Honestly, genetics makes me sad. There is actually very little use for the Y chromosome. A few geneticists predict that as we lose more specific functions due to genetic crossover, we may stop existing. I sincerely hope this is not the case.
In any case, if you were to strive for that, I'd say you could eliminate us if the world got together and tried. Freeze a ton of sperm, work on establishing artificial sperm (sperm in this definition simply being a carrier for the other half of the genetic code) while you use up those stores, and get to the point that people get impregnated entirely by robots.
Now where's the fun in that? A world entirely of women would be a world full of petty disputes, moodiness, and violence... which is pretty much what it is now, so why go to the trouble of eliminating half the population, particularly when they're such nifty people?
Disclaimer: I know nothing about separatist feminists, and for the most part, don't have any intentions of changing this fact. But I did read the page. I also stayed at a Holiday Inn, so that should count for something.
Now then, my initial answer would have to be "that depends."
I view sexism as establishing a hierarchy between the sexes moreso than simply separating the two. Thus, separatist feminists simply believe that the inherent differences between men and women can never be reconciled, so they are withdrawing from men and any institution male-dominated/created.
However, when you look at all those quotes from separatist feminists, it seems that they are in fact sexist, and I would say that you must be careful not to see the idea and their own gender biases as one and the same.
But then again, if everyone that calls themself a separatist feminist feels this way, I'd say that the current definition is wrong, and needs to reflect the times.
1) Even hardcore feminists think separation (I /almost spelled this wrong/. Goddammit. Let it be known, this is the first time in my entire life I have spelled this word correctly) feminists or all-penetration-is-rape type feminists are barking moonbats. And there's not many of them; they make a very good strawman argument, but that's about it.
2) It is not necessarily sexist-- depending on how you define sexism. (Then again, if you use the nutty privilege + power definition, no female can be sexist, so your whole point is bunk.) But it doesn't have to be anti-male-- it's just a continuation of the idea that women can only meet their full potential in the absence of men, and so need men only spaces.
Though that idea in itself is pretty fucking sexist. Against women.
And anyway, most the real seperation feminists would say, "Damned right it's fucking sexist. Who ever said feminism was about eliminating sexism?"
Comments 15
Reply
In any case, if you were to strive for that, I'd say you could eliminate us if the world got together and tried. Freeze a ton of sperm, work on establishing artificial sperm (sperm in this definition simply being a carrier for the other half of the genetic code) while you use up those stores, and get to the point that people get impregnated entirely by robots.
A sad day, but possible in some twisted future.
~Joseph
Reply
Reply
Reply
Now then, my initial answer would have to be "that depends."
I view sexism as establishing a hierarchy between the sexes moreso than simply separating the two. Thus, separatist feminists simply believe that the inherent differences between men and women can never be reconciled, so they are withdrawing from men and any institution male-dominated/created.
However, when you look at all those quotes from separatist feminists, it seems that they are in fact sexist, and I would say that you must be careful not to see the idea and their own gender biases as one and the same.
But then again, if everyone that calls themself a separatist feminist feels this way, I'd say that the current definition is wrong, and needs to reflect the times.
Reply
2) It is not necessarily sexist-- depending on how you define sexism. (Then again, if you use the nutty privilege + power definition, no female can be sexist, so your whole point is bunk.) But it doesn't have to be anti-male-- it's just a continuation of the idea that women can only meet their full potential in the absence of men, and so need men only spaces.
Though that idea in itself is pretty fucking sexist. Against women.
And anyway, most the real seperation feminists would say, "Damned right it's fucking sexist. Who ever said feminism was about eliminating sexism?"
Reply
Reply
Some see females as the better sex. And feminism's goal is to promote them. But they're such a minority they're really not worth bothering with.
Reply
....
Yeah, fuck those lesbos. I mean literally fuck them, once they get a little bit of the penis they'll come crawling back to being baby-machines.
;)
Reply
It's good to know that some things still remain, even after 4 years.
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
No! I had no idea. o.o
Reply
Leave a comment