Sunday, November 18, 2007

The Pitiless Nature of Ideology

As I mentioned here, I believe ideologies can blind us. I also consider them dangerous. Consider Kiuku's Post About Separatism at Feminist Critics. It has the pretense of insight, study and reasoning, but not the substance. It leans on a cursory understanding of Evolutionary Psychology, claiming men are biologically unnecessary, and that men naturally use violence to compensate for this. All to a repugnant purpose, and the comment discussion reveals some merciless proposals for its implementation.

I stand by the comment I made:
No, men aren’t necessary. Neither are gays, jews, blacks, whites etc. As technology progresses women won’t be necessary either - cloning and artificial wombs will suffice quite nicely. In fact people aren’t necessary either - the universe will continue along quite well without us.

Separatism - from all who are unnecessary? Separatism - from men because of their intrinsic evil? To paraphrase Orwell - there are some things that are so completely and obviously wrong, that only intellectuals can believe them. This is as clear an example as I’ve ever seen.

I'm glad I refrained from being drawn into a toxic discussion. But I am following it. Kiuku, the Separatist, is painstakingly going though all the comments from the (largely male) "sentient beings" - the unnecessary ones. And everyone is engaging in pointless arguments, treating the post with a respect it doesn't deserve.

BTW - I don't see this as at all representative of Feminism - most feminists are reasonable, caring, intelligent people. I consider it hate speech of a particularly dangerous sort, but as I said in this post, better to have it exposed than suppressed


Anonymous said...

Kiuku proves my point over at Feminist Allies quite nicely about how ideology blinds people into saying and thinking idiotic stuff.

I also don't understand why half the people there are engaging so seriously with a commenter like Kiuku. If she didn't have permission to post by the moderator on high her behavior would be blatant trolling in any other online community. I am sort of having trouble containing myself from laughing at her expense under my other handle, ApconX, on that board, while simultaneously feeling a little horrified that anyone could really feel that way and state some of the stuff she does.

The biggest irony is that she claims that anti-feminists are essentialist, meanwhile her claims about male existing on the periphery because they cannot give birth and are unnecessary has an essentialist core. But why waste my breath on an silly ideologue like her, you know?

Sweating Through fog said...

This was my first exposure to her.When the comments started, and she began responding, I actually wondered if she was just fooling around, toying with people. When she started talking about "sentient beings. " Like she would finally comment - wake up people - I was joking!

Anonymous said...

She got invited for that one "guest" post on Feminist Critics to give her view on seperatism. Hopefully that will be the end of it.

If you read more radical feminists at blogs like Women's Space/The Margins or I Blame the Patriarchy and the like you'll see that they all share her views to varying degrees. It's very hard to read their posts and keep a straight face half the time; surely these people must be joking, nobody can be that dumb.

The real problem I think is there are a lot of average moderate feminists that sympathize with the radical viewpoints or won't speak out against them in the name of Solidarity (an important concept for feminists in general).

At the end of the day they all share some of the same underlying assumptions, which are wrong (at least that's what I believe at this point in my life).

Sweating Through fog said...

Thankfully I see this as something way out on the margins for now, and thankfully the discussion has died down.

It's very upsetting, but I try to control that by not seeing it as more than it is.

Hayden Tompkins said...

I hate that feminists have changed from asserting a woman's equality to 'proving' that women are better than men. You canNOT have men without women, or shall I say, masculine energy without feminine energy. Yin and yang. Those energies need balancing.

You don't have to look any further than same sex relationships to see that often one partner embodies masculine energy and the other partner embodies feminine energy.

I think the question is, why is she trying to argue that men are irrelevant. It disturbs me that she beings her post with "Men: The Problem".

Oh really? Based off of what value system?

If you value all life and abhor killing and violence (in which case I would assume that you value MEN too) then wars would seem 'evil'.

If you value strength, you might view war and crisis as a crucible for human nature and for social progression as a whole.

I can't believe she is advocating a modern day version of SEGREGATION.

hedera said...

Hey, sweating through fog, welcome to the blogosphere; I saw your post on Disgusted Beyond Belief and came over to check you out.

I haven't read the posts you're all discussing and I don't think I'll bother; as a feminist who thinks the really important aspects of equality are pay and respect (and pay), I can't stand their silly little arguments. Hayden Tompkins is spot on about yin and yang. And you're perfectly right that the appropriate way to handle the extremists is to ignore them. They won't go away - they never go away - but at least you aren't encouraging them.

It almost sounds as though this character is arguing that if there were no males there would be no war. Can she really be that obtuse?

Sweating Through fog said...

Hayden, Herera. Thanks for visiting, and welcome!

Donald Douglas said...

Happy Thanksgiving!

American Power

tomas said...

hey sweating through fog -- can you email me so i can use your piece for rad dad 8


tomas.moniz at gamil

Anonymous said...

Interesting. This sounds like the same Kiuku who trolled our board and proceeded to fly clear across the country to stalk a (male!) friend of mine whom she apparently wanted to sleep with. When he declined to have anything to do with her, she embarked on a campaign of online, email and phone harassment which included making vile comments about his girlfriend on another blogsite. She is imho quite mentally ill, though I want to clarify that that last comment has nothing to do with feminism or any discussions on that subject. Our board is centered around a completely different topic of discussion, though Kiuku did tend to start arguments with many of us about feminism and was very impatient that we refused to agree with her that men are evil and should be 'eliminated'. Then of course she turned into a sexual harasser herself...oh, the irony. BTW, she also is an ardent follower of both Scientology and Satanism--by her own admission, mind you. Anyway...beware. And good luck, since I'm sure you'll hear from her again.