Separatist Feminism

[VictorGollancz]

Ok, I really am really very late for work at this point but I thought it might be nice to have a space in which we can discuss separatist feminism. I've read a lot of advocates of it, and even incorporate some elements of it into my own life - I prefer not to live with men, for example - but I don't practise it totally and I can't find any examples of any separatist communes.

Does anyone know anything more about it? Does anyone live in a separatist way?

Surprisingly good Wiki link here

I could live my life without flying ( just about, although I'd be pretty miserable if I couldn't travel) , I couldn't live my life without penetrative sex ( and DH definitely couldn't because that's the only way he gets to orgasm ) well I could if I was widowed I suppose but then there are plenty of phallic sex toys .

I was a separatist for a while, but I fancy men too much! I don't have penetrative sex with my current partner though, because it depresses me. I do feel it can be a symbol of dominance. He doesn't mind; prefers the sensation of hands and same here.

I do think separatism may well be the quickest way forward for women's liberation, but most women aren't willing to give up the pleasures they get from men.

This is not to say women's liberation can't happen with the participation of men, just that it will take a LOT longer.

ps Sorry, new here. Hello :)

Oh, and also, some women practically CAN'T give up men - security, finance etc..

Very interesting thread- thank you VG (and all contributors too).

Thank-you to everyone who has contributed their own practical experiences of separatism. I only know the theoretical side and started this thread in response to questions on forkful's brilliant thread, and because I couldn't find any accounts of practical separatism online.

Communes for all, then?

Separatism went further in America than Britain, but its heyday was decades ago. Here's an article from the New York Times about one commune which still functions, though the women are aging (in the Fashion & Style section, hmmm):
www.nytimes.com/2009/02/01/fashion/01womyn.html

I'm pretty sure that "Twisty Faster", who writes the iblamethepatriarchy blog, lives in a lesbian community, but she doesn't talk much about it.

Am I the only one who would hate to live in a commune / group?

Not only women, but anyone, god it gives me chills just thinking about it, I would eventually run amok with a very large axe.

I just realised that when I say I can't be separatist because I fancy men too much, I sound a bit like ethical vegetarians who won't go vegan because they 'like cheese too much'. What's that got to do with the ethics?!

I must rethink.

I would also not like to live in a women only group. Not sure why this is. I'm pretty sure internalised misogyny is contributing to this.

I'd be kicked out within three days, due to my tendency to leave shit everywhere.

I would like to live in a 'Friends' episode - all my mates really close by. I think in general I'd like to have more time with my friends - everything is so structured, meeting for lunch, organising to go out. None of us live close enough to be popping by all the time.

I thought about a commune but all the ones currently running are madly expensive - they are for very rich 'communists'

Exactly, Molasses! I've been reading all this separatist theory for a while now and they say 'men-as-a-group are bad for women!' and I think of all the stats, and the housework threads, etc, and I say 'yes!'. Then they say 'we should all support other women!' and I say 'yes!'. And then they say 'leave the men!' and I say 'nooooooooo! My man is a different kind of man! A special one who isn't in the patriarchy like every other man and woman is! Um'.

Meh, we can't beat ourselves up over it too much. I think of it mainly as an interesting mental exercise for myself and I very much support anyone who chooses to live this way.

So do I.

One of my friends is a separatist, and whenever I mention this to men (who don't even know her), they get very uncomfortable and ask questions like, 'does she have mental health issues/has she been abused?', followed by, 'she should seek counselling'.

Really.

If they're threatened by one separatist who they've never even met, there must be something pretty powerful in taking that stance.

There has to be a lot of trust involved to live a communal life.

I like separatist feminist theory and remember getting all a fluster about it in my younger days. As I've aged gracefully Its been shelved as the "good theory, but not so great in practice". I'll try to put my thoughts into a coherent sequence.

Starting with the premise that if the women separated themselves then the men would realise what women contribute. Well, possibly. Or perhaps they would adapt to surviving without the contribution of women and therefore devalue it more. From my point of view there's more value in changing male perception of gender roles by challenging them openly and directly. I am not sure how that challenge could take place if they are separate.

Moving onto sex and children. The creation of babies (unless you are going IVF) is always going to involve penetration in one form or another. If you are against penetration of any reasons then the questions about children are moot. `

However the point about male children is a good one. Taking into consideration that most children in western society live with their parents until around 18 years or older, at what point in a separatist commune would a male child be welcome?

I am absolutely not suggesting that a mother wouldn't care as much for a son, or not love or take care of them in the same way, but it is an interesting point. Girls, I presume could stay on in the commune and learn the values of that group, but when would a boy stop being a child that can function as part of the commune and become part of the patriarchy? Puberty? 16? 18?

I have to admit that living in a female society is very attractive but I don't necessarily think that its a good way to challenge the patriarchy. It would remove me from it (well if I could live that way without having to interact with the outside world), but challenge? I'm not so sure.

I think IVF is extremely penetrative - I would have a hard time squaring that with a healthy way of having children in a separatist society. Actually I think a lot of medical intervention is borderline abusive - my own dream is to have a proper 'wellness' centre where women can do their own smears or the whole medical environment is seen as nurturing rather than interventionist.

Laurie - Do you think that separatism would require rejecting reproduction as the act, however its done, is intrusive?

Yes, I do. However, I think of this as an intellectual exercise as I think that rejecting biology is something only a rich western person can ever have the intellectual time to do

Biologically we are (unless homosexual) usually sexual beings who seek out reproduction whether we know we are or not - most people just think they are seeking sex. I don't have natural children so I seem to be missing that biological drive - either I have intellectually driven it out (by thinking about it too much) or that natural drive was never much present.

Perhaps a turkey baster (self-administered) is the only way for a separatist feminist to reproduce? With anonymous sperm too?

Taking this to its logical conclusion (given reproduction etc.) doesn't this just lead to the end of the species? And so what the ruddy heck is the point?

Lots to think about here. I personally feel great sadness at the idea of giving up my many, varied male relationships. While most of my closest relationships are female, there are a lot of men who bring a lot of positivity to my life.

That's why its really an intellectual exercise - the majority would never do it so the species would continue.

There is no actual point but alternative lifestyles makes the world more interesting anthropologically, yes?

@ laurie. To be fair, the only time I've ever rejected biology was when I was taking my exam options.

You're right though - when as a woman you're fighting for your daily survival (or right to exist at all in some countries), rejecting biology is the least of your worries.

Bue - well it would certainly put an end to the Patriarchy if there was no one left.

While I agree totally with you Laurie that a lot of this pondering is permitted by Western privilege, isn't separatism - in the context of rejecting reproduction - a bloody sensible idea if you're a woman in a country where your biggest chance of dying is via pregnancy and/or labour?

Well yeah, I suppose there aren't any separatist feminists who could possibly expect that their stance would become the norm. But then of course, if it remains fringe, what is it actually achieving? Certainly interesting as an intellectual exercise, but it just seems preposterous to me as a serious practice.

houseofheave - hey, maybe it is the way forward! Problem solved! :)

Oh yes. However unless you can be 'special' in some way to that society (midwife/doctor/herbalist/) then you are not useful and would not be supported. Indeed women who do this usually become outcasts in some way? I'm thinking the witch trials or nuns as two examples.

Patriarchy 'protects' women who conform - those who step out are usually shunned (or worst attacked, ostracised)

Last was to Victor - I also think that woman have much less sexual choice in other parts of the world (particularly where rape is used as a weapon)