/anarcho/ - Anarchism Board

Damn I wish people here would celebrate like this instead of giving dead plants.

>>7890
>>7891
>anfems

You are my enemies as much as the ayncraps are.

>>7896
There are pseudo anarchists like >> >>7897

>>7900
>anybody who doesn't agree with me isn't a real anarchist

>>7901
>patriarchy

What fucking patriarchy you SJW?

anfems are scum, just as ayncraps and antifa are scum, they are the enemies of anarchists, they violate our principles of equality and freedom of expression.

I'm extremely weary of any community that puts feminism on its cover.

Feminism seems, in many ways, to be entryism for liberal-tier ideologies to creep their way into the heads of anarchists.

That being said, if actual revolutionary women movements are actually fighting capitalism, the state and the oppression over the people, they can have all the feminism they want as far as I'm concerned.

>>7902
>What fucking patriarchy you SJW?
>those i don't agree with are obviously SJW's!

Your an idiot if you really think there inst patriarchy in the world.

Even if you deny that the west is a pragmatical society, which it is, all you have to do is look around the world and see much more extreme and prevalent examples of patriarchy. If you cant see it then you are fucking blind.

>anfems are scum, just as ayncraps and antifa are scum, they are the enemies of anarchists, they violate our principles of equality and freedom of expression.

Translation

>YOU ARNT AN ANARCHIST, AND YOU ARNT EITHER, YOUR ALL FUCKING SCUM BECAUSE YOU DON'T HOLD THE EXACT VIEWS I DO!

>I'm extremely weary of any community that puts feminism on its cover.

There is nothing wrong with feminism on its own, the feminist movement in the west has just been taken over by, for lack of a better word, Feminazi's, at at least that's the face of the new feminist movement. Remember that the are the vocal idiot minority, like with every group in existence.

>Feminism seems, in many ways, to be entryism for liberal-tier ideologies to creep their way into the heads of anarchists.

How so? Like i said, there isn't anything wrong with feminism, its the people how claim to be feminists who have pretty much nothing to do with actual feminism have giving it a bad name. Like how people associate an-caps with anarchist, anarcho-capitalism inst an anarchist ideology except in name, just like the faux feminists.

>>7908
Feminism is sexist bullshit, it's a war on men, it's identity politics, liberal bullshit.

>gender roles have served humanity to create a sexual division of labor to increase it's economical efficiency

Gender roles are a result of evolution retard, sexual reproduction entails that we makes some effort into seeming attractive to each other. There's nothing wrong with gender roles in themselves.

Antifa are wannabe fascists, they infringe on people's freedom to express themselves. Golden Dawn is pretty much the equivalent of a gang, just as the state itself is, antifa are no different in how they act. You don't have to endorse antifa to stop militant fascists, stop this reactionary bullshit.

>>7909
Anfems are as much as anarchists as ayncraps, anarchism is already about equality, and feminism is inherently sexist.

>>7910
>Feminism seems, in many ways, to be entryism for liberal-tier ideologies to creep their way into the heads of anarchists.

This is exactly what I'm trying to say. Anfems aren't helping, they are bringing identity politics and muh patriarchy into the mix. Notice how many anfems are depicted as men.

>>7915
There is no patriarchy you plebbit-tier little shit, there are as many women as there are men at the top of the capitalist food chain. In fact, women CEOs on average tend to make more than men.

>>7919
>There is no patriarchy you plebbit-tier little shit, there are as many women as there are men at the top of the capitalist food chain. In fact, women CEOs on average tend to make more than men.

Oh look, your a fucking idiot. Oh joy! News flash dumbcunt, just because there are women CEO and they tend to make more more (Btw, they usual decide what they get paid themselves because they are fucking CEO's) doesn't mean we live in a non-patriarchal society, just like how there is a black president dost mean there isn't systematic cultural and legal racism, just like women CEO's doesn't mean their isn't systematic cultural and legal obstetrical for women.

Im gonna say some words, now read it slowly, cause you might miss the point again. You. Are. Fucking. Retarded. And. Fucking. Blind.

You dont even have to look at the west, look at pretty much any country in the middle east, Africa, south America, or any other continent on the planet. Your gonna find patriarchy, and if you don't see it, congratulations, you didn't fucking look for it.

Do your research you dumb cunt.

>>7922
>Racism is a result of believing in the idea that race exists, that signifies some meaningful distinction in people when it doesn't.

Lets conveniently forget that our societies are systematically and extremely racist the the majority of "minority" postulation. A few women and non-whites in positions of authority dosn't mean the system isn't racist. How the hell can you be an anarchist and not recognize that? Historicity you're wrong, in modern day you're wrong, there is literately no scenario where you are right about this. None what so ever.

>you social justice warrior
Kek, I will re-iterate.

>What fucking patriarchy you SJW?
>those i don't agree with are obviously SJW's!

>there is no fucking patriarchy

There is, it exist all over the world in various places and cultures. You are wrong, have some dignity and admit it.

>Men and women equally impoverish other men and women.

Yes, yes they do. Is this evidence that the western and the majority of ofter societies are not patriarchal? No, no it dose not.

Look, clearly you've spent too much time on /r/anarchism or something and have thus been exposed to the vast about of femanazi and SJW bullshit they produce, and you've probably just gotten to the point where your gonna demonize anything associated with feminism.

The real world isn't the internet, get your head out of your ass, do your own research instead of this "I DON'T EXPERIENCE RACISM AND PATRIARCHY THERE FORE THEY DON'T EXIST" and actually know what the fuck your talking about, because you clearly don't.

>>7925

sjw pls go

youve proven nothing, your nebulous patriarchy is nonexistent, and maintaining identarian walls and fighting on their behalf will never emancipate anyone to begin with

pls drink some bleach

>>7925
Feminism is a paradox and requires a patriarchy in order to exist, whether or not there is one, which as it happens, there fucking isn't. Feminism preaches equality while excluding half the fucking human race just because of what's between our legs, that's discrimination and that's sexist. Feminism is sexist, that is a proposition I have held before I even visited the internet. Feminism creates an arbitrary divide between men and women. Also notice how the pictures of the turkish anarchofeminists are all fucking women. It's not equality, it's a gender war and the partiarchy is men in general. Anfems are just as much my enemy as the ayncraps, the antifa, and the anarcho-queers. As far as I'm concerned you don't get to just put the word anarcho at the beginning of whatever bullshit ideology you believe in. I don't think anfems are anarchists period, you are liberal try hards, radical feminism is a paradox because it's reactionary and it's petty as fuck.

>>7926
fucking this all the way, I'm in this shit for real equality, not some war on gender roles and the arbitrary difference of the piece of flesh between my legs.

Anfems in a nutshell

>smash the state cuz STATE=PATRIARCHY
ok state is smashed now what
>lol i dunno let the mutualists/commies/syndicalists handle it

they're trash

>>7928
>implying anarcho-feminists can't be communists

what the fuck are you talking about? you seem like you learned about anarchism just from the internet lol. grab a book, at least read emma. "anarcho-feminists" are just underlining the women issue it's not an economic distrubiton politics. anarcho-feminist revolution is not separated from anarchist revolution. well, if you are an ayncrap it is.

>>7928
I don't see a problem with this.

How could one seriously compare them to ayncraps when this is the consensus of what the anfem movement is?
You - answer me.

>>7927
>Feminism is a paradox and requires a patriarchy in order to exist
That's not what a paradox is, that's called a reaction.
Just as there would be a equally legitimate masculinist reaction to a matriarchal society.
>, whether or not there is one, which as it happens, there fucking isn't.
There obviously is, you're just so insanely buttmad at statist feminazis that you've come to the conclusion that ignoring actual patriarchy somehow makes you win an argument.
>Feminism preaches equality while excluding half the fucking human race just because of what's between our legs
They do? That's news to me. Can you cite the source on that claim? And let me just inb4 some statist feminazi propaganda from an American west-coast tabloid.

Admit that what you are mad about are liberal feminists, not anfems.

>>7930
>underlining the women issue

which is irrelevant to the end goal anyway so it's a pointless division of anarchism

it's trash

anarcho-[anything with nothing to do with economics] is absolute fucking trash

>>7932
So you're admitting to the fact that you are so fucking primitive that you can't allow multiple topics of discussion to go on on an anarchist board, outside of economic discussion, without you blowing a fuse?

I guess we've settled it then.

>>7931
>I don't see a problem with this.
>How could one seriously compare them to ayncraps when this is the consensus of what the anfem movement is?

Anarchism isn't about just smashing authoritarianism, you need a plan for after that happens or else you're not helpful

There's no anarcho-femeinism after the state is gone if society is modelling themselves around mutualist, communist, or syndicalist economics. The entire premise of the belief would be "if there was a state it would be run by dudes, because I say it would"

Either that, or they want matriarchies in place after, which like ayncraps aren't anarchists :^)

>>7932
>anarcho-[anything with nothing to do with economics] is absolute fucking trash

if you really think that you should become a marxist tomorrow. anarchists will never have a marx. he exposed capitalism and ended the debate with das capital in economic field. but it's not enough we know it is not. anarchists was always holding their grounds because there some truth behind all these economic theories and you can't overlook them. now if you are saying "anything with nothing to do with economics is absolute trash" well bitch, that's what marx was saying to bakunin.

