 am

    I did, to the old blog contact.

  48. chicky permalink
    February 15, 2011 5:29 am

    I posted a bit on your other blog. Since your blog brought up Julian Assange I been wondering if anybody knows about him being awarded the Sydney Peace Medal? I haven’t heard any Feminists talk about it.

    http://www.smh.com.au/technology/technology-news/julian-assange-awarded-sydney-peace-medal-20110202-1adeu.html

    “In the estimation of the Sydney Peace Foundation, Australian WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange stands alongside the Dalai Lama and Nelson Mandela.

    As he outrages and embarrasses world leaders by leaking secret US diplomatic cables – and continues to face down allegations of sex offences – Mr Assange has been chosen by the foundation to receive a rare gold medal for peace with justice.”

    They aren’t even going to wait to see if he’s convicted or not. It doesn’t matter. How far will society go to tell males woman don’t matter and you can do with them as you like. Makes me think of this boy at work who was talking to some other guys saying how O.J. killed his wife and got off. “HE got off thou he got off. He killed his wife and got off.” not outraged but excitedly. Like he accomplished something.

  49. FAB Libber permalink
    February 15, 2011 1:07 pm

    “In the estimation of the Sydney Peace Foundation, Australian WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange stands alongside the Dalai Lama and Nelson Mandela.

    Clearly the SPF does not operate with a high operational estimation frame of reference. Next year, I will nominate my piece of broccoli for the prize. Except the broccoli probably has more integrity than Assange. Curious that the first three letters of Assange = Ass.

    Assange (or, Ass for short) is the lib-dude’s hero. And, we radfems all know what librul lefty dudes actually think of women. Not by their words, but by their actions. Ass’ is no different.

  50. Laur permalink
    February 28, 2011 2:32 am

    There’s a reason I’ve never gotten into IBTP. It’s never truly struck me as a….P blaming site. Not to sound like I’m so, oh, blamier-than-thou-or what-have you.

    I spent the weekend working with preschool/early elementary boys and girls. There’s already a HUGE socialization difference between these two groups, and it’s really draining to watch, to KNOW that so many of these gyrls will experience sexual violence (if they haven’t already) and the boys will perpetuate it.

    But, to make a long story short, these 5 and 6 year old boys made it impossible for the all female staff to do anything BUT watch them! The gyrls all stayed very quiet throughout the two hour group. At one point, one of the boys threatened to kill another one. At that point, one of the gyrls blurted out, “that’s not nice!”, and we volunteer staff agreed it was not.

    Point is, it is SO easy to forget about all these liiitttle moments that add up to a boy socialization and a girl socialization. But unfortunately, this is the reality right now.

Trackbacks

  1. Decoding the FAAB/MAAB “Argument” « femonade
  2. Females: Silenced By Trans* « You think I just don't understand, but I don't believe you.

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: