Radical lesbian separatists

[Slayerofmyth]

I'm a radical feminist, I'm straight. Getting a lot of flack from other radical feminists who are telling me sexuality and orientation is a choice, and that until women abandon their heterosexuality nothing will change for women......thoughts.....

I feel that the compulsory heterosexuality argument makes sense when you view it in its historical context (and I think it’s fair to say that it holds less sway today than it did in, say, 1981). Yes, it was a more extreme view than that held by most feminists at the time, but it was part of a scorched earth policy against patriarchal oppression and it was felt that extreme positions were needed at that moment. And maybe there's a resurgence of that, I'm not sure.

This probably won’t be a popular view, but in many ways I see parallels with it and some of the more extreme aspects of the TRA arguments. I would imagine that a few years down the line, some of the very black and white transactivist positions will have modified, but that at this moment in history they feel it’s necessary to take a radical stance.

I think it's probably best to leave the radical feminist lesbian separatists in peace, smother your unhelpful urge to police their views.

Sometimes we just need to air our disappointment, disillusion and frustration without being policed by heterosexual women.

You don't want to end up like one of the sad blokes who comes on here, hijacking threads and droning on endlessly about how women are feministing wrong.

There are other groups were you'll feel more at home, and things you can do in real life that will be a lot more helpful than wasting your energy trying to dictate what lesbians are allowed to think, feel and say.

I accept that our sexuality is probably heavily influenced by patriarchal norms and that it is near on impossible to know how deep our conditioning is, but the women in the rad fem group are openly hostile to het women and bi women. There has been some questioning but the admins organise pile ons. I dont want to leave the group, there really aren't that many rad fem spaces.

Well, I really dont know what to say. It sounds like the issue is a toxic group situation, not feminist separatism. Women are no less likely to be total gits than men, personality wise. There are other feminist spaces online. I'd hie thee hence to spinster and ask there. Theres no need to stay in a group where the admins and you so profoundly disagree.

stealthsquirrelnutkin

I haven't done any of those things? Not to mention these lesbians don't represent all women or all lesbians. I think discusion is great, attacking other women based on their sexuality isnt. Imagine if heterosexuals categorised all lesbians in that way.....we don't.

I have to agree with stealthsquirrelnutkin.

There are mixed Rad Fem spaces both on and away from FB.
I'll stand beside Lesbian Rad Fems in solidarity any day of the week, but I have no clue what it feels like to grow up lesbian in a hetrosexual world, so I don’t think I'm going to wade in to that coversation, nor would it be appropriate for me to do so.

Just leave the group.
I'm sure there are others - if not you could start one.
You'll be an admin so you can delete/block comments and people you don't like

I'm not sure you can defeat compulsory heterosexuality with compulsory homosexuality

OP just leave the group. Lesbians are being thrown under the bus left right and centre and they are probably letting off steam. Allow them their space and their rants and save your sanity.

It's an interesting topic though. As a radical feminist and a married straight woman, I do find it absolutely exasperating to live with a man most of the time! I know a lot of men who are feminist in theory but not at all in reality. It's real life in the patriarchy. If I could find the perfect feminist man I'm sure we wouldn't fancy each other (don't know whether to grin or sad face at that).
I do fantasise about living with my sister and/or female friends. We could see the menfolk to socialise and have sex. I do wonder if our relationships would be more harmonious if we didn't live together.

I don't think men can be feminists.

HeyDuggeesCakeBadge

I know they are and I do agree. However, why be hostile to those women who are doing their best to help with that, women like me who have het privilege but are willing to put ourselves on the line for lesbians, facing job losses (nearly in my case). I'm not the enemy, other het radical feminists are not the enemy......but we are being treated like we are.

Well some feminists are their own worst enemy, turning on each other.

And yes weezol good point. Men can't be true feminists so I guess I should say feminist allies.

If they are saying that sexuality is a choice then they aren't lesbians. Anyone who is capable of being attracted to both men and women is bisexual - and, yes, if they are bi, very committed to radical and separatist feminism and sick of men, then sticking with women might be the best option for them but it isn't for everyone.

I think some bisexuals just don't understand that not everyone's sexuality is fluid, particularly if they've previously suppressed one side of their sexuality to fit in with a heterosexual world they then think that everyone has that other side that just need to be freed from the patriarchy.

Do you actually get any benefit from that group or feel that you are making a difference in terms of activism via that group? Are there any other groups you could join?

Lol, I think I know the group (and the admin) you’re talking about. Quite a few women flounced recently because of her - it’s not just what she says but the way she does it, isn’t it?

I just ignore her shit on ‘hets’ and ‘bi women’ because there are interesting conversations in that group and because I quite like her otherwise.

I suspect that some of the people who say this are people who are naturally a little more flexible about their sexuality, but perhaps they don't realise it doesn't apply to everyone equally.

I'd not even say they are naturally bi-sexual. I think that it's become something that isn't talked about much, but there is a capacity in many people to learn to enjoy intimacy with those they aren't so strongly attracted to naturally. Sexual contact can feel good even with someone you don't find attractive and it can be possible to learn to appreciate it at that level for some people.

Maybe only a minority, or maybe most of us don't want to bother when we could have sex with people we are really attracted to, but for some reason these women have been able to do that and motivated to do it.

Like a previous poster, a lot of separatist feminists in my experience have abusive backgrounds in common and my guess is that is what is behind a lot of the rhetoric and maybe an inclination to turn to the non-prefered sex for sexual partners. And for those who don't have a lot of personal insight they can't see why people who have fulfilling and positive relationships with men would not feel the same.

Meh. I think people forget that heterosexuality is not an aberration but an evolutionary norm and therefore deeply ingrained in every animal species including homo sapiens.

Homosexuality and bisexuality make up a very, very tiny percentage and that will never really change even when sexual fluidity is embraced. The percentages stay relatively stable across different cultures around the world.

There can be strong elements of biology denialism in feminism but all the feminist will in the world isn't going to change the fact that human beings have evolved to sexually reproduce and therefore heterosexual pairings will be the driving force in the overwhelming majority of people's lives.

Also worth remembering that the vast majority of women do not identify as feminists, even if they might agree with (radical) feminists on certain issues. Just like most people aren't Marxists even if they might agree on certain points about capitalism, workers' rights etc. If I understand it correctly, radical feminism is strongly grounded in Marxism? Therefore it's always going to be a very marginal and niche following.

It might be lovely to daydream about Wonder Woman-esque storylines of women only populations, but like many idealised notions, the separatist viewpoints tend to be devoid of realistic details in terms of bringing about this promised land / nirvana.

Focus on the topics that interest you and ignore the hetero-bashing.
The things that actually make a difference in women's lives are pragmatic ones that bring about change in the here and now, not utopian musings. If there were more pragmatic solutions, I think more women would embrace feminism.

I'm pretty sure I know which group you're talking about, and if so this is the third MN thread I've seen about the same group.

Seriously, just ignore them. The admins and their mates in that group are mostly a bunch of misandrists with VERY black and white thinking which they're keen to force onto others. The culture in the group can be toxic IMO, hence threads on it appearing here.

Thing is, they don't own radical feminism.

Do you actually get any benefit from that group or feel that you are making a difference in terms of activism via that group?

That's a really good question. If it's the group I'm thinking of, I don't think I've seen any activism coming out of it at all.

As a lesbian I have NEVER met any gay person that thinks that sexuality is a choice. Why would anyone in their right mind choose to suffer stares, judgement, hate crime etc.

I know what you mean OP, I have seen this sort of thing a few times in other parts of the radfem universe. I've also noticed a few posts on Spinster and the GC subreddit saying how terrible it is when women are feminine in anyway which I assume means we should all let our hair go grey, cut it short and wear men's clothing which I find grim since I've always been feminine and enjoyed dressing in a mostly feminine way (note: feminine not hypersexual). On Spinster they linked to a video of a rather haughty young radfem who was mocking women for dressing in a feminine way and she conflated femininity with hypersexuality. This is a side of radfeminism I am not keen on, but I noticed most of these women are young and I think they are still trying to 'look cool,' were hipsterish and looked like they were trying to find their identity. I'm quite a lot older than them and I have a feeling they'll ease off with this as they get older. The problem with telling women they can't be heterosexual, bi or ever wear dresses etc is that it reduces the feminist movement to a very narrow group of gender non conforming lesbian separatists. Whereas I'm more of a (not intentionally) gender conforming heterosexual gender critical feminist. I agree with most radfem views but not all.

When it comes to rights movements, feminism has always been in a unique position. If, for example, the majority of relationships were multiracial then I'd guess racism would be far less acceptable. And yet - because of sexism and gendered socialization - we still see widespread oppression of women despite most being in relationships with a member of the oppressor group. Men won't share the power.

Sadly there are far too many women in lousy relationships, which they endure because of bad family dynamics.

However more generally I think as individuals we can have some influence by refusing to get involved with men who don't clearly display their rejection of sexism. I certainly wouldn't have married a man who didn't see me as his equal in every way. It was a must.

The problem with telling women they can't be heterosexual, bi or ever wear dresses etc is that it reduces the feminist movement to a very narrow group of gender non conforming lesbian separatists.

^^ This. I've never really recovered from being chucked out of my town's only feminist group in my youth all those decades ago for the crimes of wearing makeup and sleeping with men.

I've felt like a failed feminist ever since. I recently shared this with my monthly feminist group. One of them pointed out that I clearly hadn't noticed that she always wears makeup and they all laughed at me. I'm a bit dim at times.

I question whether the women who have fled abusive relationships, who are living in poverty, who looked after the children pretty much all the time and do the drudge work really do have ‘het privilege’
That is before you get to the women who have been murdered by partners or male relatives and the ways women are treated in other societies than our own.

My private thoughts about political lesbianism is that political lesbians are likely already lesbians (by orientation) who at some point found a belief system which allowed them to reject heterosexuality and this was so amazing, such a bolt of lightening where mind, body spirit all aligned and made sense not just as an answer to their own selfhood, personal integration and relationships, but to all the injustice in the world and the liberation of women, they want all women to experience the same.

I think it can be hard sometimes for people who find something that makes absolute perfect sense to them to accept that it won't work for everyone.

On the other hand I am not so sure about the rigidity of sexual orientation as some posters on this thread myself. When it comes to the 'biology' argument our close primate cousins the bonobos are all bisexual (although not exclusively lesbians I think) so bisexuality may be fairly natural and normal in our species too. In humans, lots of women really go off sex after a while or have a reduced sex drive and find their male partner's continuing high sex drive oppressive (of course this can occasionally be the other way around) so perhaps a sexual rejection of men at some point is actually 'natural', and it is fairly common for women to passionately fall in love with another woman around the time of the menopause - a sort of orientation 'switch'.

Even though it is not for everyone, I think political lesbianism is an essential pillar of feminism - it may even be feminism's beating heart - the clarity about patriarchy and the passion for women's liberation is unparalleled elsewhere. It pisses me off when people knock it because a few women are a bit over zealous.

As for the having to wear men's clothing malarkey and have short hair - that isn't true. They simply reject the aspects of gendered 'femininity' which are a hassle and pain that men don't have to contend with. They may wear skirts and have long hair, unless they deem them too much of a pain in the arse for whatever reason. They are about rejecting the gender binary not 'crossing over' to male stereotypes.

As for online forums it creates a false kind of hierarchy where moderators have power over members and frequently this overspills in a way that can become controlling and kill the vibe of the whole community. Moderators need to be as neutral as possible to allow a free exchange of ideas to flourish. Perhaps this radfem fb group has had its day? It's better to get out and meet one another in person anyway.

I question whether the women who have fled abusive relationships, who are living in poverty, who looked after the children pretty much all the time and do the drudge work really do have ‘het privilege’

I think 'het privilege' is a term that fits in with queer/intersectional feminism rather than being relevant to political lesbianism.

Political lesbians tend to view heterosexuality as a detrimental compromise of women - mind, body and soul, and lesbianism as being the beautiful, hugely preferable way out of male domination and from patriarchal oppression. Julie Bindel said 'come in, the water's lovely'. Political lesbians are more likely to see themselves as privileged for having found political lesbianism.