Is that on the list yeah i've read a lot of that as well.I read a lot and dont have friends as is evidenced by being on the internet at 12.30 on a friday night.
I'd say something, but I'm here as well.
yes! backbiting and bitchiness turns into a self help group for friday night wallflowers. all with the help of one taboo breaking confession of vulnerabilty, way to queer masculinity george!
p.s. at least i got to watch aladdin tonight. and i talked to TWO real girls (via the internet).
way to queer masculinity george!p.s. at least i got to watch aladdin tonight. and i talked to TWO real girls (via the internet).
Fuck you i make johnny cash look camp.
And it doesn't count if your talking to your girlfriend. She has to talk to you. Poor girl.
What is a 'girl'? I think I knew once, I've forgotten.
You always have to ruin things by trying to make it be about gender, if your parents had splashed out on a full zygote for you and your brother then you wouldn't have this problem.
Yeah fucking walking abortion guilt trippers.
I'm in because I got sooooooooooooo drunk last night at the ncad ball.
Are you recovering or is she so pissed that doesn't want to see you. Either way makes me feel better knowing you're hung over and i amn't. 
i would recommend the germaine greer as a decent entry into it all, broken down into short chapters. i would recommend speaking freely by julia penelope, which i can send you a pdf of if you like. also i would recommend "against our will" and "femininity" by susan brownmiller.
tbh i think the best way to read is to take an issue that is important to you and read around that. the thing is that radfems write on all sorts of subjects, but most of their work is not on "radical feminism" as such, but on specific subjects written from a radfem position, iyswim. it's a way of looking at things rather than just a 'specialist subject' of its own. thats one of the reasons i find reading current radfem blogs so helpful, because these women are writing about all sorts of issues from their radfem view, and it's kind of bite size.
Read Jeffreys. One of the non-historical ones is best - Anti-Climax maybe. Everything that's bad and everything that's good about radfem all rolled into one. MacKinnon's Towards a Feminist Theory of State is worth a look, but mostly for the bibliography and summaries - her own argument is awful Leninist crap, but she's good at laying out what other people say (although it's hostile her long summary of Wages for Housework is one of the best I've seen).
For actual good stuff there's Maria Mie's Patriarchy and Accumulation on a World Scale which is a good overview book with a great apparatus for chasing things down. In the Wages for Housework tradition, but more subtle and with a better historical grounding.
im going to have to make myself a longer reading list 
hi arf,can you explain what it is that makes a feminist,a radical feminist,isn't all just a search for identity,based on a scale of conviction.
do you mean whats the difference between a mainstream liberal feminist and a radical feminist?
radical feminists dont believe that equality should be our goal, but full liberation. we appreciate that reforms must be tried for under patriarchy but we dont believe that they go far enough, they are merely a temporary measure. we believe in the personal is political and approaching all politics from a woman centred pov - this may seem sexist but as all current systems are sexist we are merely trying to bring some balance. radical feminists want the end of white supremacy and capitalism, but vary in their approaches to the latter.
does that kind of answer your question? really it would be better to read around radfems, because we all have slightly different approaches, and different things we focus on.
nope. uk.
Feminism simply recongnises the subjugation of women through sexual inequality and declares that this subjugation and inequality should be brought to an end.
Radical feminism is a bit more precise than that.
Marx once said: "To be radical is to grasp the root of the matter. But, for man, the root is man himself." I think a fair summary of radical feminism would be to say that raidcal feminists believe that "To be radical is to grasp the root of the matter. But, for woman, the root is woman herself." And from that argue that, from a woman's standpoint, they argue that woman is oppressed by man through 'patriarchy'. Essential it argues that sexual opression exists in and of itself and needs to be takled as a defining oppresion in patriarchal capitalist society.
Radical feminism is a branch of feminism that views women's oppression (which radical feminists refer to as "Patriarchy") as a basic system of power upon which human relationships in society are arranged. It seeks to challenge this arrangement by rejecting standard gender roles and male oppression. The term Militant feminism is a pejorative term which is often associated, usually by detractors, with radical feminism. Often, radical feminism is seen by people other than adherents as a form of identity politics.The term radical in radical feminism (from Latin rādīx, rādīc-, root) is used as an adjective meaning of or pertaining to the root or going to the root. Radical feminists locate the root cause of women's oppression in patriarchal gender relations, as opposed to legal systems (liberal feminism) or class conflict (socialist feminism and Marxist feminism).
Feminism simply recongnises the subjugation of women through sexual inequality and declares that this subjugation and inequality should be brought to an end.
approaching all politics from a woman centred pov - this may seem sexist but as all current systems are sexist we are merely trying to bring some balance. radical feminists want the end of white supremacy and capitalism, but vary in their approaches to the latter.does that kind of answer your question? really it would be better to read around radfems, because we all have slightly different approaches, and different things we focus on
I don't see how you can be acting to end capitalism. It seems important that capitalism could function from a women centred pov, so there is something tacked on to radical feminism to make it anti-capitalist. But, I'm sorry to bring this up again, I was taught that communism is about a universal class, which you must dismiss out of hand: I would go as far as to say that radical feminism is against my political convictions lol
Besides which, if I was going to get into identity politics, I would be interested in "madness", as its more relevent to me.
Just out of interest, arf, do you deny that radical feminism is identity politics; or do you claim that there is something special about women's oppression that does indeed separate it from other varities of oppression?
I mean, at its most basic, I don't see why radical feminism is worth my time? Its an oppression. Say, if I wasn't communistically minded, I would be more intersted in being anti-war or something (though of course being a victim of war isn't enough of an identity 
)
Radical feminism: anti-communist and there are better alternatives
I am not a mysogonyst 
Say not all oppression of women is from class conflict: w/c women would still be opppressed sepcifically (prehaps not in ways worse than w/c men) under capitalism. Therefore you can't win: you can't end women's oppression, all you can do is ask for an equal amount of oppression with men! Radical feminism defeats itself!
Sorry to triple post 
as I understand it, to avoid cipehing socialism out of feminism, one would have to accept either:
1. Class is more basic
2. Patriachy negatively affects all working class people
Otherwise there just is no universality to your "socialism".
of course the most obvious question to ask is how exactly is their a "womens pov" in that having or not having a vagina has as much political leferage as liking Marmite or not. I mean Maggie Thatcher hada womens POV, it didn't do my mother or sister muvh fucking favours.
is getting more woman chief executives part of the plan to overthrow capitalism arf?
is getting more woman chief executives part of the plan to overthrow capitalism arf?
Liberal feminism, innit.
do you deny that radical feminism is identity politics; or do you claim that there is something special about women's oppression that does indeed separate it from other varities of oppression?
i dont really believe that the term 'identity politics' is anything other than a derogatory term tbh. also, i think all class based politics would have to fall into that category too, if it was being fairly applied.
Say not all oppression of women is from class conflict
okay.
not all oppression of women is from class conflict
as I understand it, to avoid cipehing socialism out of feminism, one would have to accept either:
1. Class is more basic
2. Patriachy negatively affects all working class people
patriarchy negatively affects everyone, but to different degrees.
Maggie Thatcher had a womens POV
did she really? a woman centred approach does not mean agreeing with all other women, which would be impossible. a woman centred approach means actually taking women into consideration.
i wonder what would happen if you applied these same standards to your own politics?
is getting more woman chief executives part of the plan to overthrow capitalism arf?
what refused said.
i dont really believe that the term 'identity politics' is anything other than a derogatory term tbh. also, i think all class based politics would have to fall into that category too, if it was being fairly applied.
No it wouldn't, because class politics isn't necessarily about identity.
neither is feminist politics.
neither is feminist politics.
Some of it is though, nobody is saying that all feminism boils down to identity politics.
some class politics is too tho madashell!
all class based politics would have to fall into that category too
Do you disagree with this now?
Maggie Thatcher did take women into consideration, she took women like her into consideration. Just as whilst i'm sure Tony Blair takes men into consideration it doesn't seem to stretch to jobseekers or iraqi's with cocks.
but maggie wasnt feminist, and never identified herself as one, so i dont really understand what point you're trying to make.
so feminism is clearly more than taking women into account, it's about what woman you take into account and why, and therefore feminism is not some apriori that comes before other ideological positions and perspectives or can be understood independent of them. I mean a socialist feminist will have a completely different take on feminism than free marketeer, because i fail to see much politically follows from having or not having a penis.
from having or not having a penis.
which intentionally or not is a provocatively phallocentric way of putting it, Sigmund
but yeah i agree, obv
In less than two weeks time hundreds of neo-Nazis and racists will descend on the coastal town of Dover calling for Britain to “close the border”. It is vital that anti-fascists and anti-racists...
A short biography of Séraphine Pajaud, French anarchist and champion of atheism, anti-militarism and women's liberation
An article by Staughton Lynd reinterprets the concept of union democracy to include workers of all kinds (unionized workers, nonunion workers, and farmers); protection of the rights to strike,...
Please read the posting guidelines before posting. If you see anything which falls outside them please use the down' button on the offending post to flag it for the moderators' attention, or in the case of spam, click the 'spam' button. Site admins are listed here, and feedback can be posted in the feedback forum.
Click here to register now. Logged in users:
Can comment on articles and discussions
Get 'recent posts' refreshed more regularly
Bookmark articles to your own reading list
Use the site private messaging system
Start forum discussions, submit articles, and more...
Is that on the list yeah i've read a lot of that as well.
I read a lot and dont have friends as is evidenced by being on the internet at 12.30 on a friday night.