In retrospect to the 85,000, reformism and other things

When men view our blogs in such large numbers, it’s a threat. They’re not just looking at it, they view it with the intent of harming radical feminists and women in general. They do it to collect information so they know what next to do to prevent women from going there. They batter radfem work in public for all women to see and show the result of their verbal and written battering as an example of what will await women if they do, think or say the same. They write nasty and threatening comments, that in order to trash, I have to read at least a few words of. Even though it doesn’t hurt my feelings, they are still harmful and inevitably affect my thoughts.

85,000, that’s the maximum number of views I had in one day a couple of weeks ago when the liberals and MRAs circulated my PIV blogpost for punishment. Unlike a normal blogger, attracting 85,000 hits isn’t something I want to celebrate. It’s threatening: you know they’re after you, it only means you’ve hit men’s radar and you have no idea what they plan to do. Will they attempt to hack into my blog? Will they try to find info about me? The kinds of thought this leads me to is 85,000 men going after me in real life. Probably a bit less if you discount the women. If that happened, how on earth could I hide from tens of thousands of men?

Receiving so many comments denying what I said one after the other reinforces my sense of isolation, of outlandishness, of being the only one who knows. It makes me doubt the reality of my perceptions, it makes me waver, it shakes my foundations for a bit. I start questioning what I said. If so many people assert this with such confidence and if it contrasts so starkly with my perceptions, how can my assumptions be real? The wavering doesn’t last for long thankfully, I regain my senses quite quickly, sometimes more so than others. Writing, talking about it to friends and receiving radfems comments helps a lot. It’s the only thing that ever helps actually.

All this is gaslighting and bullying, men’s lies are meant to sound convincing. They convince with the use of force, ordering me to comply to their view by using an authoritarian, terrorising tone. ‘How dare you see otherwise. You’re crazy. You’re a bully. Etc.’ Which is why it works so well to instil self-doubt because it’s a mindfuck, it’s thought-blocking, it’s also an assault and it creates fear and willingness to appease to avoid further assaults. Brainwashing works through a mix of mind assaults, terror and constant repetition of a same message until it’s hammered into our brain, which is psychological violence. 85,000 views and hundreds of trolling comments is in effect a blitzkrieg brainwashing attack by men and male-colonised women. Hundreds of men and their pawns attempting to reprogram the minds of deviant female bloggers, women who don’t comply and who break through men’s myths and lies.

It’s interesting that Cathy Brennan’s response to the whole thing led a commenter, Tracy, to comment about what it meant on reformism: I hadn’t framed it in that way (see discussion here, here and here). I’ve been thinking about it for a while but haven’t had the time to comment on it properly so I’ll continue my thoughts in this post. Tracy defined CB’s post as reformist to the extent that CB doesn’t name the agent, that is why men isolating us from one another is so dangerous, why it’s so important to huddle together in this circumstance [because men are waiting in line to rape and kill us]. CB asks us to take safety measures against a threat -men- that she won’t name, and at the same time treats men as an audience to appease, as if they would take note and change their behaviour accordingly. Tracy named that gaslighting because it’s acting as if two opposites (truth vs. omission/lie; threat vs. safety) were the same. Of course it’s not CB’s fault because she herself is victim of it.

So reformism defines as gaslighting because it acknowledges a threat -violence- and the need for it to stop, yet it never names the threat -men- and then requires us to RELY on that threat as a source of help. It requires us to resort to men as sensible beings who would stop being violent if told so, which causes the opposite of the aspired safety: renewed vulnerability to men’s violence. So it IS a mindfuck: we should see there’s a threat, but treat it as if it weren’t, then go back in harm’s way to try to plead with our rapists and murderers instead of getting AWAY from them. Resorting to men – policemen, lawmen, statesmen, whatevermen, to protect us from… men! It always leads to more abuse, not less. We are supposed to seek safety from abusers, and truth from lies. This is very deliberate, the very point is to prevent us from seeking safety where safety is, and from identifying men for what they are, so we never get away from men’s dominance.

Gaslighting is an abuse tactic of individual abusers against individual women. But all male abuse patterns work on the structural level, too. If we apply gaslighting to reformism – which men institute globally as a mode for liberation through state policies, daddy-funded NGOs, the UN, male-led activism etc – well that gives us, as Tracy mentioned, a campaign of gaslighting women at a global scale: therefore reformism is worldwide psychological abuse of women. The repetitive, circular nature of reformism, the erasure of the radfem alternative to reformism (liberation / separatism), the fact it’s always planned from within patriarchal institutions (or with their approval) and applied in ways that assault women, also defines it as brainwashing of women on a global scale: it’s the fabrication and implantation of a false reality into women’s minds on a mass scale – as with all other false feminisms.

This led me to the following insight: thinking about reformism as abuse by men on a collective level, it struck me that the cycles of abuse from relapse to outbursts of more explicit violence applied to the system too. Male abusers of women, especially husbands and boyfriends, never or rarely maintain a constant level of violence over time. There are ups and downs, there are phases, and these phases serve a purpose. After a certain time of ongoing overt violence, women inevitably begin to get a wake-up call. They reach a limit, I have to go now or I will die, I have nothing more to lose. This is a breaking point where the spell of fear or trauma-bonding is broken, where she has the potential to free herself. When men sense that this wake-up call is happening, that women are no longer responding with the usual terror and preparing to escape, they might increase with violent repression to put her back in line, OR they might shift tactic altogether and pretend to be nice for a while to revive her hopes that he will change, that he has finally stopped being violent. He may buy some flowers, say “romantic” things that he stopped saying a long time ago, say he’s sorry, allow her some leeway that he didn’t before, and keep a low profile for a little while.

The fact is that during this relapse phase he never really stops being violent, but the contrast is stark enough in comparison to the previous one to give the illusion to his victim that the violence has stopped, especially if she has been accustomed to much worse for a long time. This phase is crucial in that it enables the abuser to restructure his dominance over her, to reinstall her trauma-bonding and emotional dependence to him, her belief that he has changed for the better, to make sure she won’t escape again. He needs to regain his psychological hold over her. And once this control has been re-secured, he will then rise the bar of violence again progressively and insidiously enough that it won’t alarm her.

On a structural, global level, this is what reformism is about. It’s a phase of relapse between two phases of more overt violence and genocide of women. It’s men collectively pretending to have changed for the better by agreeing to superficial transformations of their system of domination – which contrast enough with the previous phase to give an illusion of a halt and freedom, even though the violence hasn’t stopped. It’s a crisis response to movements of liberation of women, to reinstall women’s collective trauma-bonding and emotional dependency to men. Indeed, it seems that women have never been so trauma-bonded to men collectively now than ever before we can remember.

If you look at the shifts more closely though, none of them pertain to an actual decrease of men’s violence against women – number of rapes, abuse by husbands, etc. The levels have probably never changed, and the power structures have remained completely unchanged too. What has changed is the number of token women in the patriarchal institution (Mary Daly calls this strategy “assimilationism”) and the number of women with token economic and civil rights (to have a bank account, to be salaried exploited, to vote, etc). Have these shifts freed women collectively from men? Nope, not in the slightest.

Historically, it fits, at least from a western-centric perspective, but as far as I can see, western treatment of women and genocide tactics in occupied territories mirrors and complements its own internal genocide of women. We have, from the 12th or 13th century up until the 19th century, a very long period of overt genocide of women by western men across the globe. It has never really stopped of course but at the time there was no illusion that male institutions and colonialists were and could be helpful to women. In Western countries, this wave of genocide was itself a reaction by the religious states to women fleeing men en masse and taking more and more importance in society to the extent that they threatened the monopoly of the states’ power. So what ensued was mass, organised slaughter of women to physically prevent them from gaining autonomy, and men’s global colonisation, resource pillage and genocide served to increase their institutional caste power over all women and reinforce the global rapeability of women with worldwide trafficking in women for prostitution.

What happened from the early 19th century onwards, is a vast and global movement of liberation and decolonisation of women from men in western and colonised countries alike, which continued in major ways until the end of the 20th century, and continues today too. But what has happened this time is that men caught women in the traps of assimilation to them and to their own anti-classist and anti-racist movements: into the trap of reforming men’s system. Men indeed shifted their institutions, their outside appearance and discourse to give the illusion of benevolence to women and shared interests in fighting ‘sexism’. Colonialists, capitalists, pornographers, pimps: they all sold their invasion, raping and killing of women as sexual liberation.

Time and again, woman liberationists in every place of the globe were lured back into male institutional control by being offered money and offices or positions by states and institutions such as the UN, European Union and their derivatives, in exchange of complying to male interventionism and control, and of focusing only on useless, exhausting legal change and tokenism, or ‘gender mainstreaming’ or whatever shit they invent. Women being sorely deprived of money and land, it wasn’t difficult to hurdle them back in with this carrot, or to use this as a way to divide and destroy the integrity of groups between those who refused to take the money and those who believed it would work despite the compromise to their autonomy. The irony today is that there are many woman-only so-called autonomous movements in western as well as non-western countries who’ve identified this male state / institutional takeover of feminism and refuse to have anything to do with them, but on the other hand are completely colonised by the male academic takeover of feminism with all this queer, postmodern, pro-trans and pro-prostitution bullshit. It really has been a takeover on all fronts.

Anyway, so what this presages, is that if we see reformism as an intermittent relapse phase, well that doesn’t look very good does it, it certainly means that there will be a progressive resurgence of overt violence soon. And I think it’s already happening really. It’s not my type to cast doom though, and the good news is that patriarchy fundamentally doesn’t change, so I really don’t think it’s cause for more alarm than usual. All times are good to free ourselves from men. We should do it now.

60 Responses to “In retrospect to the 85,000, reformism and other things”

  1. 1 Morag January 18, 2014 at 9:23 pm

    I’ve been reading your blog for several weeks now, and I have found here so much in the way of validation and (good, clearly written) explication concerning how women are groomed into heterosexuality and abusive relationships. And about the psychological and emotional pain that causes–especially when we’re only partially, dimly awake to it.

    So, I’ve meaning to leave a comment for a while now, and with this latest blog post about how they have besieged you, it’s most definitely time to tell you: I’m here, too! Listening, learning and thinking about the things you and your commenters write. Connecting it all with my own experiences and observations and, slowly, with this introspection, getting closer to seeing things as they are, instead of seeing things as most people say they are.

    “Receiving so many comments denying what I said one after the other reinforces my sense of isolation, of outlandishness, of being the only one who knows. It makes me doubt the reality of my perceptions, it makes me waver, it shakes my foundations for a bit.”

    Yes. That sense of isolation, outlandishness and doubt. What a hideous experience. I have that very experience when a friend simply brushes away some hard-earned, close-to-my-heart observation I’ve made as if it were too silly to take seriously for even a minute or two (this happened to me just the other day). That’s bad enough. But hundreds and hundreds of instances of not just dismissal, but hatred, threats and violence? It would be impossible not to waver, not to be deeply affected. But, as usual, we have consider how very close we are to the truth, when simply speaking it causes such outrageous, irrational and frightening displays of anger.

    I’m glad that you still feel strong, that you feel you have regained your senses after this mass assault from men and colonized women. But, I do want to say that I’m still very, very sorry for the effect their concentrated, orchestrated violence had on you.

  2. 2 witchwind January 18, 2014 at 9:49 pm

    Talking about reformist activism, I have witnessed so many women around me saying they wanted to quit feminism altogether as a result of burn out, abuse and disillusion from reformist activism. Almost every feminist I know has told me at some point “I need a break from activism”. And the combination of exhaustion with the lack of any clear positive results of this activism in our own lives and in the lives of other women, it really burns us out. This has already been said but it’s relevant here.

  3. 3 talkingtomyself16 January 18, 2014 at 10:43 pm

    I was once surprised by the males who follow my blog for goodness knows what reason. Your post gave me insight as to why they do. Btw I love your writing and hope these trolls don’t stop you.

  4. 4 witchwind January 18, 2014 at 10:49 pm

    I used to be really overwhelmed when one woman would just deny, brush away what I said or be impervious to any kind of feminism. I still find it unbearable nowadays but it doesn’t threaten my confidence in my perceptions so much as it used to. Over time I learn that my perceptions and intuitions never fail and that it’s fine to trust them. It’s not easy though and we remain vulnerable to any form of psychological violence and negationism. I’m honestly still scared of the effects of receiving those comments on me, and probably don’t even grasp the extent of it right now.

    The risks of blogging as a radfem definitely affects my real life choices too, in many ways. I take crazy measures I would never normally take as a non-blogger. It reduces a certain amount of freedom.

    Just as of 30 minutes ago I trashed another trolling comment saying something to the likes of ‘you hate men, it’s good that you self doubt blablabla’. Well I knew some male trolls would attack me on that specific point and it didn’t fail. And it still shook me. I’m really pissed off right now for all of this. Blogging as a radfem is great and I love the writing and discussions and until the tens of thousands of hits came it was fine. But getting this shit is dangerous, without mentioning the potential threat of harassment in real life, as many radfem bloggers have been subjected to in the past.

    I don’t want to deal with this on my own. I’m sick of receiving these toxic messages and being the only one to have to deal with this. I know I’m not the only blogger to have this problem and every single female blogger especially radfem blogger, receives these kinds of messages and has to bear the burden of reading and modding the toxic trolls all by her own. This is not what I’m blogging for. Fucking men I’m so sick of them. I feel like every single one of my words is now being stripped down and surveyed by them, that I have to watch what I say – far more so than before. I’ve already started to censor my thoughts, to think about how some will react before I write something, which I didn’t as much before, and which is why I allowed myself to talk so openly. This is really shit. Sorry i don’t usually rant on my blog but i feel like this is the appropriate post & discussion to rant about it.

  5. 5 witchwind January 18, 2014 at 11:04 pm

    I will continue writing as long as safety permits – emotional, physical safety, in all senses. Even if I have to stop blogging for some reason I will probably continue writing in one form or another. What I fear most is losing my psychological integrity and being brainwashed again, therefore this is what I value and protect most, with my own physical safety and integrity too of course. If I see that it has too much a toll on me then I will probably start by blocking comments, and allowing discussions but on a different space or private space. Who knows what solutions can be found. I don’t see the point of modding comments for the sake of the safety and woman-onlyness of discussions when one woman still has to read and put up with those toxic comments. No women should have to put up with that at all, there shouldn’t be any sacrifice for these woman only, toxic free discussions to be held.

    Imagine we organise a discussion group IRL, and for that discussion to take place, one woman, always the same, has to stand outside of the meeting space to hold back all aggressive and invasive males so they don’t intrude in the meeting. At every meeting, she gets to hear all their vile insults, their manipulations, their mindfucks and reversals. And she’s alone in doing that.

  6. 6 Dar Guerra January 19, 2014 at 12:04 am

    Congratulations on your courageous truth-telling, Witchwind! I too have been reading you and appreciating your insights.

    I regret that such truths cannot be spoken without obsessive MRA surveillors of women bloggers alerting their troops to commence mass pileons of male hatred. The comments are assaultive and as you say hard to handle as dozens turn to hundreds and thousands. Then their media outlets start up. It’s all meant to exhaust and silence and control through fear as usual. It’s the only collective “activism” MRAs do well – cyberbullying.

    The good news is that, as hard as it is to deal with, your words HAVE made it out there for women to read and judge for themselves. Each time I see this happen it feels like a small miracle. And each MRA click brings up your blog in search results, so they are supporting your outreach!

    Let’s share names of threateners and publicize those names to protect other women. Let’s have a friend mod the onslaught of comments – it’s EZ to mod them if they’re not aimed at you. Let’s share technical information and take all precautions to remain anonymous – it’s our best protection. Let’s always remember not to let ourselves be derailed. These men are trying to insist on getting our attention away from where our thoughts lead. But even pounding on one blogger verbally 85,000 times won’t derail us!

    In general I find it works best to simply report on their provocations, defamations, ad feminems, hate, and verbal assaults once for informational purposes for other women bloggers, then Get Back to Bidness and ignore them thereafter.

    We are freer online, speaking anonymously, than we have ever been. And the MRAs can’t do a damn thing to take away that freedom if we just keep on keeping on.

  7. 7 GallusMag January 19, 2014 at 12:25 am

    Doing this work really takes a toll. It is brutal.

  8. 8 WordWoman January 19, 2014 at 3:35 am

    Damn, that is a horrific image! Of the one woman withstanding all that. {{{{{{{{{Witchwind}}}}}}}}}

    I had no idea there were so many. Is it some kind of computer loop thing or are they actually 85,000 different people? If so, that is staggering. It also indicates that you touched a nerve. Bullying at it’s most obvious.

    This post presents a key issue. How do we learn to withstand gaslighting? How do we help others withstand it? I don’t have the answer but it is important that we ask that question and begin to figure it out. Individually, and maybe together.

    I love your point that moving away from men is moving toward safety. Statistics of all sorts prove your point. Keep moving forward and never look back! That’s the message.

    For some reason, I’m reminded of Mary Daly who seemed to get more and more centered on women and on being a woman. She started out less radical, if you read her books. She just shut them out of her mind and her life. She seemed happy. How to do this online is a different kettle of fish, obviously. Maybe we can be inside one another’s minds in a good way, I mean as women together.

    Thank you for this blog. I’ve loved what I’ve read here.

  9. 9 Primrose January 19, 2014 at 6:38 am

    Hi Witchwind, I just want to let you know that what you are doing is not in vain and that you are not alone. I too, have trouble trusting my perceptions and it’s reading radfem blogs like these that keep me sane, myself being a teenage girl in today’s male supremacist society.

    Please keep writing! Your work is really excellent. Men and their handmaidens.. it just show what to expect, doesn’t it? It’s the same old thing. So, remember, resist; do not comply!

    Goddess bless.

  10. 10 witchwind January 19, 2014 at 8:52 am

    It is a horrible image Word Woman! It’s not just me though, it’s every radfem blogger who’s had a lot of traffic on her blog at some point, or continuously: FCM, Gallus, Davina Squirrell, Cherryblossom, many other women before them or at the same time. As Gallus says it takes a toll, it’s brutal. But it’s become so frequent and expected that it’s viewed as a normal part of blogging as a radfem, a chore you have to put up with, but it so isn’t normal and we so shouldn’t have to put up with this AT ALL. I don’t think it’s possible to withstand gaslighting, brainwashing or any kind of psychological assault. If you’re punched in the face, you’re punched in the face, you can’t withstand it while it’s happening. And unlike physical violence, with psychological violence you can’t dodge the attack, duck down and avoid the blow. As soon as you hear or read it the attack is there. The only way you can protect yourself is by not being assaulted at all, that is by getting completely out of reach of the assaulters / abusers. I’ll see if it’s possible with wordpress to block comments from everyone except known commenters.

  11. 11 witchwind January 19, 2014 at 11:28 am

    What I mean is that we would never accept such a configuration in real life, yet in blogger life it’s accepted as a normal downside of blogging, something we have to grudgingly put up with for the sake of online radical feminism. Well, no thanks, I’m not going to put up with that and I’ll try to find a solution so I don’t have to read their toxic shit every time I check comments. Blogging should be as refreshing as having a walk in the grassy, flowery sunshine. Just now another asshole commented saying “threat threat threat threat mwuhahahaha”, something like that. Go to hell, asshole. Harassment is so funny ha ha ha.

