"...it's not the training to be mean but the training to be kind that is used to keep us leashed best." ~ Black Dog Red

"In case you haven't recognized the trend: it proceeds action, dissent, speech." ~ davidly, on how wars get done

"...What sort of meager, unerotic existence must a man live to find himself moved to such ecstatic heights by the mundane sniping of a congressional budget fight. The fate of human existence does not hang in the balance. The gods are not arrayed on either side. Poseiden, earth-shaker, has regrettably set his sights on the poor fishermen of northern Japan and not on Washington, D.C. where his ire might do some good--I can think of no better spot for a little wetland reclamation project, if you know what I mean. The fight is neither revolution nor apocalypse; it is hardly even a fight. A lot of apparatchiks are moving a lot of phony numbers with more zeros than a century of soccer scores around, weaving a brittle chrysalis around a gross worm that, some time hence, will emerge, untransformed, still a worm." ~ IOZ

Jan 28, 2013

What I Prefer

What I prefer is to see women and children cut their attackers down. This is not to imply that they should not do the thousand other things needed to liberate themselves from the system of men, to challenge the assumptions about femininity and masculinity which shuffle people into oppressive norms, to create spaces which exclude the gender most likely to act as tormentor, abuser, patriarch, raper and rent taker.

In any system where sex* is rent, where childhood is debt and where gender is a distinction intimately tied to notions of property, propriety and right conduct, revolutionary violence is appropriate. It may not be the only response; it needn't be exclusive. But, it is justified.

If we can accept as generally true that labor must seize the means of production, and that morality is a limitation imposed from above in order to prevent just such a revolt, we must of necessity also concede that those who suffer the consequences of the domination class' control of property, family, wealth and gender itself have something akin to an inalienable freedom to harm those who would subject them to this system of alienation, and that any attempt to moralize or condemn this harm is expressly and intimately a decision to maintain oppression.

What I prefer is for women and children, for all those who have been feminized from without as a prelude to their submission, to organize as Furies, as winged erinyes, and for a period of no less than a decade, to have free reign upon the agents of their misery, until men understand in their marrow that what came before comes no longer, ever again. 


* - both as the act of sex, and as gender

15 comments:

Jack Crow said...

test

ifthethunderdontgetya™³²®© said...

Did we pass?
~

d.mantis said...

Truly hope all is as well as it can possibly be with you, Jack

Cyn said...

Yea! I can finally post! Have been thinking of you often. This is a great post.

One of the Furies.

The Mathmos said...

My thanks for coming back.

High Arka said...

The following awful, discriminatory quote is taken from Mein Kampf:

What we prefer is to see the German people cut their attackers down. This is not to imply that they should not do the thousand other things needed to liberate themselves from the system of the Jews, to challenge the assumptions about living space and Versailles which shuffle the volk into oppressive norms, to create spaces which exclude der Jude which has always been most likely to act as tormentor, abuser, patriarch, raper and rent taker.

In any system where reparations have interest, where Aryanhood is debt slavery to der Jude and where the German is tied to Jewish notions of property, propriety and right conduct, revolutionary violence is appropriate. It may not be the only response; it needn't be exclusive. But, it is justified.

If we can accept as generally true that the people must seize the means of production, and that morality is a limitation imposed from the Jew in order to prevent just such a revolt, we must of necessity also concede that those who suffer the consequences of the Jewish control of property, family, wealth and gender itself have something akin to an inalienable freedom to harm those who would subject them to this system of alienation, and that any attempt to moralize or condemn this harm is expressly and intimately a decision to maintain oppression.

What I prefer is for the German people, for all those who have been oppressed from without as a prelude to their submission, to organize as valkyries, as a blitzkrieg, and for a period of no less than a decade, to have free reign upon the agents of their misery, until the Jews understand in their marrow that what came before comes no longer, ever again.

High Arka said...

As the above passage from Hitler shows us, we must always be vigilant in ensuring that evil, discriminatory fascists never again gain power. We must try to peacefully prevent hateful bigots like Hitler from influencing the world.

Jack Crow said...

