Talk like a pirate day approaches!!
You are The Cap’n!
Some men are born great, some achieve greatness and some slit the throats of any man that stands between them and the mantle of power. You never met a man you couldn’t eviscerate. Not that mindless violence is the only avenue open to you - but why take an avenue when you have complete freeway access? You are the definitive Man of Action. You are James Bond in a blousy shirt and drawstring-fly pants. Your swash was buckled long ago and you have never been so sure of anything in your life as in your ability to bend everyone to your will. You will call anyone out and cut off their head if they show any sign of taking you on or backing down. You cannot be saddled with tedious underlings, but if one of your lieutenants shows an overly developed sense of ambition he may find more suitable accommodations in Davy Jones’ locker. That is, of course, IF you notice him. You tend to be self absorbed - a weakness that may keep you from seeing enemies where they are and imagining them where they are not.
What’s Yer Inner Pirate?
brought to you by The Official Talk Like A Pirate Web Site. Arrrrr!
An’ t’ Celebrate, ‘ere be a previous postin’ ’bout anarcha-feminism, but t’is time in pirate-speak, Arrr!
(Courtesy ‘o medicore minds english ‘t pirate translator)
Anarchists all be pirates at ‘art!
What be anarcha-feminism Do we need it?
What be anarchist feminism Do we need a feminist consciousness?Ahoystorically, anarcha-fem was when anarchist women realised that anarchist men weren’t dealin’ with their patriarchal conditionin’ towards privilege The women needed somethin’ in addition t’ anarchist theory ‘n practice because it was gettin’ ‘em nowhere. (Bloody privateers!) They realised that they needed feminist consciousness But that feminist consciousness had t’ reject privilege, ‘n had t’ be based in class politics Because without class politics, workin’ class women would merely be awarded gains for rulin’ ‘n middle class women
Anarchism assumes that we’re all equal, but we’re not. (AAARRRRHHH!!!) Our cultural conditionin’ makes it impossible for us t’ come t’ the table as equals in struggle. (Sail ho!) I’ve heard people (and even meself) give an analysis o’ privilege as though we were all positioned on a ladder - all white rulin’ class men be at the fore, black women in poverty be at the bottom, ‘n t’ whole filthy lot o’ ‘em else jumbles into the middle somewhere. (Bilge!) But that’s just so simplistic ‘n unrealistic It totally ignores all the different factors that contribute t’ create hierarchies o’ privilege, ‘n all the other complex factors that contribute t’ maintainin’ those hierarchies on a day t’ day basis. (Sail ho!)
Once ye say you’re an anarchist, you’re meant t’ give up hierarchy ‘n become equal t’ t’ whole filthy lot o’ ‘em else But its not that simple Ye can’t simply leave yer privilege at the door, especially when ye don’t analyse ‘n understand how that privilege came t’ ye in the first place Pretendin’ that the problem will go away, or doesn’t exist won’t work t’ dispatch global capitalism, it won’t save our environment from destruction, ‘n it won’t work t’ eliminate sexism or racism from anarchist communities
There’s a current o’ thought circulatin’ at the moment which be based on 5 points o’ observation ’bout anarchism ‘n feminism:
1. (Arrgh!) Its not mens’ fault that they were born men, so they can’t be expected t’ do anythin’ ’bout their male privilege
2. If women feel uncomfortable ’bout a particular man’s particular actions, then the poppet needs t’ deal with that particular man by pointin’ out how ‘is particular actions weren’t OK
3. (Blimey!) Feminism be just a hourgeois attempt t’ shame workin’ class men get power over ‘em, ‘n when workin’ class women take up feminism, it be divisive o’ the workin’ class as a revolutionary agent
4. When a man has other forms o’ disprivilege (like class, knowledge, race, access t’ money) then this automatically dissolves ‘is gender privilege.
5. (Arrgh!) Women already have gender equality in Australia today(This approach consists o’ thin’s I have ‘heard ’round the traps’ It be the sum o’ excuses ‘n reasonin’s I have heard from several sources while talkin’ ’bout men, women ‘n privilege I’m not tryin’ t’ refute a stated position - but I am tryin’ t’ crystalise several ‘reasonin’s’ so that they can be refuted Part o’ the difficulty I find in feminist theorisin’ be the liquidity aforded t’ feminism’s critics - they aren’t easily pinned down)
I think this approach denies the overall political importance o’ the collective oppression o’ women, by men at every level in society. (Aaarrhhh, me parrot!) Its important t’ realise that just because a poppet be oppressed by other women (hip hip hooray for the middle classes!), that this doesn’t invalidate that oppression o’ women, as women A poppet can take the place o’ oppressor, but if she acts like a patriarch, she enforces the patriarchy, she gains power like a patriarch ‘n she uses the oppressive tools o’ a patriarch, then she be a patriarch She doesn’t need a penis t’ enforce a system o’ values which privilege men ‘n maleness
In response t’ these 5 elements o’ current anarchist thought ‘n practice, I would like t’ say:
1 Its not mens’ fault that they were born men, so they can’t be expected t’ do anythin’ ’bout their male privilege.
By this logic, thar can be nay stoppin’ those born into the monied classes either In a liberal-demoncratic society, o’ course oppressors wil give the excuse that they don’t mean t’ be oppressive. (Bloody privateers!) What’s more, I would accept that excuse, provided that the privilege avasts As women, we be taught t’ subject ourselves t’ shame ’bout our bodies, our thoughts ‘n feelin’s (and if we lapse, there’s always someone thar t’ help us feel more shame). (Sail ho!) As anarchists, we don’t want t’ reverse the relationship o’ privilege by shamin’ men when they dominate as men Nay! (Aaarrhhh, me parrot!) We want an end t’ the domination Anarchist women want anarchist men t’ discontinue engagin’ in male privilege. (Arrgh!) Nay more, nay less. (Shiver me timbers!)
2 If women feel uncomfortable ’bout a particular man’s particular actions, then the poppet needs t’ deal with that particular man by pointin’ out how ‘is particular actions weren’t OK
This denies that thar be a broad political basis for the exclusion o’ women from participatin’ in their own lives in any meanin’ful way. (Aaaarrrhhh!!!) Individuals do perpetuate hierarchy when it benefits ‘em t’ do so, so individual men be the proponents o’ patriarchy ‘n individual women be the victims This ‘individual man’ approach pits the victim against the oppressor, alone, unsupported, ‘n unable t’ access a political case against her oppressor (because he be an individual man, not a representative o’ an oppressive system) This be so alien t’ anarchist politics (especially those o’ us who be into workerism ‘n anarcho-syndicalism) that it barely warrants refutation. (AAARRRRHHH!!!) As anarchists, we strive t’ organise collectively against those oppressive relationships that fuck up our lives, but as women anarchists, we’re expected t’ go it alone against the most complex, initimate ‘n oppressive relationships. (AAARRHH!!!)
In anarchist thought, its up t’ the oppressed t’ organise ‘n overthrow the oppressor But when you’re talkin’ ’bout insidious, hidden relationships o’ power that distrupt even the most intimate relationships (of partnership, voluntary union, love, childraisin’, co-workin’) in subtle ways, ye can’t simply overthrow the oppressors They be our partners in the species, if nothin’ else Valerie Solanas in her “SCUM Manifesto” suggested eliminatin’ men from the planet as a sure-fire way t’ combat male oppression. (Yarrr, more grog, wench!) People called her crazy (and let’s face it, she probably was), but this course o’ action be bonnie much what be expected o’ anarchist women - t’ rise up against their oppressors in the same way that the workin’ class will rise up against the rulin’ class t’ purge ‘em from this earth, because men don’t really want t’ deal with the besue o’ ‘emselves as oppressor Anarchism seems t’ give women the choice o’ either eliminatin’ men, or bearin’ the cross o’ womens’ oppression
Even that language be so insidious “Womens’ oppression” as though we own ‘n perpertrate the oppression o’ ourselves as women! (Aaarrrrhhh!) Ha. (Yarrr, more grog, wench!) Its “oppression of women by a system which privileges men”. (Bloody landlubber!) The only way t’ distupt male privilege be for men t’ consciously cease t’ engage in male privilege
3. Feminism be just ’bout shamin’ men t’ get power over ‘em, ‘n this be divisive o’ the workin’ class as a revolutionary agent
It be the power which men wield over women that divides workin’ class men from workin’ class women. (Aaaarrrhhh!!!) The only way in which workin’ class women anarchists be divisive be by demandin’ an end t’ the privilege held over us. (Be ye ready to walk the plank?) The way t’ strengthen class solidarity be t’ strengthen the relationships between men ‘n women within the class, ‘n this means an end t’ oppression o’ women as women by workin’ class men This will mean an appraisal o’ the roles that men ‘n women play within class struggle, an appraisal o’ the gender balance in anarchist organisin’, an appraisal o’ how oft we all clean the toilet or take out the garbage, ‘n on ‘n on until the class be actually united in struggle for a better life for all (not just male revolutionaries united ‘n supported by unpaid poppet domestic labour) … Power t’ the sisters ‘n therefore t’ the class
4. When a man has other forms o’ disprivilege (like class, knowledge, race, access money) then this automatically dissolves ‘is gender privilege.
I’m caucasian I went t’ uni (but didn’t finish) I was a gifted child (but not very) I was born into the arse-end o’ the workin’ class (but didn’t fit in thar because I was fairly clever, ‘n hated for it) Me job pays me well, for what I do, but I’ll probably never own me own house - not even in cessnock I’m not in a lesbian relationship, ‘n never have been. (Yaaarrrr!) I buy new clothes, but I don’t dress like a corporate poppet What be the sum total o’ me privilege? (Bloody privateers!) Me privilege can’t be weighted ‘n summed t’ a round number, ‘n then compared against t’ whole filthy lot o’ ‘em else (if nothin’ else, that’s a hierarchy, ‘n we’re against those)
The myth that privileges can be balanced does media miracles for white liberals (and those wantin’ t’ appear so). (Yarrr, more grog, wench!) Take the Bush administration in the ’states: Condolezza Rice ‘n Colin Powell - 2 Black people (one a woman) in very high positions in the government, so Bush must be a tolerant, anti-racist, all-round good guy. (Yo-ho-ho!) Nay Two millionaires who have nay trouble developin’ ‘n enactin’ racist, anti-woman, anti-worker policies t’ further their own aims. (Shiver me timbers!) They’ve got nay sympathy with the workin’ class because their blackness be only skin-deep. (Bloody landlubber!) They’ve been excused from the negative connotations o’ blackness ‘n womanhood in exchange for sellin’ their image as symbols o’ tolerance ‘N participation in dominance over others
Anarchists should know better Blackness, or womanhood, or bein’ workin’ class doesn’t excuse ye from responsibility over yer own daily relationships with other people This includes relationships o’ co-operation ‘n o’ dominance When men be bein’ oppressors as men, over women as women, then their privilege should be apparant t’ all. (Yaaarrrr!)
5. (Bilge!) Women already have gender equality in Australia today
Women do not even have gender parity in lots o’ trades, professions ‘n positions o’ trust in Australia today Lots o’ middle class women appear t’ have an equality o’ opportunity, but that isn’t nearly the same as an end t’ gender-based oppression
A note on men ‘n maleness
I’ve talked here ’bout “men”, “men’s privilege”, “patriarchy” etc. (Bloody privateers!) I want t’ make clear that this be by nay means all men that I’m talkin’ ’bout This has parallels with class - not all rulin’ class people be vile Lots o’ ‘em just go t’ work, do their jobs ‘n it never crosses their minds that thousands o’ people can lose their jobs ‘n livelihoods at a stroke o’ their pen Some o’ ‘em would even think that they truly deserve their six-figure paychecks (afterall, its only enough for a house in the country ‘n a flat in the town) Only a few really live like kin’s, ‘n most o’ ‘em have a genuine job that they do which lets ‘em explain away their privilege as somethin’ they’ve earned
Not all men hate all women. (Bloody privateers!) Only a few would actually hate ‘em all, ‘n most might only have slight feelin’s o’ disharmony with specific women they didn’t get along with Men be still socialised t’ be agressive (and women t’ be passive), they have a myriad o’ reasons t’ explain their behaviour as natural ‘n normal. (Yaaarrrr!) BUT this doesn’t mean that their behaviour be natural ‘n normal or a neutral way t’ behave.
If you’re a man, ‘n you’ve got t’ the end, woo Maybe yer behaviour be really cool ‘n good, ‘n you’re not a sexist dickhead at all. (Be ye ready to walk the plank?) But, what do ye do when yer women anarchist buckos need t’ stand up t’ someone who be bein’ a sexist dickhead, who be excercisin’ ‘is power ‘n privilege over ‘em because they be women