  12. 12 witchwind January 19, 2014 at 11:50 am

    And yes, I love Mary Daly for her wonderful woman-centredness and the sense of magic, energy and warmth she conveys in all her writing, it wraps you around like a warm blanket. Even when I don’t read her I like to have her books near me like a shield against evil male eyes.

  13. 13 witchwind January 19, 2014 at 1:12 pm

    Anyway, the main part of the post was on reformism and how it’s one phase of a larger, global-scale abuse cycle. If men always ‘act nice’ for bad reasons on an individual level (ie to obtain something from us, either intercourse, services or submission), well there’s no reason this should not be the case on the structural level, because men are the same collectively as they are individually, except worse. Anyway this only further suggests that the only solution is WITHOUT men, not WITH them. That is, to get away from them completely. To leave our husbands, boyfriends, male friends, bosses and sons whenever we can. And get rid of our rapists and abusers.

  14. 14 branjor January 19, 2014 at 2:20 pm

    Reading about the awful assaults that you endure, witchwind, I think there has to be a way to turn the negative energy, the aggression of the attacks, back onto the perpetrators. That is, make it boomerang back onto them so that it hurts them more than it hurts us and/or doesn’t touch us at all and thus teaches them not to do it if they don’t want to suffer the consequences. Anyway, not exactly sure what to suggest to accomplish this right now, but I do know that I have been remarkably able not to listen to men in my life, and to reject the conclusions they have wanted me to make even before making them. We need to think on this more, maybe institute some of the suggestions of Dar Guerra above.
    Anyway, thank you for your writing. I too love your blog for daring to talk about the truths we as women have been forced to live and labor under in our lives, and for keeping me sane. I find it a great loss to no longer have FCM, Davina and Cherry’s blogs (thanks for leaving them archivally in place) , as it would be a great loss to no longer have yours or Gallus Mag’s.

  15. 15 blackmetalvalkyrie January 19, 2014 at 2:56 pm

    Great post. Sorry those pricks were harassing you. Maybe a trusted friend or multiple friends who are RF bloggers can delete the trolling?

    Male terrorism never stops because they are incomplete beings. The trannies are coming to bring the next burning times. As Lucky Nickel said “The Burning Times are here again. This time men are wearing skirts instead of bibles to conduct their witch hunts on women.”

    The mindbindings of ‘choice’ feminism a prevalent form of trauma bonding these days. There was a time when the average woman acknowledged piv sucks and talked to her friends about not liking it. Now women are honestly taught to believe the outrageous lie that heterosexuality is normal and inborn…unless you’re gay then you’re ‘born this way’ or in my dad’s words ‘genetic freaks’.

    You could make you blog password protected, I know a lot of RF bloggers had to end up doing that. You can also turn the commenting off which is what I would do if I started RF blogging because of these waste of airs who feel entitled to comment but you can only do that for future posts on wordpress.

    I don’t think you are ranting. I think that word is always used against women to trivialize our voice which is actually much more insightful and truthful. Almost everything men say is ranting. The most famous ‘speeches’ by men were rants. You are enlightening, sharing your wisdom, connecting, taking your rightful place in the foreground. Men are shit but you are strong sis! -hugs-

  16. 16 blackmetalvalkyrie January 19, 2014 at 2:57 pm

    You are courageous to maintain radical feminist speaking space. It is extremely valuable and rare.

  17. 17 WordWoman January 19, 2014 at 3:03 pm

    “So reformism defines as gaslighting because it acknowledges a threat -violence- and the need for it to stop, yet it never names the threat -men- and then requires us to RELY on that threat as a source of help. ”

    This is such an important point. If you look at many stories and media, particularly the ones aimed at women, there is usually the portrayal of a good man/bad man dichotomy. A woman escapes the bad man and ends up with the good one. Thus, she is saved. This is a salvation narrative that becomes lodged deep in our psyches. Consciously or unconsciously a women then seeks the good man who will save her. Incidentally, living out this narrative successfully will make a woman “whole,” since we are only partial beings without them. This is the making good “choices” part of the toxic narrative. This is a woman who “succeeds”.

    If a woman “fails” and ends up with a bad man there is a lot of shame. Victims of abuse are shamed by themselves and others and that is part of it, that it’s all her fault. Why couldn’t she reform him? It’s her defectiveness. Or reform the society and men in it. While the whole thing crumbles. Main rule: Never name the agent.

    But how to tell the good ones from the bad? This part is particularly gaslight making, since there are no good vs bad, only these toxic narratives that there are. Making the bad into the good is the narrative that the reformists rely on. The “good” never pans out. Crazy-making, gaslight-making.

    You point out that this is based in fear. Naming the source of the fear is too frightening for most. Instead we succumb to the narrative and are in greater danger.

  18. 18 WordWoman January 19, 2014 at 3:08 pm

    I wanted to point out that while we are often fed this toxic narrative as relating to individuals, you can substitute any system for the individual. If only a woman (or a group of women) can reform the ____ system, win against the bad part of the system and embrace the good. It always backfires and the worst sociopaths take advantage of idealistic and gullible people who buy it. Women, of course, are socialized to be idealistic and gullible. It’s a part of reformism.

  19. 19 Tracy25 January 19, 2014 at 4:36 pm

    This is an interesting Post and an interesting Topic. Meta. Men surveil Radical Feminists and subject radical feminists to Two Minutes Hate. These are indicators of an Orwellian totalitarian regime and surely these men have all read Orwell being Modern and Literate and all. And Political Minded. But Women are not supposed to make these Connections and use it as Evidence that we are Oppressed. More gaslighting.

    And knowing what Men do to women they have labeled “Crazy” including Institutionalization, Torture and yes Burning at the Stake, publicly or privately branding women Crazy is an implicit Rape and Death threat. But to acknowledge the Truth of that is only more evidence of your Insanity because they deny it, and they are the ones who get to Admit and Deny these things, thereby creating Reality, not us. More gaslighting.

    Making these points publicly is an Interesting Exercise. You are of course Right, and you are describing Reality as it is never described anywhere else. Accurately, in other words. But there is Backlash, and as you note elsewhere, the point of Radical Feminism is not to make Political Points but to Identify the Harms of Men and Patriarchy so that we can escape them. So really, once you have Experienced something like this, and recognized the Cause and Effect here (not that it is your Fault, this is not the Point) the Radical Feminist response would be to remove yourself from the harm somehow. This might look like Letting Men Win and that you have Left Blogging. More gaslighting, and also a tortuous Double Bind.

    This makes me think to Older Women and what they are showing us by their Actions and their Response to a lifetime of living in and surviving Patriarchy and male abuse. Surviving it is Key — they are showing us how it’s done. They knit. They Caretake Animals and Bake Bread. They play cards or do puzzles. Not all of them of course, but Let us not invisiblize the ones who do and refuse to hear their message. They Isolate or separate, in other words. This also makes me think of Female Shut Ins or so called Agoraphobics. Is this not a Logical response to male abuse which is all Pervasive and completely Normalized? Note of course that all the Women who fit the descriptions in this paragraph are subject to Patriarchal Medical controls (medicine) as well as being Persecuted as Witches. These women specifically. They are doing the One Thing that women are not supposed to do, which is to separate from Men and Maleness. I am not saying they are Radical Feminists in theory, but perhaps in Action.

    The Crazy Old Lady Down the Street (and Witches) have also been blamed for disappearing and harming Children over the years, which is a euphemism for Male Abuse and a scapegoat for Men who are surely doing these things and avoiding Blame. Just like the Boogey Man, and the Monster Under the Bed, and the Dread Stranger we are not supposed to take candy from — these are all euphemisms for men’s known propensity, Globally and across time, to abduct, rape and murder Children. However one does wonder whether Older Women who have seen it all and who are responding by Removing themselves from Harm (the best they can) are perhaps Culling male children, in some tiny fraction of the numbers that Violent Males are torturing and murdering both Girls and Boys. It would make perfect sense if they were, and they would be doing us all a Huge Favor. It is something to think about.

  20. 20 Sargasso Sea January 19, 2014 at 4:49 pm

    It really is quite clear that reformism is the culturally sanctioned psychological abuse of women and girls on a global scale. What makes it even more insidious is that it is primarily women ‘catapulting the propaganda’.

    And, yes, to name the agent is terribly frightening. Because when a woman comes to the realization that men are violent and that they have not stopped being violent and that they are not going to stop being violent she is suddenly aware that the is nothing she can do about it – that she has absolutely zero power or control to protect herself. Not only that but that all of the ‘work’ she has done and all of the careful ‘choosing’ of the men in her life and the raising of ‘good’ sons has a been a LIE. All of it.

    It is difficult to find a way to live a joyful life accepting this truth, but I’d rather live this way than the other.

  21. 21 Tracy25 January 19, 2014 at 5:51 pm

    Yes, all the points in this Post are True, Clear and Self Evident. Or, they seem so Imminently Reasonable once they are pointed out that One Wonders why One did not see it the whole time? This is rather Universally women’s Experience with Radical Feminism, that it is like Coming Home, that it resounds on a Deep Level and we know it is the Truth. This is evidence of our Brainwashing and how Reality is deliberately hidden from us, but also how Close the Unvarnished Truth is to the surface. The Illusion is precarious and flimsy, and takes a Tremendous amount of Violence to maintain. This is terrifying but gives Hope at the same time, does it Not? It means that it is Possible to wake up. We may be killed for it, but it is Possible. Possibilities, for women, are very limited in general. Increased Possibility seems as if it has Revolutionary Potential. It certainly has Revolutionary Intent behind it for the women who are Revealing the truth and Stripping the lies.

    Regarding the Witch Burnings. This is the most Freeing thing I have read all day, sure I just Happened to be the One to Write It, but I did not come to this Conclusion alone. I suspect that Some of the Women who were Burnt as Witches had been Culling male children as a Matter of Survival, and as a Gift to the Next generation of Women. What is Freeing about this is that it is a likely Truth that has been Set Free for us to Consider. That some tiny fraction of the Women who were Tortured and Murdered during the Burning Times had done something to deserve it, if only in a Patriarchal Sense and not a Natural sense obviously, only seems Fair does it not? There are many Other Places this Truth may lead. We know women around the World are Culling male children now and considering it and discussing it, this has been reported in the Mainstream Press more than once. Does this mean another Burning Times is coming? Is this what Started It the First Time Around? If so, what does this Mean for us? Andrea Dworkin predicted that another Holocaust was coming for Women. This may be the rumblings of it. We would be foolish not to Consider what this means and to place all of these Truths in Context, and that includes everything that has happened Before. Not an easy thing to do when Men and Colluding Women (including alleged Radical Feminists) have long Conspired to Erase our history and our Work.

  22. 22 Dar Guerra January 19, 2014 at 6:31 pm

    Tracy25, Why do you write in Caps in a Clumsy Imitation of Mary Daly? And introduce violence into this discussion? I sense that your comments are derailing.

  23. 23 Tracy25 January 19, 2014 at 7:58 pm

    What an Utter Reading Comprehension Failure and reversal Dar Guerra, seeing as how Violence is the entire Point of this entire Post.

    Or does Violence only register as Violence when we are talking about Women invoking our Natural right to utilize Culling — a Universally accepted practice against Overpopulations of various Organisms by the way — against Males in Self Defense. You sound like an MRA. And you are Thought Terminating women and Derailing by repeating MRAs reversals and lies about us.

  24. 24 Sargasso Sea January 19, 2014 at 8:21 pm

    @ Dar Guerra

    The entire point of this (these) discussions has been violence – male violence against women, children and everybody and thing else on this planet. We have also touched upon the ‘natural right’ of women to defend/protect themselves and others from this violence.

    The reformist reversal is to say that women’s defense of life is “violence” if it includes harming men or boys in any way.

    I do not find Tracy’s comment derailing at all.

  25. 25 Tracy25 January 19, 2014 at 8:25 pm

    Honestly. It is a bit stunning that Anyone could read the Above Post, and understand that this is the Context within which this Discussion exists and is happening, and to have the same person identify Tracy25’s comments as The First, Original and Only noticeable or Observable references to so called Violence anywhere on this page. This is part of what we are Talking about here isn’t it? How Male Violence Against Women is completely Normalized so that even self-identified Feminists do not see it, or Refuse to Name it. How we are Swimming In It as well as how it Works on Us, even when we cannot know what the Effects will be and we need not Consent to being Affected. Dar Guerra has been blinded and thought terminated, and now cannot See male violence against women as Violence at all. Again, this is very much to the Point, where Witch Wind has said that We cannot Control our response to these exposures, that our Response and how it Affects Us is not under our control and cannot be Mitigated, and that it is Naive to think otherwise. That removing ourselves from and Preventing these exposures is literally our Only Defense. Dar Guerra has proven Witch Wind’s point.

  26. 26 WordWoman January 19, 2014 at 8:34 pm

    Tracy, I don’t agree about the older women culling males. Highly unlikely. Older women just want to be left alone. I remember the older women in my family and they really did just want to bake, play cards, have lunches, and shop with each other. Most of their husbands were gone, dying of natural causes.

    Culling males, nah! Why do I think this? Well, these older women often favored the younger boys in our family and when a woman got divorced, there was blame. It was all on her head unless he was a “wife-beater” in the extreme. But they really didn’t want much to do with men. They didn’t really socialize with their husbands as a couple much, either. If their husbands were still alive, they often expressed relief at being done doing PIV duty. They just saw it as bearing children.

    Women wanting to cull men are likely to be younger and abused. Culling their abusers to get away from them. Well, self-defense, really.

    I think that’s based in a stereotype and fears that men have, though. It’s a kind of paranoia that comes with abusing women for a lifetime. I think that’s why the women were declared witches and murdered. Older women, especially widows, tend to be more outspoken and not beholden to men. Men then get these paranoid thoughts about any woman who shows a bit of power. But really, these women just want to be left alone.

    Killing someone exacts a severe emotional price. It is not worth it. But trying to bear only girl children is another way of culling. Kind of the reverse of countries like China. Culling them in that way may make sense since an overabundance of men makes a much worse society. You don’t even have to be a feminist to see this and to think it makes sense. I think it seems like common sense to many women in the world.

  27. 27 blackmetalvalkyrie January 19, 2014 at 8:39 pm

    Maybe English is not her first language? I do think Tracy is capitalizing the wrong words. I like it when RFs capitalize some concepts for effect but the words you capitalize must make sense. “One Wonders”, “Conspire” and “Erase” should not be capitalized. You should be capitalizing phrases that speak of female truth and reality and lower case the descriptions of male idiocy and oppression of women. Men are already put a pedestal for being less than decent human beings and their violence is glorified so we should not perpetrate that.

    As a poor woman paternalistic welfare (government) is the male institution I am forced to deal with for my survival but I am *lucky* enough I live in a developed country where being single is relatively acceptable (because there is such strong brainwashing they don’t care if a few women don’t do it).

    Men created money to put women in poverty and suffering and keep women dependent on men but I know an upper middle class woman who has a husband who is a control freak and she shares a bank account with him and has to ask for any little amount of money out of it despite that she works.

    I would rather be poor and struggling than be raped and dead from male intimate partner violence, the biggest threat to women all over the world. I also know many upper middle class women and girls with eating disorders. My family has a lot of middle class friends so I grew up knowing a lot of them personally and as long as you are free of living with men then you are not free… even if your family has some dough.

    If I was in an undeveloped nation and had RF consciousness it would probably be easier to cull male babies without the bleeding hearts of the goverMANt crying about a little dick that never had a chance to rape so that would be a big action towards making female life better there.

    I hear liberal criticisms of RFism as being a “white middle class movement” (not that they know shit about our movement) as pure idiocy and ignorance as I talk to women in developing countries who are RF too. Also the non-logic of libros that white women=bad and stupid + useless movement is annoying because I don’t believe in white women being blamed for colonialism like the libros do. At least we respect all women as full human beings while they just take token of every minority and think that doesn’t make them woman hating losers.

    My friend in India tells me single women are actively targeted by men and men are suspicious of them. I am happy I found RFism while young before I got sucked into the PIV and relationships with men bullshit. I know a few other young women with RF consciousness and I think that is a cause for real hope that RF blogs on the internet are making a real difference.

    It does instil terror in my heart at the thought of another Women’s Holocaust but truly it has always been one globally. Men’s terrorism has never stopped. It has been constant through male existence. They EVIDENTLY cannot and will not stop or they would. Women need to understand this! Avoiding men and male institutions as much as possible SAVES WOMEN’S LIVES.

    It achieves much more than any protesting would. In fact female protestors are often targeted even when their goals are far from radical. If you can even get enough women to come together to protest bc we are busy surviving.

    Don’t get me started on that femen thing. How awful it would be to be bare breasted in public with pornsick perverted deviant freak men watching and Goddess knows what else. Damn those cretins.

    I find the actions of femen and other reformist protestors very masochistic and masochism is anti-antithetical to female survival so their self identification as feminists is laughable. Sad we live in a culture that praises and enforces it. Not that I keep up with femen much but what I have seen makes me shiver.

    It is completely true that women are socialized to be idealistic and gullible. Which is an ironic reversal of our true nature because our brains are more well connected between the 2 hemispheres.

    We are naturally more connected to all Life and more spiritually aware. I don’t understand friends of mine that find MRA bullshit and pomo shit funny. I wish I could laugh at it but I am only filled with coldness at this concerted attack on all women.

    Okay maybe falling into the abyss of pomo tumblr terms like demisexual and pansexual is a bit funny ;). “Libertarian feminist” and “socialist feminist” are pretty stupid too.

  28. 28 blackmetalvalkyrie January 19, 2014 at 8:46 pm

    I think feces are a good analogy to how to respond to and view men. Of course shit stinks, that’s its nature. Of course men say and do retarded, senseless and sadistic things- that’s their nature. I don’t get personally offended by shit, I just avoid it. Same with men. Whatever you do, do not put shit/men in or near your vagina! I definitely won’t be cleaning up their mess though.

    Maybe I have to learn to laugh at these narcissistic unnatural cretins, I don’t know.

  29. 29 Monique January 20, 2014 at 12:03 am

    Hello, I’m not particularly knowledgeable regarding wordpress but in the past I would frequently visit the feminist blog I Blame The Patriarchy. To my understanding the blogger collected a variety of buzz words that came about most frequently from instigators, trolls, and supposedly misguided anti-feminists. I’m not sure how it worked but I recall some occasional umbrage courtesy of regulars from her comment section. There were complaints here and there concerning their comments not making it through her smamulator (I think this is what it was called) which was basically a filter to block the toxic hate speech from making it onto the blog.
    I don’t know if this will help at all but I was under the impression that the ‘spamulator’ or filter made it easier on the blogger to do away with the waste. I could be wrong but I hope I’m not. Still, if I am it was just a suggestion. I love your writing and your ability to tell the truth in the most affirming and thought provoking ways.