Yes, Arka, thinking that porn is produced by fascist relations is exactly like being Hitler.

High Arka said...

Presume that once, in the history of Germany, a person who self-identified as being Jewish loaned money to a person who self-identified as being non-Jewish. Presume that the loan was unfair.

Presume that this happened many times.

Does that, then, make Hitler's policies acceptable?

No, it does not, because Hitler was collectively punishing a group based on the actions of one/a few.

Your primary flaw is not in advocating violence, but in advocating collective punishment. Punishing all [members of set] for the perceived sins (or actual sins) of some [members of set] is the stereotyping and bigotry that underscores patriarchy.

If you want to critique something--say, porn--find an actual producer or production company that does something wrong, and write about how bad they are. Slurring all "males" because some wealthy men and women produce pornography that you find offensive is wrong.

It's tempting. It's simple. I understand the allure. If a black male president heartlessly orders the drone killing of three little Pakistani girls, it can be tempting to look at the murderer's hateful face and say, "I hate black people." But it would be wrong. It would be unfair to tar other black people with culpability for Obama's murders.

You might respond to that by saying "Patriarchy is so evil as an institution that men are benefited by it. Therefore stereotyping and slurring men is okay."

But, Hitler could point to generations of wealthy Jewish moneylenders to justify his group-hatred. Pakistani tribal leaders could point to generations of conflict with Muslim-surnamed black men west of Pakistan to justify group-hatred of African blacks for Obama's crimes.

Neither "structural" argument is appropriate. If you don't like patriarchy, don't pick up its foul tools and use them against a different group, no matter how good it feels.

Jack Crow said...

No one is "slurring or stereotyping men" Arka. And there is no comparison between those on the receiving end of fascism and the fascists.

I do marvel at your apologetics for power, dressed up as they are as defense of the poor powerless people in control of everything.

High Arka said...

"until Jews understand in their marrow..."

"until men understand in their marrow..."

Mein Kampf could be altered by replacing "Jews" in Hitler's writing with "bank loan officers who engage in a systematic pattern of unfair trade practices," and your writing could be easily altered by replacing "men" with "patriarchs." Then, the policy wouldn't be genocidal, and it wouldn't be collective punishment. It would be focused on choice and behavior, rather than birth identity.

Anne Frank shouldn't have been lumped in with Hitler's anger at the reparations of the Great War, and some poor homeless guy in Little Rock shouldn't be lumped in with Hillary Clinton's anger over having lost that essay writing contest in her second year at law school. Men can't help being men, and ethnic Jews can't help being ethnic Jews, which is why targeting punitive policies at group membership based on birth is collective punishment.

/hug

Jack Crow said...

Perhaps, Arka, you might stop equating the victims of the system with the masters of the same?

tsisageya said...

What I prefer is to see women and children cut their attackers down.

Amen, brother.

High Arka said...

Who are the victims, and who are the masters, Jack?

Let's quote a woman, rather than a "feminist man," who actually knows what she's talking about:

Asia Carrera: There's a reason why you always see the same guys over and over in every movie. It's because there are very, very few guys who can perform on command under the demanding, grueling circumstances of shooting a movie. Imagine: it's 5am, you're exhausted, 15 crew guys are grouchy and waiting on you to perform so they can go home. They're giving you nasty looks while you're trying to get hard in the freezing cold, buck naked, on your aching knees on the cold metal hood of a car. The girl, who isn't even very attractive close up, is off set with her boyfriend, smoking a cigarette until you're ready. You're wanking in the cold with an audience of 15 impatient guys, knowing that if you don't get hard, word will spread instantly that you are not reliable. And if you don't come on cue, forcing them to reshoot the scene, you will never be hired again.

Asia, again: This must be the only place in the world where guys get paid less than girls, and we call all the shots. (feminists take note!) Guys get a couple hundred per scene. New girls can get between five and six hundred for a boy/girl scene, and the rate jumps as you become a bigger star. Contract girls get paid by the movie, instead of by the scene, and they make thousands of dollars per movie.

Owned.

tsis said...

Besides which, Jack. Does it really matter what you prefer?

No offense intended.