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

snomama you need to take the time to actually read my post. You are responding to a point I didn't make, and not responding to my actual point which is this: your claim about 'power structures' is bizarre to say the least.

MrMan Snowmama's point about power structures, is only bizarre, if you don't understand or recognise where her arguments are coming from.

In response to a point upthread (I think SGB made it), I would say that while not everybody 'needs' to know their bio parents, everyone has the right to know who they are. This is a big issue amongst trans racial adoptees, many of whom have no way of every regaining contact with their family.

I know that is slightly off the topic of the thread, but it was something I wanted to point out.

While I have little interest in female separatism, this thread has made me think about female socialisation. For many young, heterosexual women in the UK, much of their social life is probably quite male centred. Even when men aren't there, eg hen parties, it's still male centred. For me, it wasn't until I became Muslim that I regularly socialised in women only groups.

But of course, it's not just socialisition, everything, films, books, magazines are male centred, with romantic love (with a man) as the be all and end all.

Still finding this thread very important. Thanks especially to anon, SaF and Riven and Anne your posts have been very illumonating.

GAG - that's one of the reasons I want DD to go to an all girls school.

It's probably the only time in her life that her psychological and social orientation will be female instead of male.

Responding to all the posts would be mammoth and impossible but I'd just quickly like to point out to MrMan that, despite the few quotations he's pulled out, there is nothing that I have read, either on this thread or in the context of separatist theory, to suggest a hatred of men based on 'negative stereotypes'.

I have read a disinclination to be around men due to the violence perpetrated on women-as-a-group by men-as-a-group. That is a fact - it was a fact in the 1970s when separatism started to be widely discussed, and it is a fact now. Women-as-a-group are beaten, raped and murdered by men. Fact. Not all men, no, and yes, some women will also abuse other women or other men but as a large, group analysis, the violence is done by men, to women.

This isn't women being bitchy or men being domestically inadequate; this isn't about who you're friends with (my very close, beloved male friends would have to go under this model) or who has been nicer to you; this is about responding to the simple - terribly simple - fact that men as-a-group display violent and aggressive tendencies towards those who do not fit with patriarchal models. It is this that makes me question why aren't we all separatists? I may not have suffered violence but plenty of other women have. Violence that is totally worthy of a drastic stand such as separatism.

Men are also the prime perpetrator of violence against other men. Women simply have an advantage in that we're the opposite sex in a binary model and thus separation is a clear-cut (if fairly blunt) tool. In prison, for example, women would never be housed with men. Sadly, other men who may not fit the partriarchal model of 'man' remain housed with men.

Plenty of posters on this thread have pointed out the limitations of separatism, emphasising a desire to engage with men in various ways. We (myself included) are all responding to a group theory with individual responses. Nothing wrong with that, of course - but it is interesting to note that separatists and political lesbians address exactly this practice.

Very interesting thread thank you.

Especially agree with HexBex - my DP has been away with work recently and when the dc have gone to bed its been lovely. So peaceful not having to interact with anyone! Although I think that would be the same whether DP was male or female.

this has been a very interesting thread. it has helped me come to the conclusion that i am perfectly fine with women living alone or in all-female environments (and in my circle of older, well-educated, slightly bohemian friends it is NOT in any way unusual for women to live alone) but it's not for me.
In fact, i'd be happier with LESS segregation and i hate when social groups split into male/female factions. i have at least two other female friends who also hates this as much as me and the rest are more likely to socialise in mixed groups but have more patience than i do for the 'boys night' or 'girls night' which i despise so much.
i have never really categorised my friends as male or female.. i just don't. i'm not 'butch' or a lesbian but i do male-dominated sports, never wear makeup, don't wax... so i guess i live in a middle world between conforming and not conforming.

what i have found confusing is the conflation of 'living with men' and 'living with a partner'.. i am not sure that living with one partner in relative social isolation is a good thing whether the partner is male or female. i am inclined towards communal living myself.. though i know many aren't.

i don't see why we should be all the same, i would support some people living alone, some in partnerships with one other person, some in groups... there is no need for a single 'norm' imo.

Sorry, tangent.

Just applying a similar bit of research to CDV's example of private schooling.
As HerBex says, when you take income and other external factors out of the equation students from public schools do not show a remarkably lower performance than private.
However, the abilities to offer scholarships and have restrictive entrance exams allow private schools to select the more promising raw material to work with. There have been several studies that show the superior results for students at private schools are more to do with the the students the school has than the supposed superior teaching going on.
The most recent study was an American one, which showed that factoring for the relative economic and social issues faced by a large amount of public school kids (which private school kids almost universally didn't face) the differences were minimal. Those that were present could be explained by the selective nature of the schools.

Not intending to cause another education fight or derail the thread, I will go away now and let you all get on with a really interesting discussion.

thankyou Cat.
excellent post Victor-and i agree with you.
yep-i agree with you Saf[reg statistics]-im not a great fan of statistics-you get diffrent stastistics for all diffrent things-and it always depend whose behind them to as how right these stastistics are and for what reason.

anyway-id like to talk some more on forced seperitism![if no one minds]
ive said what ive said and id like to look/talk at a diffrent angle of this.
id like to talk about very marginilised women!
the fact that i had to change my name for what i wanted to say before and im still a name change for this-says it all really.
where to start-well-
one of my dd was raped and in another incedence[diffrent men]she was stabbed-she ended up with mh probs-then she got addicted to crack.
she ended up in prostituition!

one of my sons ended up addicted to herion-this was after years of being called things like"limp wristed faggot"-"arsehole bandit""nancy"ect ect-
at one point he was was scared to go out as he kept getting beat up.
hes own father even kept calling him awful names when he was pissed off and decided to take it out on my son!!
no wonder he turned to drugs!

another son also got addicted!
at one point-i had two sons in two diffrent prisons and a daughter in a psyc ward!!!
as you can imagine-i felt like shit.
i was torn between the love for my children and total shame.
somewhere along the line-i teamed up with some women and we did our best with this[they had kids in the same posision]-
they were middle class women with husbands.
the men were total wankers and as much help as a choc teapot!
it was us women running around at night to drug houses trying to save our children.
it was me who dragged my dd out of a brothel!
i had things in common with these women-apart from the obvious-
we all layed in bed at night terrified that we would get"that knock on the door from the police to say our child had overdosed"-we all felt shame and as mothers society hated us!
this made us seperate a bit[from society]-after all-we were hated as mothers.
this was probably the start of seperatism for me.
i needed to do this to help me deal with it all.
i must of done something right though as-
nowdays-my dd is doing great-shes a sahm mum with a child and [f]partner and is studying.
one of my sons has a excellent job-one that not a lot can do.
another dd has excellent degrees!
another son is doing ok!
others are doing ok!
sadly-this seperitism continues for the reasons ive already talked about.
sadly-although its turned out ok[to a extent]for us-two of the women did lose theyre sons!
ive had to do what i felt was the only way i could.
ive had to grow some bollocks to deal with all of this and fight like fuck for my kids!
its been said[on this thread]that im enjoying the fight and struggle-
i was really upset by this-does it look like this is enjoyable?
i will stop talking/fighting when marginilised people are reconised and understood-and i make no appology for this.
i will stop when women dont have to hang theyre heads in shame no more.
i will stop when people stop looking at stupid stastistics-look at the people insted!
i will stop when marginilised people can stop having to live semi seperate.
i will stop when people stop saying-basiccally-"fight it from the outside"
this cant happen untill theres understanding and learning!
this cant happen untill people realise what the partriarchy has done!
untill then-ill fight the best ways i can!

.

????

I don't know what she means either. I do know that your last post wad very moving annon ans also very inspiring. I don't see why you should stop fighting, not at all.

sorry - i do that to mark my place as otherwise I can't find where i got to.

not a comment on what people had written at all - just having a busy week & worried I'll get left behind.

anon, that is just about one of the inspiring posts I have ever read..

..if you don't mind I am going to keep a copy of second half of your post about when you will stop fighting to remind me, and not to get lulled into a sense that things are ok now....there is still so much to fight for.

thankyou Cat.
ah Kickass-thankyou for telling me this-ive seen this before[and "marking my place"]and wondered what it was about.

thankyou Snowmamma-i thought that i was going to get a pile of biscuits!
im extreemly tired and fed up at the moment-and im finding it harder and harder to stay with it-[fighting]but as you say.........theres still so much to fight for.
obviously-ive just been talking about marginilised women-women that no one wants to talk about or aknowledge[in general]but i feel that this is a area of forced seperitism!
someone said on this thread[sorry-i cant remember who]"what has seperitism got to do with feminism?"!
i feel seperitism has got a lot to do with feminism!

a lot of the lone parents/relationships boards have comments from single women who say that they are happier on their own. now, many of them may well have been in unhappy (or worse) relationships, but they are not rushing into finding 'mr right'. also, many of them had this situation 'thrust upon them' by men absconding, so it wasn't a conscious choice.

however, i would say that it is much easier to live like this after having children. not only does the experience (mostly) teach you maturity & self-reliance, but it also removes the drive to hook up with someone just to have children. women in this situation can be more picky, and only have men in their lives how & when they want.

if you compare the stereotype of a bachelor in his 40s to that of a spinster in her 40s, it becomes glaringly obvious how much pressure society puts on women to become a wife & mother. biology also pushes us that way, and often we are left in ok but not great relationships, which make us unhappy because we have to live them every day.

in other ares of our lives, it is possible to deal with this, relations with parents, friends, work colleagues, and the work itself. if it's ok but not great, does not affect us so much. if, however, it's your home that makes you feel like that, it can make someone truly unhappy.

which is reminding of the 'cognitive dissonance' thread from a while back.

so, yes, separatism is v much a feminist issue, as our bodies, our families & society at large conspire to make us live with men, even if it isn't in our best interest to do so.

HOWEVER, the whole issue of children just makes it so much more complicated.

it's possible, but still not easy, and I bet that you & your dc have to deal with situations that I don't, just because I am married to a man.

i am watching with interest events in the US regarding the laws around marriage - recently there was a whole load of news about states which did/didn't allow same sex marriages. there is also the issue in the UK about whether civil partnerships 'count' as marriage in the same way that 'marriage' does, and how that can affect divorce etc. there's also the case of the polygamist family who have 'come out' on tv, and are now fighting a legal battle against the state of utah.

more & more i think that the state/gov doesn't have a right to interfere with personal issues. yes, there should be protection for any children involved (and that extends to their main carer), but beyond that, who has the right to decide what marriage is?

no matter what i think of the polygamist family (the browns), i think that they are happier than families where one adult has a secret affair & treats the other one to emotional abuse, neglect etc. so, why is marriage so highly rated? basically, money. it serves society & men to keep women married & bringing up the children. it can also serve the woman to do so, but not always.

if we had more time separate from each other, it would perhaps make us think a bit more about the kind of relationships we want before committing to anything, though i have a nightmare vision of young women kept in convent-like austerity until mr right comes along, which is not what i mean at all.

One of the basic problems with this concept is the idea of men-as-a-group and women-as-a-group because, in reality, no such grouping exists. The spectrum within either gender is far wider than the difference between them and always will be. Whichever sex you are, you will have far more in common with a large percentage of the opposite sex than the out-liers of your own. Furthermore - and quite apart from the practical impossibilities - plenty of women are being perfectly successful without worrying about percieved 'patriarchical' monsters under the bed and would have their lives completely undermined by any division of their lives on the basis of gender (sexual discrimination, in other words). The whole idea smacks of obsessive academic navel-gazing and has no application in the real world.

Looking forward to the day when it's the goody goody boys who get all the female attention and not the bastards, Leningrad... Bad behaviour tends to get rewarded.