    I would hate to see you stop like FCM (who certainly paid her dues and was a major contributor to online radfem truth telling) or have to password protect like some of my other favorite radfems, though as a sister I completely understand and would rather your psychological as well as physical well being put first. Because no matter how many coping mechanisms or defenses one has learned over time, they still can’t keep the poison (in the from of head trips) from setting in, I think a lot of us are in denial about this fact. Anyway, I truly enjoy this place and hope to contribute more to the conversation next time I post.

  30. 30 Beatrice January 20, 2014 at 12:12 am

    I found this blog som time ago and I want to tell you that it has really changed my life. You have helped me get free from men and realizing what harm they have done to me. Men will always deny these things, because what you are writing is not about them. Everything is about them in this world, that is why they are confident that this violence is not real. For me on the other hand, everything you write makes perfect sense, you are describing my reality.

    Finding you is one of the best things that have ever happened to me. When it is hard to resist men’s lies and colonization I can always read you words that is confirming my feelings, and feel confident in my choices regarding men.

    The work you do is so important, I want you to know that. This is the only place where I and probably many other women feel understood.

  31. 31 WordWoman January 20, 2014 at 3:34 pm

    Blackmetalvalkyrie, excellent point about money and violence. Men have fetish about money, just like they do about other things. But more than that, too. Money becomes the rationale for the violent destruction of all things natural. Look at any environmental disaster and you will find money used as the rationale. It is just an extension of the violence. It gives the man who has it free rein to despoil women and the earth. They say to “follow the money” if there is something untoward that you do not understand. That’s the way to uncover it.

    Many women who are middle class and above that class, or who aspire to that class buy into the gaslighting even more. Money is a part of that gaslighting. So money can be the rationale for enslaving women, for an oil spill or a chemical leak or poisoning the water or killing off the oceans. WTF? Does that make any sense? It’s all just paper or digits in a computer. Because men are behind it, with their violence. That is what it is. Violence compressed into paper/digits in a computer.

  32. 32 WordWoman January 20, 2014 at 3:52 pm

    I wanted to add that the women who buy into the money trip are just trying to escape the violence of men. Money is seen as security. So of course women will want it on that basis. No blame toward these or any other women, but also calling it like it is. Saying it’s important to wake up from the bad gaslighting experience. Saying that’s not the way to go, but not blaming the victims of it.

    Like the older women I remember from childhood that I mentioned in the earlier comment. They spent time shopping and fixing up their houses, houses that weren’t rich and barely middle class. But they saw it as security. These women just wanted to be left alone and be secure. I think they also wanted the company of other women. Really, they had fun together. Women naturally connect with one another.

    Unlike the grumpy and sometimes toxic old men I remember who no longer had access to money through jobs and became more and more constricted as the women expanded. Of course, the rich older men do the most harm through considerable violence. Often by employing the violence of other men and pandering to it. It’s an evil game. Gaslighting as “the way things are” because of money.

  33. 33 witchwind January 20, 2014 at 6:38 pm

    In my paragraphs on reformism I discussed causes of men’s last several century-long wave of genocide, and my knowledge is that women were fleeing men, creating autonomous and woman-only communities everywhere, gaining a lot of legitimacy in many spheres to the extent that they were often the only professionals that people relied on, especially the poor and rural people (women were herbalists, medics, writers, editors, artisans and builders, artists, musicians, spiritual leaders, scientists etc.). This probably coincides with a resurgence of pagan religions and communities which were likely to be led by women or in which women had a prominent role. In other words women threatened men’s centralised authority and were gaining too much power and credence in society for men’s liking. Janice Raymond, Mary Daly, and other women such as the writer of the Caliban and the witch have written about this.

    Anyway, Tracy responded to that, saying that one reason why they might have slaughtered women so madly and brutally for so long is that some women, (old? Young? Who knows) may have effectively culled young boys for women’s good. And I think that’s a very good point, because it’s perfectly plausible that some women did that, it’s very likely some women have always done that at all times and still do, especially very early in humanity before men progressively took over and installed their totalitarian dominance over women.

    Now there are several points to bear in mind wrt to children: children, especially girls and especially infant girls, have always been treated by men as property of the father/slave owner, who had right of life and death over them, and very often used it. Men have always been the abductors, rapists and killers of children and women and this is what they systematically do to us when they take control of the “family”. Abducting, raping and killing women, girls and their offspring is the very means through which they take control of us and enforce patriarchy. This is what makes them so dangerous in the first place. This is what patriarchy is all about. children’s (girls) property status persists in much more blatant forms than for women from a legal pov, since women were legally freed of property status in many countries before children had any rights, although part of women’s liberation movement was to prevent men from raping girls.

    Since until very recent shifts in some countries, married, abducted women’s only function was to give birth to children continually until their death (or till menopause if they survived until then) and women would very often have 5, 8, 12 and + children. So it was very common for a number of children never to make it up to adulthood, mostly because of the gruelling conditions men would put women and their children in, but also because women would have to kill some of the infants if she couldn’t take care of them if there were too many. This was very common and killing infants was considered normal for a long time apparently, almost as a post-birth abortion if she didn’t have the means to perform abortion on herself during pregnancy. Infants were considered as dirt by male authorities and even thought to have no consciousness and feelings, just like animals, who could (and should) be beaten and it wouldn’t do anything to them, it would be for their own good. In many countries, crying of children is considered normal and not a sign that something’s wrong or she needs something. Not so long ago, new-born infants would be operated even at open heart without any anaesthesia in hospitals because they are assumed not to feel pain. Even today, newborn babies may be slapped, hit as a way to wake them up or something at birth, and male medics will prod thermometers in their anus supposedly to measure their temperature and this is considered normal. Anyway the list of male abuse and contempt of children is endless, this just scratches the surface.

    So what I’m saying is that women, under patriarchy, have always had to either abort or kill infants regardless of sex because of all the unwanted pregnancies caused by rapes – on top of men constantly killing and raping children, specifically girls, as part of their pater familias right and absolutist rule, and on top of men killing female infants as part of a genocide strategy. So killing and abducting CHILDREN, especially girls, never was a big deal for men, cause that’s what they do to maintain power over. What must have happened is that a tiny minority of women must have targeted only BOYS for culling reasons, as a feminist action. Not that men cared about the loss of boys either, because men will kill and sexually assault boys too, but what it meant is that here women were resisting men’s dominance and taking direct action against it. It meant that these women had understood EXACTLY what men were, and they understood EXACTLY what needed to be done to reduce male violence. And they were a threat to patriarchy, to male rule, probably the biggest one of all.

  34. 34 witchwind January 20, 2014 at 6:44 pm

    @ WordWoman, interesting about the old vs.young. I guess if old women were culling, it would make sense that they would target boys instead of grown men because they wouldn’t need so much effort. And I guess boys and girls must have been given more frequently to the elderly, widowed women of the family who were freed of their duties (slavery) to their husbands. Anyway these are suppositions, but it wold be interesting to find historic evidence on this.

    And indeed, women have always killed their abusers as a way to free themselves from them. I think it was a Greyhorse or Greysomething who commented at FCM’s, pointing at that since the opening of women’s refuges, the deaths of abusers has decreased, because they would obviously rather flee than have to kill their abuser.

  35. 35 WordWoman January 20, 2014 at 7:31 pm

    Yes, Witchwind, I agree about women having to kill babies in some conditions, when the children would not survive, but older children would, for instance. But my gut tells me that this is one of the things that is a basic difference between men and women. Men seem to kill naturally, like being warlike, etc. Women kill in self defense. Look at the way men who “identify as women” behave, like those constantly reported on GT’s website. Their killing statistics stay the same or even increase. Compare them to the statistics for women. In fact, this is one of the things that convinced me of that difference.

    I think that killing, for women is based in survival of themselves or their children. But also, I don’t see women as naturally violent and killers. Plus, there is a price to pay for killing. Perhaps the price is beyond mental anguish. Perhaps it is a violation of the connection we have to the earth in some way. Certainly witnessing violence all the time does this. Trauma bonding does this.

    Of course, if men have created cultures where life is cheap, women get influenced by that. It’s just hard to imagine women killing in the way men do. I’m not saying that women can’t kill or that there aren’t situations where it is not right to do so. I’m certainly not against self-defense.

    But these actions are dire and there is a price to pay. That’s my point. I think that separatism has a point beyond safety (though that is more than enough to justify it). The point is to find out what it means to be ourselves beyond the conditioning, beyond the trauma bonding. It means bonding with the earth and with other women. Committing murder is more likely to separate us from what I can tell. Plus, men always have used the idea of an enemy to commit killing. I don’t want women to fall into that trap. I do want us to recognize the danger and act in self-defense. That’s not in question.

  36. 36 WordWoman January 20, 2014 at 7:55 pm

    Witchwind, I see all the things you say about men’s treatment of women and children and appreciate your articulation of it. It is undeniable that they are different from women in some fundamental way that women can’t fathom. This inability to fathom it by women is part of what makes so many of us overlook it. Plus, the history that Raymond, Daly, and others document is incredibly important. Hard to read at first and then eye-opening for me.

    How do we separate and be as safe as possible? Certainly learning self-defense is part of it. In the earlier feminist movement lots of women were learning self-defense. From what I can see that all was replaced by the idea that “no means no” by the funfems. A big switcharoo. Interesting as more recent history of deflecting women’s ability to defend. Plus all the crazy shoes that came into fashion since then. Men do not want women to learn self defense or even hear of the idea of it. Thank you for discussing this on your blog.