>>7935
You're implying that people rally behind an anfem-banner from time to time under the current authoritarian climate can't hold economic views as well?
>:^)
Indeed, it's time to stop banging on the keyboard, mate.

>>7936
>anarchists was always holding their grounds because there some truth behind all these economic theories and you can't overlook them.

did I ever deny that

>>7938
>You're implying that people rally behind an anfem-banner from time to time under the current authoritarian climate can't hold economic views as well?

They can, but then it's a pointless rally that exists solely to divide people, which works directly against an anarchist goal

>>7936

>if you really think that you should become a marxist tomorrow
"Who is right, the idealists or the materialists? The question, once stated in this way, hesitation becomes impossible. Undoubtedly the idealists are wrong and the materialists right. Yes, facts are before ideas; yes, the ideal, as Proudhon said, is but a flower, whose root lies in the material conditions of existence. Yes, the whole history of humanity, intellectual and moral, political and social, is but a reflection of its economic history."
Literally the first paragraph of God and the State.

>now if you are saying "anything with nothing to do with economics is absolute trash" well bitch, that's what marx was saying to bakunin.
No, Marx was telling Bakunin that he was a faggot because everyone who wasn't Marx's bitch was a faggot in Marx's view. Also something or other about the class nature of states I think.

Maybe anfems ITT should provide more specifics and sources for their claims and anti-fems should stop equating these posters' brand of feminism for SJWism.

Just saying, shouting matches don't help anyone.

>>7947

This is the kind of kneejerk reaction that makes me think the anfems might have a point.

I hate SJWs as much as the next guy, but Emma Goldman is okay in my book.
As are all the feminist anarchists in the militias fighting for liberation in Kurdistan.

>>7949
>kneejerk reaction
>implying what I said wasn't thought out

Thanks faggot, why don't you refute each of my points before trying to discredit my argument.

>emma goldman
>anfem

You know she never actually called herself an anfem, but she did call herself an anarchist. Moreover anarchists on the whole are for the rights of both men and women, so by that logic all anarchists are anfems, which sounds like anarcho-autism to me.

Feminism is redundant in general, specifically in relation to egalitarians, and even more so in relation to anarchists who have no need for it as we are already concerned with women's rights just as much as men's.

>>7950
>anarcho-autism

post-identity anarcho-autism
imageboards in a nutshell

>>7950
Completely agree.

It's not my job to educate you but sexual division of labor created gender differences that got materialized by human culture. That's why woman in our cultural are relegated to the household work, commodified sexual objects, tend to not have any major role in the capitalist economy, more likely to get raped, MTF violence, gender roles in general, and so on. The Patriarchy as a system does not just oppress women but also men because it makes men incorporate a manly gender role of infinite virility.

Your argument that feminists oppress you because you have a penis just shows your ignorance, that's like an argument of a 19th century propaganda cartoon, any real radical anarcho-feminist knows that gender is a social construct and that there isn't a necessary connection between biological sex and gender. Women or Men are not made up by their genitals, that is the essentialist notion of the transphobic mysoginist, which is the opposite of the trans-feminist notion that we have as Anarcho-Queer/Feminist.

Example, I'm trans woman and i can´t support a movement like yours if you don't recognize our basic rights that are constantly shattered by the society that we live in. Our oppression is the same as the extraction of surplus value, there are both material and ideal relations which reproduce the oppression of people who don't fit the normality idealized by the rational capitalist mode of production. A truly anarchistic theory should abolish all form of hierarchies that divide humans, our identities shouldn't determine our value as human beings, they are just things with that should have no relevance to achieving our life goals of creativity and self-fulfillment, your world view just creates barriers for queers and women expression.

CNT-E knows it's role in the revolution as a queer feminist movement, that's why it's the largest anarcho-syndicalist union, because it can make alliances with other anarchistic groups instead of fetishizing a 19th century patriarchal wet dream. They publish in their magazine several articles on Women's and Queer rights, they are quite progressive about it.
>CGT is not anarchistic.

Call us when you are able to emancipate your bourgeois minds and create alliances with the queer feminist folks.
Try to make a effort and learn why we support the Anarcho-Queer/Feminist movement, instead of spilling 19th century prejudice.

>>7979

Do tell me what oppression you face and how "manarchists" intend to maintain and exploit it. Please.

>your bourgeois minds
Ooooooooh boy, here it is.
Guise, if you disagree with me you're petty bourgeois.
Petty bourgeoisie is a state of mind, not an objective position in society. Lenin told me!

>>7980
>ignoring everything that was said before

Maybe try to read the History of Sexuality volume 1 if you want to understand my perspective. Foucault can be more persuasive.

The ad hominem shit that i said is dumb but you are silly to use the same fallacy after you pointed it out.

>>7983
Whitewashing the oppression of women, trans, and other sexual minorities with their idea that class comes first, jut like the old leninist hierarchical priority.

Facts:

THERE'S A FUCKING 10% CHANCE OF TRANS PERSON DYING JUST FOR BEING TRANS AND WALKING ON THE STREET. Being trans can enrage someone to the point of them feeling the need to kill that person.

Open a fucking newspaper and check for the daily homophobic attack that killed someone or lead to suicide.

Let's ignore that women in the last 2000 years of recorded history were treated like cattle and only in the last century got the right to participate in politcs. Politcs comes from the greek word polis that means to govern the city, since politics is related to all aspects of human society.

I talk about bourgeoisie because women in middle ages had different freedoms that they don't have now, covering the past history has a dark past trough the evolutionary social relations of today is just not true, society doesn't evolve we just adapt the social relations to the material conditions and the ideas that justify the economical control of the dominant class. People in the middle ages walked naked on the street to go to the baths, they would sleep naked together, using clothes while sleeping was a stigma since you were hiding something on your body, people would fuck on the streets, being homosexual wasn't necessarily a bad thing since the idea of homosexuality didn't exist, the sexual act of fucking a woman or a man was the same what mattered was that the individual was not passive/bottom.

look around your culture and use the tool of empathy to try to understand how i woman would feel.

catcalling

rape culture

social control over female bodies like they were commodities

>>7984
>>7984
>>7984
Women's and trans oppression is a genuine thing, but claiming that being a male by default makes us oppressors is absolutely retarded. That's like saying Somalia is shit, therefore all blacks - niggers - are apes.

Sorry, there are horrible men, but there are good men too. In fact, I have even been oppressed by a woman, who I had done nothing against. And even so, I did not try to get back at her, because I understand that she was a victim of her shitty household circumstances.

>>7988
/thread

>>7988
A little aggressive, but you are absolutely correct.
Anarchism is feminist(not feminazi) in nature itself. You dont need to use anarcho-feminism as much as you dont need to use anarcho-statelessism or anarchic-unheirarchism.

>>7997
Anarchism is not feminist in nature, because feminism is sexist, exclusive to women. Anarchism is egalitarian in nature, it is inclusive to everyone regardless of gender.

>>7999
Why are AwA consistently quasi-reactionary?
Everyone understood what he meant, why do you feel the need to antagonize everyone further?
>say egalitarianism instead of feminism!
Is the mirror version of
>say feminism instead of egalitarianism!
Also on the same level as
>muh pronouns

>>8002
There is always misrepresentation. If you ask about anarchy, most people would respond to sons of anarchy or chaos. Doesn't mean anarchism is chaos. Neither does it mean feminism itself is about matriarchy. Those who claim to be feminists and seek to establish matriarchy should be called feminazis. That's it.

In any case, referring to your point about pronouns. In that case, you don't need to segregate us further and call it anarchism. Call it egalitarianism and humanism.

>>8004
>muh true scotsman

Feminism by the principle of it's being exclusively about women makes it sexist, just as MRAs are sexist by being exclusively about men.

Anarchism entails more than simply equality, it's about negating the unnecessary and overly formal idea of government, so it's definitely more specific than egalitarianism. Humanism is another redundant ideology, there is no point in making an ideology of out what you must be by default, might as well say you believe in lifeism. I suppose there are a lot retarded ideologies out there.

>>8005
Fine. What about anti-patriarchists?

>>8009
There is no patriarchy faggot, there is the rich and the poor. Men and women both do their part to impoverish other men and women.

>>7988
The real division comes from a narrow view of society that just creates a secluded white dudes circle jerk. Not in pointing out our social hierarchies of gender, race and sexuality.

>>actually calling yourself anarchist while spouting out cliche liberal rhetoric
And you are spouting the same rhetoric that national socialists use while referring to feminists wanting to dominate men. I don't say that to attack you but just to point out that your argument is silly, sharing a rhetoric with another political group doesn't make it necessarily false, but facts.

That's not the philosophical origins of feminism, since the 19th century anarchists have been formulating a anarcho-feminist theory, for a reason we were in the vanguard of women rights, even in catholic Spain, because we understood that society created gender hierarchies to maximize the economic efficiency. In early capitalism, men were used as workers, acquiring a wage, while women were totally dependent on men, and women would take care of reproduction and other matters of the household. Those few women that worked had low wages, just like children, and even though they had some money the wages for women were so low that they couldn't have independence from the patriarchal family, it was only through a man that a woman could guarantee her subsistence. Moving on, my argument is that the basis of the sexual division of labor in industrial capitalism is still present today. Saying that men and women are equal is just like saying that wage slaves have it good in capitalism since now they can acquire goods and services. But the basis of workers having the right to consume comes from a history of class struggle against the capitalist exploitation, just like the new rights of women come from their struggle against the gender hierarchies of that same capitalist society. And history shows that there is a gender hierarchy that comes from the values of Christian religion which in it's turn as the ruling ideology appropriated roman and greek philosophical principals.

Can you point to human history and show me a period in which men and women became equal?

>>8012
>>8013
>le feminazi cultural marxist DD:
Just because some people say some dumb shit you can't generalize like they are representatives of feminist philosophy. I also agree with the radical notion of freedom of speech.

>>8020
the appropriate video was just uploaded.

Anarchist and Marxist philosophy came from Liberalism, so they will always be a facet?
>Source: Chomsky, On Anarchism.

You are using psychological notions to a sociological issue. The issue is not the white male individual but the social notion surrounding white male privilege, they are two different things. Just because someone is born male it doesn't make him an oppressor, but society instills in him ways to behave which reflect the patriarchal dominance. Although people are not just social reflexes we have to ability of agency and to critic the ideas that rule our society and our bodies, therefore being a men doesn't make you necessarily an oppressor.

If sexism was over or a minor issue i would really like to know about that historical event in recent history which destroyed millenniums of oppression. That kind of event should be traceable. With that i'm not ignoring the oppression that men suffer, that's why we diverge from liberals, since our feminism can't be separeted with our struggle against the capitalist state apparatus, wage slavery, male gender roles, and so on.. Are ultimate goal is to build a society based on the principles of anarcho-syndicalism on the shell of the old one.

>>8027
Dude you are really dense eh

I don't know what you think you're spouting that needs its own identifier under anarchy but anarchy itself already encompasses most egalitarian/feminist ideals. To take a few of those ideals and put them at the forefront is divisive and counter-revolutionary.

>>8019
>Can you point to human history and show me a period in which men and women became equal?

In secular societies when they were granted equal legal rights

If you're looking for an international movement to deal with religious sexism etc. you'll get it when we get anarchy

>>8031
Numbers of posts by you, 16

Number of people that have, for the most part, rightful told you you are full of shit. 6

Your complete lack of understanding of what feminists what they want, what anarchist want and have had to do with feminism is, and the complete and total "nananan, im not listening to you fucking feminist's and your arguments" is some /pol/ tier bullshit.

I realty hope you are a troll, it makes me sad to have someone so ignorant.

>>8034
No anarchist would oppress women, why the fuck do you want to bring feminism instead of anarchism? you are just as silly as those who want to bring communism and remove capitalism. That ONE thing isn't the only problem.

>>8038
I think their implication is that anarchy wouldn't do away with the likes of gender roles or sex based behavioural expectations

Which they could be right about but people can think whatever they want and behave however they want without infringing on the ability of others

It's only when it's forced is it a problem, and then it wouldn't be anarchy

>>8031
Lets follow your line of reasoning:
straight cis male cracker.
Oh wait, there aren't insulting words for normative people in western languages, why is that?
Maybe there is a social norm based on the cis straight white men in our culture since language is the best reflection of our culture.

>>8033
i know, anarchism actually encompasses the most radical (in the etymological sense of root) forms of queer transfeminism. I don't put any issue on the forefront, i'm an anarcho-syndicalist of the IWA but i also do activism related to queer transfeminism and i think that it's important for us to have our own spaces to develop some kind of ideas instead of spending all the time trying to explain some dude how sexism, racism, transphobia are a real thing and that the cis white male is not in danger.

>>7908
Here's the problem with feminism: It's called feminism, not anti-sexism or something. It isn't about gender equality, it's about women. I'm not some /pol/ack who can't see that women are clearly disadvantaged in others, but even if it wasn't for the areas in which they are advantaged I would wish for the boundary between men and women to be distorted. In my ideal world, no one gives a shit about your gender or sexuality, so instead of being a pangender queersexual treekin you can just do what you want and no one will care. I am very distrustful of groups such as these which discriminate based on anything, and gender is a pretty big thing.

Reminds me of how the socialist movement in Scotland has morphed into an near-fascist ultra-nationalist movement.

>>8164
*women are clearly disadvantaged in some areas