Anti-feminism - a special request

[Cerridwen]

I posted earlier in response to a thread titled "Do you agree that there is a great deal of anti-feminism on DU..." started by efhmc (thread link: http://tinyurl.com/bymzg)

efhmc was kind enough to suggest that my post might be a good thread starter - thank you, efhmc :D

A quick note: I used ""alpha" male as norm" twice for emphasis.

Here's that post in its own little thread. :hi: Enjoy, debate, do what we do.

I believe anti-feminism goes fist-in-glove with misogyny; both of which come from fear of women - gynephobia. Much of the fear is wrapped up in and manifests as an almost pathological need to control women's sexuality, psyche, and bodies, i.e., rights of choice, rape as war weapon/strategy, ""alpha" male as norm" definitions of "appropriate" sex/sexual activity, ""alpha" male as norm" definitions of women's "acceptible" role in society, etc.

I've read many articles and treatises about why it may be that men fear women (generalized statements used to keep this post from becoming a treatise); everything from psychological indications due to mother being the first care giver/disciplinarian in a child's life (which doesn't explain why all girls don't also grow up to hate/fear women) to ancient archetypes of women/Goddesses with vagina dentata the "toothed vagina" which has permeated our "race memory" and caused boys/men to feel that all girls/women are out to devour them or rob them of their masculity through the use of our "toothed vagina." Much as Delilah "robbed" Sampson of his "strength" when she cut his "hair." (Oh the symbology.)

If you'll read the Malleus Malificarum "Hammer of the Witches," a Middle Ages Inquisitors' guide to identifying and torturing "witches," you'll see frequent references to witches stealing or shriveling men's "manhood." Many references to "witches" make the same claims. It was no coincidence that Pat Robertson's diatribe against feminists included, "The feminist agenda is not about equal rights for women. It is about a socialist, anti-family political movement that encourages women to leave their husbands, kill their children, practice witchcraft, destroy capitalism, and become lesbians. (Fundraising letter, 1992)" (emphasis mine)

Until men deal with their fear (see previous note about generalizations), I don't know that we as feminists can do much about anti-feminism, mysogony and gynephobia; except, continue to do what we do.

Recognize and point out "the lies of the fathers' tongue," (Penelope, J. (1990). "Speaking freely:" Unlearning the lies of the fathers' tongue. New York: Pergamon Press) and reclaim our Power to Name and therefore define ourselves and our message, and so much more that this post is becoming a treatise.

Here, this says it better than I am able:

"How To Be A Fabulous Feminist"

Fight Sexism. Do it Now Say Yes to Female- to Justice- to Freedom. Love Yourself, Love other Women. Say No! Get angry, Get Active. Don't Agonize- Organize. Fight racism- classism- ageism- homophobiasizism and ableism. Lower pain and isolation. Raise Consciousness, Raise self esteem. Think Globally- Act locally. Avoid Burnout. Be Woman identified. Create Safety. Take Risks. Take Your Power Back. Do it Now! Live equality. Thank Yourself. Celebrate Women Survivors. Invent Herstory. Shatter Myths, pioneer, trailblaze. Discover She-Her-We-I-Woman. Honor lesbians. Say Yes to Power. Love Your Body. Decorate yourself anyway you like. Have Happy Sex. Visualize Perfect Birth Control. Keep Abortion Safe, legal and accessible. Help A Mother today. Make every child A Funded Child. Praise Rebel Spinsters. Do it Now. Be A woman's movement. Vote, March, Girlcott, Lobby, Write letters. Elect Progressive Women. Win the ERA. Stop the Violence Against Women. Demand Economic Justice For All. Say Yes to More Money. Fun-raise, raise Hell. Do it Now. Cherish Your Mother Earth. Be anti-war. Liberate Oppression. Think Humanarchy. Make peace with Men. Be a Mover and A Shaker. Support Bad Girls. Join A Feminist Political Organization. Volunteer, give love, give money. Get Powerful, Get Respect. Heal Yourself. Heal the World. Collect Fabulous Memories.

Do it To Win!!!

From the poster "How to be a Fabulous Feminist"

[efhmc]

1. So is this fear of a woman stealing a man's "manhood" suppose to be

an inbred genetic thing or part of our socialization history?

[Cerridwen]

2. I've seen it theorized as both and neither-other theories from this group

are welcomed and encouraged.

Does it truly exist? Is it a justification for .... ? Nature? Nurture? (ack, that argument is a pain: chicken or the egg, does it matter?)

Anyhoo, I'd love to hear other theories. I've read many but want to hear other people's ideas.

[Cerridwen]

5. Erk, Cerridwen - yeah, I sometimes talk to myself - that was a

piss poor answer. Sorry, efhmc. I was tired when I posted and didn't think it through.

I think as ccbombs does (if I understood ccbombs correctly) that fear of women (gynephobia) is the exploitation by "leaders" within patriarchal society of a biologically coded instinct - "fight or flight."

In other words, it's both/and rather than either/or.

My question now, is - is "fight or flight" truly "hard-wired" into our biology?

Do humans have actual "instincts?"

Any biologists, anthropologists, psychologists posting to this group that have answers?

[donsu]

11. of course humans have instincts! - we are animals

nt

[Hello_Kitty]

3. I think

The survival instinct is inbred while societies manufacture threats to it in addition to, or in the absense of, real ones. Notice the language used by Pat Robertson in his diatribe against feminists. "Kill" "Destroy" "Abandon" etc... Words like that conjure up powerfully frightening images. They are a common theme throughout the examples throughout history used in the original post and show how patriarchy needs to instill fear in men as well as women.

[Cerridwen]

4. If I understand you correctly,

you're saying that leaders within the patriarchal establishment* exploit to their advantage the "fight or flight" instinct in humans? Did I get that right?

*I'm extremely tempted to call those people "alpha male" types. I've seen men and women act as or attempt to act as "alpha male."**

**"Alpha male" being those who would dominate and control. It might be a good thing in a canine pack - but I think it's counter survival in human society - the "The Chalice and the Blade" by Riane Eisler is one book which leads me to believe that and equalitarian society is healthier and saner for humans than a hierarchical society.

[Finder]

6. What about "Alpha Females"?

I think human personality allows for both sexes to want to be leaders. What I mean is there are leaders and followers based on personality.

It gets messy though when an alpha female tries to compete with an alpha male and that is where patriarchy comes in.

Throughout history(herstory)there have been females who led men but it has been whitewashed. Joan of Arc, Boudicca, Cleopatra, female pharohs, etc. This seems to happen in all cultures.

In now Christian lands, legendary women who were venerated as goddesses were scrubbed or made to be "saints" ala Bridget in Ireland(celtic culture) and many were melted into Mary veneration.

[Cerridwen]

7. Thanks for noticing and for asking.

I specifically left out alpha females because, in my experience, those who want to control and dominate are not interested in being 2nd in command but in fact want to be "top dog" regardless of whether they are male or female. And, as you noted, it's because in patriarchy, it's all about being "on top."

Alpha female in a pack tends to be 2nd in command to the alpha male and continues the patriarchal ideology of hierarchy. In my opinion, the position of alpha female continues and reinforces an ideology of hierarchy. Or, in other words, we continue to have women taking the role of alpha female who in essence are "men in skirts" and who are complicite in perpetuating the status quo. Some examples that come quickly to mind, phyllis schafly, ann coulter, beverly la haye, and even some of "our own" who appear to have "become that which we would fight."

It seems you and I have read many of the same books, i.e., Joan of Arc, Boudicca, etc. and the books pertaining to the cooptation of the sacred female into the veneration of mortal women thereby diminishing the Sacred Feminine. Oh, and that's a whole 'nother thread. :D

And, to maybe get back on topic, perhaps it's because there is a herstory of women able to be in control, to dominate, and to play by the "guys' rules" successfully, that patriarchal leaders today are so fearful of powerful women, of women who will step into the role of leader, of women who are capable of doing for themselves without the assistance of a patriarch (with or without the skirt ;)). Perhaps that is really the reason patriarchal leaders today are so bent on keeping women under their collective thumb.

I mean really, what would happen if we had another Boudicca, Cleopatra or Joan? Can you imagine what would happen if many women and men got behind a leader such as they? There is a reason for glass ceilings and targeting of "our" leaders. What if just one slipped through?

Yeah, I can see that causing wholesale fear.



:evilgrin:

[Finder]

8. Exactly--Alphas are considered Betas.

But look at elephants...There is a matriarch and of course the Bonobos(I love to throw that primate order at silverback knuckledraggers)

There is a fascinating book called "Demonic Males" that is a scientific/sociological approach to the evolution of patriarchy.

[Cerridwen]

9. Bonobos?! BONOBOS!!! Yay! Now I KNOW you and I are reading

the same material.

:rofl:

At another site at which I posted and chatted, bonobos were a frequent topic of conversation. What a way to wage peace, huh? ;)

Speaking of elephants; in a class I took somewhere along the line in my academic career, we read about the impact of women researchers on research previously done viewed through the filter of patriarchy, i.e., anthropology, archeology, animal behavior, etc., and an example from that reading still sticks in my mind.

The accepted theory is that the male lion is the head of the pride. When a woman researcher studied the behavior of the pride, she posited that it was in fact the females who allowed the male to remain with the pride based on the male's ability to provide for their needs. She noted instances of the females selecting which male was to be included as well as times during which the/a male was warned away from the pride. It may be that the "king of the jungle" is nothing more than a worker/provider to a female run co-op. :evilgrin: Needless to say, this particular theory has yet to become accepted into mainstream scholarship.

I'll see if I can find a link though I wish I had the particular text in hand for citation purposes. Erk.

[efhmc]

15. Okay one leaves for a few hours to weed and move mulch around and when

she comes back, she is so out of the loop. So what are bonobos?

[Kenneth ken]

18. ape species closely related to chimpanzees

and so closely related to humans.

From the postings on this thread, I'd guess they're a matriarchal society, or else a co-equal society. I guess I should read up.

[Finder]

21. Some info

http://www.bonobo.org/whatisabonobo.html

[cally]

22. In case you don't want to read the link

(I usually don't read the links.) Bonobo chimps are said to be the closest species to humans. They are peaceful and very sexual. Sex is used to avoid conflicts.

[Finder]

24. Why don't you read links?

How can you understand something without reading a link or a book or something that goes indepth?

Not calling you on it, I am just curious why you state you don't read links. How do you research something?

[cally]

27. I read the links on something I'm very interested in

but it's a pet peeve of mine that folks just post a link without info. I'll check a link after reading a paragraph or two to see if it's something I want to know more about. There's so much info on DU that I don't have time to look at all the links.

[Finder]

28. True

I am the same way. I hate when someone starts a thread with a title akin to "Look at this" and then just a link with no context or excerpt.

I will post just a link to a request for further info on a subject within a thread however.

[cally]

30. I'll sometimes post a link

when someone asks for info. I wasn't criticising you.

[Finder]

31. no prob--wasn't taken that way

I just was curious about the "not reading links" statement.

[donsu]

12. alpha females in a pack only give in to males stronger then they are

they don't automatically give in to males.

mostly females ignore or tolorate males unless the female is in season.

women must remember that all research on pack animals (mammals) was done originally by men. men watched the pack and reported their finding from the male point of view.

when women became animal scientists and watched the packs they saw a completely different set of social actions.

thus much info on animals had to be redone. and is still being redone. and the many men fight changing their observations.

[Finder]

13. good point...

same in archaeology and anthropology.

Maria Gimbutas turned archeology on its head yet still she is not taught in many universities.

[Hello_Kitty]

17. Yeah that's it

The language is always about a threat to your survival. And most people haven't had to live in constant fear of wild animals attacking them or bands of roving thugs from rival tribes (though that has persisted somewhat) since the advent of agriculture. But the fight-or-flight instinct remains and is easily exploited by the patriarchy, whether to instill fear of women or people of other races. Or when Cuckoobananas does it to make voters fear swarthy terrorists so much that they can't even see that he's no better than they are, in fact probably worse. The instinct is exploited in inumerable other ways by religions, politicians, and marketers. Have you noticed how often fear is used in political and advertising campaigns? Nothing motivates people like a threat, real or imagined. The only thing that even comes close is sex.

I've not much academic training so that's just my meager assessment, based mostly on my own experience and observation.

[Finder]

26. Point on...

Don't need any academic training to state the obvious.

[donsu]

10. way, way back men feared women because we bleed each mo. for

a week and don't die.

so this is an old fear.

many male constructed religions make women stay apart from them when they are bleeding as women are 'dirty' when bleeding.

that's so much nonsense, but there it is.

and men didn't want to own us until the connection was made of intercourse leading to pregnancy.

they wanted their sons. the only way to make sure was to make up marriage laws and keep the wife under constant surveillance until she produced the wanted son. daughters were collateral damage.

[all.of.me]

14. at what point in time was that connection made?

the one between intercourse and pregnancy. i have wondered that for years.

[Hello_Kitty]

16. That reminds me of "The Blue Lagoon"

When Christopher Atkins asks Brooke Shields "Why did you just have a baby?"

Sorry, couldn't resist :evilgrin:

[donsu]

19. don't know - would a woman historian please tell us?

nt

[Finder]

20. It depends on the culture/religion...

I imagine females knew before males did and prior to the written word.

[geniph]

29. That was a topic that fascinated me in anthropology

some societies have revered the female, because she becomes pregnant and delivers new life. Many, many less-developed cultures thought that women were impregnated by gods or spirits. I imagine in most cultures, it was probably those who were in charge of basic healing and delivery of infants who figured out that girls who'd never had intercourse never were impregnated by the gods, and eventually someone would make the connection.

Not all societies DO make the connection. There were a couple we studied when I took anthropology that insisted that all females be married from birth, because the gods could impregnate them at any time, and the pregnant female needed a provider and protector. (Why the whole tribe couldn't fulfill that role is another question entirely.)

[all.of.me]

32. i would imagine a woman made the connection first, because...

having had kids myself, i know it is a very intuitive process. i know when i conceived, just because those two nights i was very aware of everything around me, aware of how we all should be treating each other, aware of the darkness of the new moon. it was magical, and i can see a pregnant tribal woman, who did not have the complications of modern society to distract her from her body, completely in touch with what is going on. so at some point, the women decided to challenge the status quo. i'd really like to know the truth! or the theories, at least.

what would be a good source for that info? or what would i even google? i have no idea!

[geniph]

35. Well, you won't find ONE answer

because it's different in every culture when, and how, that connection was made.

[cally]

23. When Christians migrated into Europe

they faced a female centered culture. Older women were the wise ones and healers. The older women were a threat to the male priests and Christianity. It is during this time that wealthy men were encouraged to marry young, naive women. Before this, men wanted the older women for the status they brought to the marriage but the priests taught that men should train women. So this was a way to stamp out the old religions and allow men to train the women in the patriarchal culture.

A mass genocide occurred with the witch burning. It's been a long time since I read this stuff but I think 25 percent of women were killed during this time.

I believe that much of the fear of women, women's power, and older women in our culture comes from this taught fear of the female leaders of the old religions.

[Finder]

25. The dark ages...

I for one do believe in female power and agree that the things you cite were done for the reasons stated.

Our culture(US)with materialism and such keeps women competing amongst themselve and therefore not in solidarity.

[donsu]

33. I'm kicking to give some more women historians time to chime in

with info for us

[Finder]

34. Anthropologist not historian

since it would have been prior to the written word.

[donsu]

36. women historians write about the times before the written word

hey, I'm cool with anthropologists or anybody else that has some info to further educate us.