  37. 37 Sargasso Sea January 20, 2014 at 11:07 pm

    The talk of women culling children in general has me thinking about the mythology of the ‘witch’ of Hansel and Gretel. In all likelihood that witch was not a monstrous, luring, child-eating woman but a woman who had the knowledge of humane euthanasia who would be ‘given’ the child(ren) to spare them from a painful/suffering death from starvation, disease or rape. It is not a stretch to think that mothers knew where these women lived and would leave the children nearby knowing that the ‘witch’ would understand and do what was best.

    And yes, I agree that men saw this as an affront on their right to their property and an affront to their right to have ownership over that suffering – what better way for a man to relieve his own suffering than to inflict it upon others?

  38. 38 witchwind January 21, 2014 at 3:02 pm

    That’s interesting. I think both are possible: either reversal or distortion of truth, that some women did take upon the task of culling / euthanising children for the good of women, although here specifically I was talking about culling boys for reasons of female survivalism from male violence, which is different from women having to kill / abort the children resulting from the constant marital rapes, regardless of sex.

    For those who might wonder why we’re taking up this discussion on culling in particular, it started off here

    @ Wordwoman, that’s an important question, what it would do to us if we killed for defense reasons. Culling is in itself defense, and the only reason women don’t do it more readily is because of fear of consequences: women know that they would be sentenced to prison and severely punished, tortured and killed themselves for doing so. And also fear being traumatised by it. One element that might cause trauma is the guilt that we are trained to feel for defending ourselves, to the extent that we fear harming even our oppressors and torturers for our own survival, that we feel empathy towards our oppressors, mostly because of trauma bonding. Trauma comes from fear of dying and fear of reprisal, and in the case of killing, i suppose also empathy to the person or being we’re killing or feeling that it isn’t right. for instance, to eat, we have to kill a living being. It may be hard, and it makes me feel sad to kill even vegetables, plants and trees because they are very sensitive and conscious beings, but it’s not traumatic because you know it’s necessary for survival, that it’s right. You have to grieve the death of that living being you’re going to use for food or material for your home or whatever. Killing life is part of life. But we’re only supposed to kill just as much as we need, never more, and never for leisure. We do it as little as possible, and preserve and respect life and being’s freedom as much as possible. We treat them as if they were our friends, as persons. We minimise the harm to the animals and living beings in every possible way. Men do the exact opposite, the maximise harm and killing of living beings in every possible way.

    So really I do think that it’s possible to kill an abuser / rapist without it being traumatising, especially if it’s in condition in which our lives aren’t at risk (if we risk our lives doing so, well then it will be traumatic for sure). It would be all the less traumatic that unlike with non-human beings, I won’t even grieve the death of a male rapist, I won’t feel sorry for him, I won’t think about his life before he died, I won’t give a shit. I’ll be happy that there’s one killer and rapist less in this world, that there will be less women victims. Not only it’s necessary for our survival but it’s not like we would otherwise be friends with men in other circumstances, like we would with plants or animals we eat. Plants or animals never threaten our survival as human males do, men are our only and primary threat in this world, they threaten the well-being of the entire planet. I have no empathy for men, because empathy for men is dangerous, it can cost you your life.

  39. 39 witchwind January 21, 2014 at 3:15 pm

    Hi Monique, thanks for your comment and support, I have already done that (that is, automatically spam comments which include certain words that are insulting etc) but most trolls use normal words of the dictionary without the use of banned words. With wordpress there’s no way to filter comments in a way to receive them from only wanted persons. For that I’d have to close comments altogether and resort to another strategy which I won’t mention here. I haven’t taken any decision yet though, I’ll wait and see how I feel in a few days. I have no intention to take my blog completely off public for now though.

  40. 40 witchwind January 21, 2014 at 3:20 pm

    @ blackmetal, yes avoiding men and removing ourselves from harm is certainly only thing that protects us, but I’m wondering whether that’s achievable for all women on this planet given that men will still be around in big numbers, and will notice that all women are going away from them if they do. When women do it in very small numbers (ie radfems and separatists) it may go fairly unnoticed even if never without resistance and punishment from their part, but women separating on a global scale, massively? Something more would have to be done for sure.

  41. 41 blackmetalvalkyrie January 21, 2014 at 5:57 pm

    Yes it is very frustrating to me that all women cannot escape men and live on their own. I agree with witchwind, we can’t have empathy for rapists. That is the death of us. I think killing one of them would be empowering but when we fear the institutions men have created against women will punish us and probably kill us it is traumatizing.

  42. 42 Tracy25 January 21, 2014 at 6:09 pm

    There are many Things to Talk about Here but Let me start with what I find Odd. One. Women are already Culling Male children, and considering it and discussing the Cultural Practice of Birthing and Gestating Males (and recognizing that yes, it is a Cultural Practice) and Also of Not Birthing and Gestating them. That they are doing this is a Historical fact, Google it. It has been reported in the Mainstream press more than Once. And yet there are Some here who say this is “unlikely” to Ever Happen, in the Past or Now or Ever. This is more Gaslighting on the part of Feminists who say that, in the Face of Evidence to the Contrary, the Opposite is “really” true. It is Wise of course to Question the veracity of anything you see in the Mainstream press, but that has yet to be Raised as an issue here. We seem to be Saying that Yes, it is happening now, however it is impossible so therefore Simultaneously it is Both Happening and Not Happening now. Or, Yes, it is happening now, but it is not likely to have happened in the Past, and yet here is no Evidence being presented as to Why this would be so, Why would it happen now and Not Then? No One ever says, they just Assert that this has to be the Truth. This is not Reasoned Discourse, this is Something Else. But What Is It? This is very much the issue. It is gaslighting, wishful thinking, and using Avoidant Behaviors to stave off Male Violence. And Thought Termination, avoiding and Preventing yourself and other Women to think about these things and to Consider the Evidence. We are Educated now, but we are not allowed to Act Like it, or to use reason and information (Facts) to Further Our Own Interests, or to even Recognize that we Have interests.

    The Testerical male response to the very Idea that Birthing and Gestating Males is a Cultural Practice, and something that any of us have a Say in or Control over is terrifying but what else is it? It’s not as if we are Wrong, they know that this is a Cultural Practice, they have been Culling females Globally for centuries. They also are not against Infanticide obviously. There are at least a thousand men Right Now, as we speak, who have Babies on their dicks. This is not good for Babies and Babies die from male treatment of them including Rape. Men also just flat out Kill babies all the time and this Includes Male babies. Men favor Infanticide actually. They favor all Killing, and that includes killing other Boys and Men. This goes to what Witch Wind was saying above, that Infanticide and also Abortion and Contraception were not always illegal or even a Moral Issue. At one time, this changed. What brought on this Change can be Speculated on, and it is not unreasonable to speculate, based on the Evidence, that Women started culling Specifically Males as a Feminist Action, and men found this Cultural Practice to be against Male interests. This is Reasonable, and this is what Women must do to piece together our own History when so Much of it has been Erased by Men and Colluding women. We Have to be Willing to Speculate and to Make these Leaps. It is all we Have.

    I will also Note that, if Culling brought on the first Burning Times, it is possible that it will bring on the Next. Well, it is happening right now whether We (Western, educated and perhaps Colluding Women) like it or not. “Other” women are Doing This. And Hundreds of Thousands if not Millions of Completely Innocent Women were Burned the first time, so whether You choose to Cull male children is really irrelevant isn’t it? We can partially See the (Our) Future here, is what I am saying, and it would be in our Best Interest not to Ignore it. We are not in Full Control of this Situation. I would think We would be Used to That idea by now.

  43. 43 Sargasso Sea January 21, 2014 at 6:44 pm

    “…specifically I was talking about culling boys for reasons of female survivalism from male violence…”

    Yes of course and I like to think that women have done exactly that and for that exact reason – there is no other way I have been able to think of that could be as effective. My mom used to muse about ‘non-violent’ ways of reducing male aggression, but also about “picking them off”. Frankly I suspect that every woman has had the same thought at least once in her life and it follows that at least a few of them have acted upon it and not because they were/are ‘crazy’ or ‘jealous’ but because it is what is best for the survival of women.

    Also, you describe women’s relationship to living things so nicely – thank you.

  44. 44 witchwind January 21, 2014 at 11:15 pm

    @ Tracy, that is a very important point indeed wrt to the gaslighting and the fact that whether we like it or not, whatever we decide to do, we aren’t in control of the situation. It’s irrelevant to men killing us because they do that anyway.

    The criminalising of abortion did come long after the genocide had started. In some countries it wasn’t made illegal up until early 2Oth century. That in itself may be considered a reaction against women’s movement of liberation in the late 1800′.

  45. 45 witchwind January 22, 2014 at 12:02 am

    my last paragraph didn’t make much sense. Will comment later

  46. 46 blackmetalvalkyrie January 22, 2014 at 1:16 am

    Just wanted to say even though all women cannot do it, I don’t think female separatism is reformist or choicey choice and some would accuse us of. We need the situation in all countries to be developed and then it will be easier to make the choice of separatism without suspicion from men. All the so called matriarchies had a low number of males. They knew that too many men, especially enough outnumber women would result in every human rights abuse imaginable and mass scale dictatorship because men are deeply black evil rapist mutant scum. My own brother has been a terrorist since he could first walk and talk. Since he was little he repeated extremely painful and hateful things he heard on TV because he takes pleasure in seeing me crying and upset. He also locked me out in the cold from our duplex with no shoes on and spit in my face and doesn’t flush the toilet when he shits just to disgust me. If they all died today we would be able to keep the world going without them only better, Without fear of men and cocks and their penis like weapons. Fuck them all. Fuck their system that makes us dependent on their bullshit. FUCK MEN!

  47. 47 trustyourperceptionsartemesia goldman January 22, 2014 at 5:09 am

    Witchwind: You got 85,000 hits in one day because you EXPOSED the successful and entrenched mindfuckery men use against women to rule over women’s bodies. You exposed patriarchy’s innerworkings.The degree of hatred directed at you is how close to the center of their psych-ops your arrow struck. And you, Third Passage Woman, struck bulls-eye.

    Personally, I do not accept comments on my blog. It works beautifully. If you went private, you wouldn’t be able to reach as many women. It’s been exciting to read the many women writing here who say you have changed their lives.

    About reformism as the “Nigel” stage of the Abuser in the cycle of violence against women: This is another critical insight you’ve had, Witchwind (you keep having them, despite the hatred! Do you see how Unstoppable this Third Passage is?) The radfem Jacqueline S. Homan, who was trafficked into prostitution when she was 13, also writes about this in her book, Without Apology: How the left hand and right hand of patriarchy work together. Homan shows how in the US, for example, Clinton signed the Welfare Reform Act, which plunged millions of poor and desperate women into an endless pool of available bodies for the burgeoning pornstitution industry. The right hand works to take away harm-reduction measures like birth control; the left hand works to remove any psychological barriers a woman who still might trust her perceptions has. The left hand teaches a woman not to trust what she knows in her body, to sacrifice herself on the altar of patriarchy as if it was her own idea. Jeckyll and Hyde is really just one dude.

    Witchwind, your sisters stand by you. WE STAND BY YOU. You are appreciated and loved. You help us all. Is there any way that we can help you?

  48. 48 witchwind January 22, 2014 at 12:16 pm

    what I wanted to say in my last comment is that I have no insight, from a historical point of view, whether there were peaks in women culling male fetuses, men or boys for reasons of survival, defense and taking control over themselves. That would be really interesting to know and if Tracy you have information on that maybe share it here? If, say, there were peaks in aborting male fetuses or culling infant boys in late 1800′ and early 1900′, alongside the global wave of women’s liberation, then it would make sense that it would be followed by a backlash of men making it illegal for women to abort.

    I have never actually come accross such information in the mainstream

  49. 49 Tracy25 January 22, 2014 at 3:52 pm

    The Evidence you are seeking Witch Wind, which is unassailable Empirical Evidence of women’s True lives and our True History is like the Holy Grail for women and feminists, but likely does not exist. Women’s lives, women’s History and countless Women Themselves are routinely disappeared under Patriarchy which is part of the Big Picture of Patriarchy. We know this. The Evidence I am talking about is the Fact that Culling is happening today or at least in the modern era, the last couple of decades for sure (Google it) therefore we know it is Possible to do this. And there is no reason to think that if it is Possible now, that it was Impossible in the Past. I am talking about Possibilities here, and making Leaps of Thought from the little snippets and slivers that manage to slip through. We have no Choice but to do it this way because this is the only Way there is.

    Isn’t anyone interested in knowing Why abortion and contraception and infanticide for that matter became immoral and Illegal at one point when it was not Always this way? Caliban and the Witch takes a stab at this and has a Lot of Footnotes, those authors suggest mainly that this was due to Capitalism and Babies being seen as a Product and a Labor Force and women’s bodies being viewed as Production, and Controlling Reproduction was essentially a tool to Assimilate (Coerce) women into this New Economy against their wills. This is what I remember from reading it, it has been Years. Okay, but if Babies were suddenly so valuable in this New Economy, why did Men never stop Raping and Killing them? If women’s Bodies were seen like Machines or Breeding Animals, why do men treat actual machines and non-human Breeding Animals better than they treat women? These are natural Questions that spring to Mind aren’t they? If not, why Not?

    Doesn’t anyone even Care about the Possible Reasons for the Burning Times? What lead men, who were already all-powerful in a Global Patriarchy that is at least 5,000 if not 10,000 years Old or Older, to lead a Global Terror Campaign and Mass Slaughter against Women and to use the Imagery of the Evil Witch? Why Evil specifically, why not just make up Any Old thing, like that we had become Afflicted with a Contagious disease and had to be Put Down? They could’ve made up anything, they make all the rules. If Radical Feminism is possible now, it was possible Then. If women are Culling males now as a more or less Radical Feminist (meaning Truth- and Reality- Based) Response to Violent Males, it is possible that the same thing was happening then. If men say Both are Evil now, and they do, it is Possible that they said it was Evil then. I am talking about Possibilities is all, and I am being met with Resistance and Gaslighting, women saying the Possible is Impossible. This is not honest, rigorous discourse, but the time for this Shennanigans, if there were ever a time, is Long Over. If there is another Burning Times coming, and Dworkin predicted that there was, we would Do Best to try to figure out why the First one happened, and to try to get out of the way. If Speculation and Leaps of thought are all we Have then we Best Well use them.

  50. 50 witchwind January 22, 2014 at 9:43 pm

    I absolutely agree that there’s no unassailable empirical evidence of women’s true lives, what i was wondering is whether it is known if women have had peaks in culling followed by corresponding backlashes. Not being a specialist in history of women, I can’t know that but maybe there are some women who do know about it, who knows? I meant ‘evidence for’ in a loose sense of whether we can find information or whether women have written about it. I do find it worth investigating things, like I enjoyed very much looking up scientific information on mitochondria, it was tedious but great fun. Sometimes we do find valuable information amongst the detritus, lies, obscured rewriting, reversals and erasure, and it’s not necessary to have that much of it to understand the larger picture, only snippets here and there, even in reversed form, and the leaps of mind as you say connect the dots, you put the truth back in place and you can find the larger pattern and implications very easily. As you say, knowing that it is done today does indeed lead to the logical conclusion that it was done before, and yes that’s part of the snippets we use. Great leap thanks for that.

    I don’t think the theory on capitalism holds either – that might have been men’s justification of it but it’s obscured, it only tells part of the truth and it’s redundant since men have ALWAYS treated women as producers of babies/slaves, this theory doesn’t say in what way capitalism is different, special or new, unless it assumes that capitalist males were the first to introduce this, which is absolutely false. Surely there is something else.

    My question is really why would women do it more than usual which would warrant a certain reaction in men, ie making abortion illegal. If we look at the criminalisation of abortion, there may be many hypotheses: it might be that women culled specifically male fetuses. It might be that women started using abortion so often, regardless of sex, that men couldn’t coerce women to be pregnant all the time and had to make it illegal to stop women from doing it. Maybe as a result of reformism and assimilating women into the patriarchal economy, women resorted to abortion more often because they couldn’t be exploited by men’s firms and be pregnant ALL the time as it was more often the case before, so they resorted to abortion more often, which went against their function as breeders, so men had to make abortion illegal. Maybe in the case of men making abortion illegal, there was no more culling than usual, and the peak in culling occurred before the genocide?

    What I’m looking at again, isn’t evidence but use of logics, what could be plausible causes and consequences.

  51. 51 fatimangry January 22, 2014 at 10:42 pm

    When you talk about reformism as a stage of niceness preceding the slaughter, i have the impression on the other hand that reformism isn’t a one big phase of niceness, but rather small periods of niceness (pseudo niceness of course) interspersed with massacres… every time there’s a small “progress”, it is immediately threatened to be backlashed.
    The very nature of reformism is to make fake steps forwards THEN immediately followed by two steps backwards. So ultimately it maintains the illusion that it’s POSSIBLE to change men, but we just need to do it better, and try to maintain these short changes.. so what i mean is that it doesn’t have to be a period PRECEDING the massacre. We can see it as an ongoing massacre passing as positive change for women… and I think that this way of seeing reformism better fits our view that patriarchy is a genocide that is happening now and not ‘to come’.

  52. 52 witchwind January 22, 2014 at 10:43 pm

    I’m currently looking up some stuff on google, and haven’t found actual information about women intentionally culling men for reasons of violence but some interesting things nonetheless.

    here a mainstream article in the daily mailwhich mentions culling as a solution to the surplus of men due to genocide of females, and states that too many men is a problem:

    But men without women are altogether more troublesome than women without men, especially when they are young.
    All kinds of speculation is now seething about what might happen; a war to cull the surplus males, a rise in crime, a huge expansion in the prostitution that is already a major industry in every Chinese city, a rise in homosexuality.

    Of course it’s all obscuring the agent, obscuring the problem, misleading and gaslighting.

    (source: htt***p://ww***w.dailymail*** )

    In a livescience article, in the same way, obscuring, misleading and gaslighting, but mentions an interesting survival mechanism of females (if it’s true):

    When times are tough, women tend naturally to abort a higher percentage of male fetuses. Researchers call it culling, but they don’t know why it occurs. This much is known: During times of social or economic stress, a woman’s liver tends produces more of a hormone called cortisol that proves so damaging to male fetuses they actually kick out in response to it. Female fetuses, more vital on the whole, seem relatively unaffected by the cortisol.

    The fact it says that males are aborted ‘because naturally weaker’ is a tautology, that doesn’t explain why males would naturally be prone to intra uterine culling and WHY this vulnerability to culling occurs – vulnerability to culling isn’t caused by vulnerability to culling. DUH. Well a logical hypothesis would be to conclude that males are culled in stressful times because too many males are redundant to the species and it makes sense that there would be a natural mechanism in women to avoid to encumber ourselves and our species with surplus males, given their inherent violence and incapacity to think for others or the greater good, in hard times they would endanger the survival of the species even more than usual. Or something in this vein. I’m not going to discuss this in detail because it’s off topic but anyway, interesting to think about.

  53. 53 witchwind January 22, 2014 at 11:11 pm

    Hi Fatimangry, that’s interesting. Yes it does fit, to define reformism / relapse abuse phase as ongoing genocide. That’s what it is anyway, abuse doesn’t stop because the abuser gives some flowers to his victim in between hitting and raping her. I think that’s the main point about reformism really, that the genocide doesn’t change, but what changes is men making an effort to make it appear nice, which makes it more lethal than usual probably, because allows to come back to the previous violence while having restrengthened their victim’s blindness to it.
    Actually Mary Daly called THIS stage of Patriarchy, this current psychological colonisation, the final stage of men’s genocide. she said that after focusing on killing women physically for centuries, men realised it wasn’t enough, and resorted to specialise more in killing women spiritually, psychically as well as physically.

    I was going to reply to TYP that this thing about Jekyll and Hyde, they may be two different men, but that again is an illusion played out by the fact that all men aren’t overtly violent all at the same time which gives an impression that some are nicer than others, and causes us to trauma bond to those who happen to be less overtly violent at a given moment. In fact each man, each system is in itself a Jekyll and Hyde: each individual contains both overt, unmasked violence and false benevolence / manipulation. Both sides always work together in each one of them. Every man/oppressor uses feigned concern, niceness, politeness, interest, or varies in intensity of violence over short or long periods of time.

    I actually find the view of ongoing genocide vs. impending worse genocide more hopeful as it tends less to the apocalyptic doom (the genocide of all genocides) even if we take into account the fact that each generation of men is worse than the previous because they learn from their mistakes and improve on their tactics from one generation to the other. What would make things worse, right now? What would the final genocide look like, if it happened now? Why now or soon? I vaguely remember Andrea Dworkin talking about this but I don’t think she mentioned how it would come about, although she must have been talking about pornography.

  54. 55 witchwind January 23, 2014 at 1:28 pm

    Here’s a link that FCM posted in a comment on women killing male babies to end male violence, on the historic ‘radical feminism in the 21st century‘ post by vliet and following discussion, which I invite everyone to read again.
    Copying the article content, in case it’s a dead link one day:

    PNG women kill male babies to end 20-year war

    By Ilya Gridneff in Port Moresby
    November 30, 2008 11:00PM

    Women in PNG killing babies

    Women in Papua New Guinea’s Highlands say they are killing their male babies to halt an ongoing tribal war / AFP Source: AFP

    WOMEN in the Highland region of Papua New Guinea are killing their male babies to try to end a tribal war that has gone on for more than 20 years.

    Two women from the Eastern Highlands spoke of the slaughter to PNG’s National newspaper during a three-day peace and reconciliation course in the region’s capital of Goroka.

    Rona Luke and Kipiyona Belas, from two warring tribes, said male infanticide reduced the cyclical payback violence infamous in Highlands tribal fights.

    If women stopped producing males, their tribe’s stock would go down and this would force the men to end their fight, the women said.

    “All the womenfolk agreed to have all babies born killed because they have had enough of men engaging in tribal conflicts and bringing misery to them,” Ms Luke said.

    The women could not give a figure on how many male babies had been killed.

    Ms Belas said getting food was hard as husbands kept fighting and mothers and children were left to fend for themselves.

    The Salvation Army is working with various tribes to bring peace to the warring groups, one particular fight continues after starting in 1986 over sorcery claims.

    The Salvation Army told the Australian Associated Press that women were so fed up with the ongoing violence that they were taking drastic steps.

    “This situation shows the extreme frustration the women have with the men in these areas,” a spokesman said.

  55. 56 witchwind January 23, 2014 at 1:32 pm

    And in the same thread, another comment from FCM linking to a Daily Male article which mentions women’s capacity to naturally abort males in times of stress.

    Women who are stressed while trying for a baby are more likely to have girls, research suggests.

    A study found that those who were under pressure at home, work or in their love life in the weeks or months before becoming pregnant had higher than usual odds of giving birth to a daughter rather than a son.

    The finding, by Oxford University and U.S. researchers, means the economic downturn could see more women give birth to daughters. The study follows others that have shown the number of baby boys goes down following major upheavals.

    For instance, in the months after the 9/11 terrorist attacks, the number of boys born in New York plunged, while the economic chaos that followed the collapse of the Berlin Wall saw far fewer boys born than expected in the former East Germany in 1991.

    But the latest study is the first to link the phenomenon to the stresses and strains of everyday life and to rising levels of stress hormones.

  56. 57 aSpinninSister January 23, 2014 at 7:08 pm

    Hi Witchwind, my first time commenting but i am a long time reader of you & FCM et all

    this discussion is Brilliant and fascinating! Thanksxx so much for writing,
    you are so Brave, loved & supported, AND appreciated !!!
    the womyn who comment here too,
    sending Love to you & All my Sisters

    re: womyns herstory, i am on my 2nd read of The First Sex ..Elizabeth Gould Davis ,,,,published in 1971,,, has anyone read it??
    she talks a lot about matriarchy, and mens place in matriarchy back then
    the transition to patriarchy
    she has raised a lotta questions for me

    re; culling of males, a few sentence fragments here to give you the
    gist of what shes saying:
    “Thrace, was the original home of witchcraft (woman-wisdom) there dwelt the nation of Amazons, that blue-eyed race of women who lived entirely without men, murdering any man who dared approach their boundaries…… order to maintain the race, reproduction by parthenogenesis became commonplace. ……This would account for the myth of the ancients, preserved by Plato, that ALL their ancestors were female ……For, according to legend, although they were manless, , the Amazons reared their girl babies and destroyed the boys born among them.” p. 49

    AFTER being challenged, invaded , raped by men
    and the story goes on….. thought provoking book, i highly recommend it

  57. 58 blackmetalvalkyrie January 24, 2014 at 6:10 am

    The natural state of males is capitalism. That is why their commmunism was such an epic failure, they cannot help but fuck up egalitarianism because they are fucked up in the head. All throughout history men have treated women terribly. Sure some societies were able to keep it under wraps but males often rebelled violently. I will try to find one good example I knew of.

  58. 59 witchwind January 24, 2014 at 11:27 am

    Here’s another article on the women of Papua New Guinea, with quotes of the women themselves:

    Tuesday, 2 December 2008 7:00 AM
    Male Babies Killed to Stop Tribal Fighting
    Women in a rural part of Papua New Guinea killed their male babies over a 10 year-period in an attempt to stop the tribal fighting that has brought death and destruction to their people for more than 20 years.

    As reported by PNG’s The National, ‘two women from the area revealed this experience to The National in Goroka’ last week.
    The women, part of a group from the remote Gimi area of Okapa in PNG’s Eastern Highlands province ‘were brought in to attend a three-day peace and reconciliation training in Goroka last week’ and revealed how, because of the death and destruction that has plagued their people for more than 20 years as a result of tribal fighting, ‘the women decided that if they stopped producing males, their tribe’s stock would go down and this would force the men to end the fight’.

    “Therefore, all the womenfolk agreed to have all male babies born killed because they have had enough of men engaging in tribal conflicts and bringing misery to them,” they said.

    One woman, ‘from Agibu village in Gimi, said several women in labour were forced to kill male babies during a 10-year period’.
    ‘She choked back tears recalling the experience, saying it was an unbearable crime but they had to do it’, saying ‘they were forced into it as it was the only means available to them as women to bring an end to tribal fights’.

    However, according to The National, ‘the 23-year struggle is set to end thanks to the tireless efforts of the Salvation Army church that got leaders of 15 different warring communities to negotiate’.
    The church ‘spearheaded the training in Goroka following an initiative by Pastor Michael Hemuno and other members of the community to end prolonged tribal conflicts in the area’.

    ‘The tribal fight in the Gimi area started in 1986 and it was triggered by some deaths blamed on sorcery’.

    Meanwhile, a report launched last week in Port Moresby revealed the problem of gender inequality in the country.

    Titled “Violence against Women in Melanesia and East Timor: Building on Regional and Global Promising Approaches”, the report ranked PNG ‘124th out of 136 countries on a gender-related development index’.

    According to The National, the report ‘also indicated that PNG’s maternal mortality rate was more than double that of any other Pacific Island country’ and “Educational enrolment rates for girls relative to boys were among the lowest in the Pacific, which led to disadvantages in the formal economy”.

    ‘Gender inequality had resulted in growing poverty, high levels of armed crime and sporadic civil unrest having a disproportionate impact on women, especially in the urban areas’.
    ‘Increasingly, women’s economic survival was dependent on exchanging sex for money, goods or favours either through informal transactional sex or regular sex work’.

    Furthermore, according to the report, in 2002, ‘PNG became the fourth country in the Asia-Pacific to reach the level of a generalised HIV/AIDS epidemic and, since 2005, more infections had been recorded among women and girls than among men’ and the ‘high level of domestic and sexual violence in PNG had contributed to the rapid spread of the epidemic’.

    To read more on the report, follow the link provided below.

  59. 60 blackmetalvalkyrie January 26, 2014 at 10:18 pm

    One example I know of males violently destroying matriarchy is the story of Sarka from Czech mythology. Men say its fake but I don’t trust anything men say. To quote my friend

    “The whole story surrounding Sarka is inspiring. Czech used to be a matriarchy until the queen’s (male) consort started to take liberties. The men quickly followed his example and started treating women like shit. A rebellion followed, where women waged war on men from a fortress. Sarka was bait in the trap to capture the leader of the men’s army, sent to break the rebellion. The man was captured and tortured to death within sight of the men’s camp. The males attacked, and eventually killed the rebellious women..if I remember correctly, Sarka evaded capture by jumping to her death off a cliff. Women fought to the death to be free of male rule! Courage and independence from males are women’s true nature.”

Comments are currently closed.

past musings


Join 425 other subscribers

%d bloggers like this: