Sign Petition to Make Sinister Wisdom an all Female, Lesbian-Feminist Journal Once Again

By Jeanne F. Neath

XX Lesbian Activists (XXLA), a new activist group, has started a campaign to return the journal, Sinister Wisdom, to its all female, Lesbian-Feminist, revolutionary roots. The group, of which I am a member, has a petition we encourage you to sign at https://www.change.org/XXLesbians.

Sinister Wisdom now male If you are incensed at the takeover of women’s and Lesbian spaces by males claiming to be women, take action by signing this petition. Sinister Wisdom’s recent issue #128 on “Trans/Feminisms” features male (“transgender”) contributors, and includes “written and visual images of dismemberment, penises, graphic male sex acts, objectification of women’s bodies, and derision of radical feminists.” (from the quote by JW in the petition) The XXLA petition pressures Sinister Wisdom to return the journal to an all female, Lesbian-Feminist publication.

In addition to signing the petition, XX Lesbian Activists encourages everyone to send a copy of XXLA’s open letter, or their own protest emails, to Sinister Wisdom (julie@sinisterwisdom.org). Let’s see a deluge of emails begin to hit Sinister Wisdom’s inbox on August 26th (in commemoration of the US Women’s Suffrage movement’s victory day). The email campaign will continue until Sinister Wisdom is once again an all female, Lesbian journal. For more information on XX Lesbian Activists’ campaigns or to get a copy of the open letter, you can contact xxlesbianactivists@xxamazons.org.

The petition is printed below. Sign the petition at https://www.change.org/XXLesbians.

Return Sinister Wisdom to its All Female, Lesbian-Feminist, Revolutionary Roots

To the Board of Directors of Sinister Wisdom:

We are Lesbians and Feminists who need Sinister Wisdom to become a Lesbian-Feminist journal again. Sinister Wisdom used to provide us with Lesbian-Feminist writings and artwork that helped us to survive in a world that is hard on Lesbians. Sinister Wisdom did far more than that.

Sinister Wisdom began publication in July of 1976, started by two Lesbian separatists who were part of the revolution in Lesbian and female consciousness of the times. For us, Sinister Wisdom became our cauldron where Lesbian-Feminist thought was rising up and spilling over, creating a world beyond the confines of patriarchy.

Now we are being erased as Lesbians, even by the board of directors of Sinister Wisdom. Our worldview is being denied and decimated. We are isolated and hurting since Sinister Wisdom has abandoned us.

What happened? Earlier this year the Lesbian journal, Sinister Wisdom, published its issue #128 dedicated to “exploring and celebrating transness.”

With Sinister Wisdom’s “Trans/Feminisms” issue #128, we have a complete reversal in which males and male visions dominate in a new twist on the old story of patriarchy.

The result. Lesbians, young and old, seeking that revolutionary Lesbian and female consciousness have had stolen from us a critical link in our web of resistance. We want our Lesbian journal back.

Here are comments from a few Lesbians:

“Sinister Wisdom grew from the grassroots of Lesbian-Feminist outrage! Our words fueled our Lesbian-Feminist energies. Stealing our cultural institutions like Sinister Wisdom from women in the name of including ‘male lesbians’ is a cruel joke aimed to destroy our communities. Only women can be Lesbians.” PEM
“Issue #128, ‘Trans/Feminisms,’ was appalling to me with its written and visual images of dismemberment, penises, graphic male sex acts, objectification of women’s bodies, and derision of radical feminists. I found nothing Lesbian in this issue of Sinister Wisdom, which still claims on its cover to be a Lesbian Journal.” JW
“Sinister Wisdom, one of our last Radical Lesbian-Feminist journals, published my name in a slanderous attack on me. This happened in an article by Mr. Susan Stryker in the ‘Trans/Feminisms’ issue. The Sinister Wisdom editor, Julie Enszer, refused to print my response.” Bev Jo
“And that’s why this issue is such an insult to radical Lesbian Feminists. Our space has been diminished if not completely obliterated. Let the trans folks, Feminist or not, have a journal of their own. They can laud the penis as much as they want to. But keep it out of our space!” RG
“Julie’s intro, with its Orwellian tones of revising history—’we have always been trans-friendly’—told me what I would find in the contents. Sadly, I would recommend removing ‘Wisdom’ from the title. ‘Sinister’ says it all.” CW
“I feel such profound sadness that Sinister Wisdom has fallen to the bullying and finances of the men who now say they are women. This once-beloved publication, along with so many others, both publications and organizations, has lost courage in a way that harms all actual woman.” SW
“This issue overflows with deception, falsification, and grotesquery. But the true horror is that its Lesbian supporters don’t (or pretend not to) feel and see a boot to the face of Lesbians.” RMG

Sinister Wisdom a queer journal? Males, male thought, and male violence have no place in a Lesbian journal. Lesbians have always defined Lesbians as females in same sex relationships. Why would Sinister Wisdom embrace queer/trans ideology and define Lesbian to include males?

The explanation. Sinister Wisdom has lost its Lesbian-Feminist focus, and it now centers on a queer and transgender, therefore largely male, worldview.

Labrys energized and reclaimed Before resorting to this petition, we wrote to the editor and the board of directors of Sinister Wisdom requesting that they allow us to edit an issue that would focus on gender-critical and Radical-Feminist creative work. Despite the considerable writing, editing, and artistic skills we offered, Sinister Wisdom refused our request for one, gender-critical issue.

We Call upon the Sinister Wisdom Board of Directors – Julie R. Enszer, Editor (2010 to present); Roberta Arnold; Cheryl Clarke; Sara Gregory; Yeva Johnson; Briona Jones; Shromona Mandal; Joan Nestle; Rose Norman; Mecca Jamilah Sullivan; Yasmin Tambiah; and Red Washburn – to return Sinister Wisdom to its all female, Lesbian-Feminist revolutionary roots.

Respectfully, XX Lesbian Activists

Sign the petition at https://www.change.org/XXLesbians.

Violence: the Primary Tool of Male Domination!

Leave a reply

Since the 1980s we’ve lived on forty acres of lesbian land. I’ve always wanted to post signs declaring it LESBIAN LAND to make clear our boundaries. The threat of male violence prevents me from taking this bold action. My desire is trivial in the larger picture. I mention it as one tiny example of the invisible barrier to action: our fear of male violence.

The threat of male violence surrounds women and girls as a daily reality. Today in the US, books are banned. Assault weapons are not! Mass shootings are regular occurrences we can anticipate as part of daily life. Male shooters are the norm. Male violence is the central tool of dominance.

In 1979 Andrea Dworkin wrote, “Women of supreme strength who have lived in creative opposition to the male cultural values of their day have been written out of history – silenced.”

Today, we are the “women of supreme strength who are living in creative opposition”! Many of the male dominated institutions of patriarchy have joined the march toward the “elimination of female Self-centering reality”, as Mary Daly warned in Gyn/Ecology, 1978. Currently, academia and medicine are leading the march in silencing anyone questioning the idea that men can be women if they so choose. Much of the media and many politicians agree with the new dogma that centers the demands of males. As Susan Unterberg said in 2018, “Men in power support men in power, and they want to see men in power.”

Why is this new, and strictly enforced, dogma useful to patriarchy and to men? Daly again helps us unravel the convoluted reality we are facing.

“Male propagation of the idea that men, too are feminine – particularly through feminine behavior by males – distracts attention from the fact that femininity is a man-made construct, having essentially nothing to do with femaleness.”

Male-defined femaleness is false and is only useful in the scheme of male domination of women and girls.

Who gets to define “woman”? Who gets to decide? We live in an era where “woman” is disputed territory! Respected British Professor Kathleen Stock, who is a lesbian, wrote, “Controversial and difficult ideas need to be tested in the public square, we need to think about them properly and we also need to enable discussion of ideas that seem attractive to people because if you try and shut it down there will be massive public resentment.”

Stock was forced to resign her faculty position in October of 2021 after a barrage of intimidation and threats, and having to live surrounded by body guards. The threats have continued.

However, in March of 2023, Kathleen Stock, Martina Navratilova and Julie Bindel started The Lesbian Project https://www.thelesbianproject.co.uk/ to “highlight and champion the experiences, insights and sensibilities of lesbians in their diversity”. Stock further explained “Lesbians will always exist but we’re in a crisis in which young lesbians don’t want to be associated with the word. Some of them want to describe themselves as queer and some of them prefer not to see themselves as women but as non-binary.”

“Allow women and girls to speak on sex, gender and gender identity without intimidation or fear” UN expert in a recent press release

Did you see headlines or hear news stories three weeks ago when the United Nations documented this reality? The press release (below) clearly describes the hostility, intimidation and violence directed at women and our allies for expressing our own political opinions and views. https://www.ohchr.org/en/press-releases/2023/05/allow-women-and-girls-speak-sex-gender-and-gender-identity-without

This valuable report, written in clear language, documents the realities of threats and violence we as gender critical feminists face! Early in the report law enforcement is named, as it at times fails to protect and safeguard our right to assembly and to speak. Read this valuable overview. Share it with friends and family. Our powerful voices must be heard. We understand that to replace biological sex with gender designations will only serve patriarchy.

GENEVA (22 May 2023) – Threats and intimidation against women expressing their opinions on sex and sexual orientation is deeply concerning, said Reem Alsalem, the UN Special Rapporteur on violence against women and girls in a statement today.

“In the context of disagreements between some women’s rights activists and transgender activists in a number of countries in the Global North. Alsalem warned that violence against women and intimidation against people for expressing differing views.
Discrimination based on sex and sexual orientation is prohibited in international and regional human rights law.

I am concerned by the shrinking space in several countries in the Global North for women and feminist organisations and their allies to gather and/or express themselves peacefully in demanding respect for their needs based on their sex and/or sexual orientation.

Law enforcement has a crucial role in protecting lawful gatherings of women and ensuring women’s safety and rights to freedom of assembly and speech without intimidation, coercion, or being effectively silenced. It is clear that where law enforcement has failed to provide the necessary safeguards, we have witnessed incidents of verbal and physical abuse, harassment, and intimidation, with the purpose of sabotaging and derailing such events as well as silencing the women who wish to speak at them.

I am disturbed by the frequent tactic of smear campaigns against women, girls and their allies on the basis of their beliefs on non-discrimination based on sex and same-sex relations. Branding them as “Nazis,” “genocidaires” or “extremists” is a means of attack and intimidation with the purpose of deterring women from speaking and expressing their views. Such actions are deeply troubling, as they are intended to instill fear in themshame them into silence, and incite violence and hatred against them. Such acts severely affect the dignified participation of women and girls in society.

I am also concerned by the way in which provisions that criminalise hate speech based on a number of grounds, including gender expression or gender identity, have been interpreted in some countries. Women and girls have a right to discuss any subject free of intimidation and threats of violence. This includes issues that are important to them, particularly if they relate to parts of their innate identity, and on which discrimination is prohibited. Holding and expressing views about the scope of rights in society based on sex and gender identity should not be delegitimised, trivialised, or dismissed.

According to international human rights law, any restriction on freedom of expression should be carried out strictly in accordance with the human rights standards of legality, necessity, proportionality and to serve a legitimate aim. Those disagreeing with the views of women and girls expressing concerns related to gender identity and sex also have a right to express their opinion. However, in doing so they must not threaten the safety and integrity of those they are protesting against and disagreeing with.Sweeping restrictions on the ability of women and men to raise concerns regarding the scope of rights based on gender identity and sex are in violation of the fundamentals of freedom of thought and freedom of belief and expression and amounts to unjustified or blanket censorship.

Of particular concern are the various forms of reprisals against women, including censorship, legal harassment, employment loss, loss of income, removal from social media platforms, speaking engagements, and the refusal to publish research conclusions and articles. In some cases, women politicians are sanctioned by their political parties, including through the threat of dismissal or actual dismissal.”

Reem Alsalem is the UN Special Rapporteur on violence against women and girls, its causes and consequences.

I’m closing with the strong language offered by Andrea Dworkin,

“The public censure of women as if we are rabid because we speak without apology about the world in which we live is a strategy of threat that usually works. Men often react to women’s words – speaking and writing – as if they were acts of violence; sometimes men react to women’s words with violence. So we lower our voices. Women whisper. Women apologize. Women shut up. Women trivialize what we know. Women shrink. Women pull back. Most women have experienced enough dominance from men – control, violence, insult, contempt – that no threat seems empty.” Intercourse (1987)

Let’s brainstorm about how we can share this vital report from the UN–perhaps have a Speakout where we read sections and then have women “testifying”. Just one thought! We can’t let this report get buried. Send it to your local newspaper. We have some power here! And powerful voices!

Sources and further readings:
About the UN report:
The Special Rapporteurs, Independent Experts and Working Groups are part of what is known as the Special Procedures of the Human Rights Council. Special Procedures, the largest body of independent experts in the UN Human Rights system, is the general name of the Council’s independent fact-finding and monitoring mechanisms that address either specific country situations or thematic issues in all parts of the world. Special Procedures’ experts work on a voluntary basis; they are not UN staff and do not receive a salary for their work. They are independent from any government or organization and serve in their individual capacity.

More from “Kathleen Stock: Gender-critical academic ‘determined’ to do talk”

Prof Stock rejects the claim her views could be classed as hate speech.
She said: “It’s not hate speech to say that males cannot be women.

“You can believe what you like, and I’m not stopping anybody believing any different, but it’s certainly not hate speech to say that and that’s basically the most controversial thing, I think.”
Prof Stock believes controversial views should be tested in public.
“It’s important younger generations are exposed to ideas they haven’t come across before. Sometimes that will be very challenging to them,” she said.
“Controversial and difficult ideas need to be tested in the public square, we need to think about them properly and we also need to enable discussion of ideas that seem attractive to people because if you try and shut it down there will be massive public resentment.”

https://www.bbc.com/news/education-65714821

The march of mechanical masculinist progress is toward the elimination of female Self-centering reality.“ – Mary Daly, Gyn/Ecology:

Women of supreme strength who have lived in creative opposition to the male cultural values of their day have been written out of history – silenced.“ Andrea Dworkin,
“For Men, Freedom of Speech; For Women, Silence Please” (1979)

The public censure of women as if we are rabid because we speak without apology about the world in which we live is a strategy of threat that usually works. Men often react to women’s words – speaking and writing – as if they were acts of violence; sometimes men react to women’s words with violence. So we lower our voices. Women whisper. Women apologize. Women shut up. Women trivialize what we know. Women shrink. Women pull back. Most women have experienced enough dominance from men – control, violence, insult, contempt – that no threat seems empty.” Andrea Dworkin, Intercourse (1987)

“All human life on the planet is born of woman. The one unifying, incontovertible experience shared by all women and men is that months-long period we spent unfolding inside a woman’s body.
….most of us know both love and disappointment, power and tenderness, in the person of a woman.
We carry the imprint of this experience for life, even into our dying.” (all from pg 11)
Of Woman Born: Motherhood as Experience and Institution by Adrienne Rich, 1976

A Woman-Centered Economy! Replacing the Male-Dominated Economy (Part 2)

Leave a reply

By Jeanne F. Neath

Perhaps after reading the first half of this blog, the subsistence economy has begun to feel familiar to you. Or not. Whatever you may be feeling, the fact remains that the male-dominated economy is doing us – Earth and humans – in and there is an already existing woman-centered economy that can take its place. Part 2 of this blog is again primarily written for people of the global North (“North” and “South” here refer more to the “developed” vs. “developing” world than to strict geographies. Even within a country, some groups may belong to the North and others to the South.) [1]. We have a choice to make!

The War Against Subsistence

The capitalist, colonizing patriarchy is doing everything it can to control that choice. This global system does not want anyone, global South or North, to have “an independent subsistence”. As Mies and Bennholdt-Thomsen explain:

“Ivan Illich stated as long ago as 1982 that the war against subsistence is the real war of capital, not the struggle against the unions and their wage demands. Only after people’s capacity to subsist is destroyed, are they totally and unconditionally in the power of capital.” (p. 19, Subsistence Perspective, Maria Mies and Veronika Bennholdt-Thomsen)

African campaign for farmer control of seeds

In the global South vast numbers of people from the countryside have been forced from their lands and subsistence-based ways of life as result of centuries of colonization, international development policies, land and water grabs, loss of land due to climate and ecological disasters, and corporate/state pressures on peasant farmers.

In the global North over a century of economic pressures on small farmers, propaganda campaigns portraying rural life as backwards and the industrialization of agriculture have pushed many farm families off their lands.[2] Today the “service” economy is busily eating away at the subsistence economy, as people pay for all kinds of things they used to get from their communities, do for themselves or not do at all, including “treating themselves” to toenail and fingernail manicures, socializing on social media, getting tattoos, and eating at fast food restaurants, to name a few.

The capitalist economy is colonizing and commercializing both the Earth and the subsistence economy in its endless quest for profit and wealth for the few. Resistance is strong in the global South, but people in the global North are far more under the control of capital, due to our loss of “an independent subsistence.”

The capitalist economy is colonizing and commercializing both the Earth and the subsistence economy in its endless quest for profit and wealth for the few.[3] Resistance is strong in the global South, but people in the global North are far more under the control of capital, due to our loss of “an independent subsistence.”

Putting Women at the Center

Still, the woman-centered economy beckons. Every day women (and men) in the industrialized world get to choose the economy they want over and over again. Eat out (capitalism) or cook dinner (subsistence). Plant kale or buy it at Wal-Mart. Walk the dog or hire a dog walker. Through making one choice at a time women (and men) can gradually diminish our dependency on and support for the male-dominated economy.

Red Russian kale Putting women at the center of an economy prevents men from taking more than their share of power and ensures a balance between women and men. Woman-centered does not imply woman-dominated. Women in subsistence economies (and elsewhere) generally create caring and sharing relationships that are non-hierarchical.

Our individual choices give us power in our own lives, but subsistence economies are created by communities of people giving to and receiving from each other and the Earth. The giving of gifts begins with the gifts of the Earth and the gifts of human mothers. As Robin Wall Kimmerer has explained, a natural human response to “a world made of gifts”, the abundance of nature, is to also give, give to the Earth and to each other.[4] Among humans, gift giving comes very naturally since human infants are dependent on the care – gifts – of our biological and social mothers. According to Genevieve Vaughan, this one-way mother/child gifting relationship forms the basis of a maternal gift economy where all relationships are based in gifts, not exchanges.[5]

Subsistence economies are based in the giving of gifts, though some, perhaps the more stratified and patriarchal ones, may include barter, trade, cash and markets while still making the well-being of everyone in the community the central concern.[6] In many subsistence-based societies women participate in local markets in order to share surpluses from subsistence production and gain power and prestige within their communities.[7] Increasingly, feminists interested in a return to subsistence and maternal gift economies are acknowledging the connections between the two.[8] Perhaps a better name for the subsistence economy would be the “subsistence/gift economy.”

Daughters of Belitis picnic, 1959, Bay Area
The capitalist economy isolates people and destroys community. Both gift giving and subsistence-based relations create deep bonds and community. As female-centered economies grow, we can expect communities to grow and strengthen too. With a central place in the economy, women’s place in community should follow suit.

We can choose to create community at the same time we choose the subsistence/gift economy over capitalism. Yes, cook dinner instead of eating out AND invite family, friends or neighbors. Plant kale, eat it yourself AND give some away. Do this within the community you belong to or intentionally begin creating the community you want.

A Plan for Transformation

Despite the climate and larger ecological emergencies unfolding, this dominant society is not even attempting to create a plan that would make the radical (meaning root) transformations necessary to halt these disasters. Such a plan would have to recognize the need to bring capitalism, growth, male dominance and all domination to an end. This the power holders in the global society cannot and will not even consider.

Despite the climate and larger ecological emergencies unfolding, this dominant society is not even attempting to create a plan that would make the radical (root) transformations necessary to halt these disasters. Such a plan would have to recognize the need to bring capitalism, growth, male dominance and all domination to an end. This the power holders in the global society cannot and will not even consider.

As Veronika Bennholdt-Thomsen has explained, these times call for new strategies to create social change:

“In view of the social power structures of our era, the old quandary of whether “we” should abolish the plundering capitalist system or whether “we” – since there is no time for systemic issues – should concentrate on reforms, has become obsolete. What matters now is that we – all sovereign individuals capable of acting responsibly – withdraw from the forced maximization economy by refusing to participate.”[9]

A very promising option available to those in the global North who want radical transformation is constructive resistance, the use of actions that work to both upend capitalist, colonizing patriarchy and, at the same time, create alternatives. Reclaiming and expanding woman-centered economies is constructive resistance. Every move into the female-centered economy is a move out of the male-dominated economy. Because capitalism is dependent on growth (to avoid recession, depression, collapse), it depends on women’s (and other consumers’) participation.[10] Think back to George W. Bush’s response to 9/11. Here in the U.S. we were told to go shopping!

Every move into the female-centered economy is a move out of the male-dominated economy. Because capitalism is dependent on growth (to avoid recession, depression, collapse), it depends on women’s (and other consumers’) participation.

The male-dominated economy has an Achilles’ heel. The growth of the woman-centered economy is the dart that can slow it down and, over time, bring it to an end. Talk of ending the economy that so many people now depend on sniffs of disaster, yet so does the continuation of that economy. An alternative way to meet everyone’s needs must be created. That alternative is the subsistence/gift economy! The shift to this woman-centered economy opens the door to the creation of fully woman-centered communities and societies that do away with domination.

30 million were affected by floods in Pakistan last summer Why not switch to the female-centered economy and scrap the male-dominated one? Clearly, the male-dominated economy that is bringing us climate catastrophe, forced migrations and the Sixth Extinction is far scarier than the subsistence/gift economy that exists only to bring us life. In the global South, people have been fighting to continue their own ways of life, which includes their subsistence economies, since the beginnings of colonization. Choosing to embrace and expand woman-centered economies offers those in the global North another way to step up by moving into an Earth-centered way of life and curtailing support for the economy of destruction.

If you are still troubled by thoughts of what you might have to give up as the male-dominated economy winds down, consider this. Yes, subsistence economies provide the essentials of life, not the “extras.” But, there can be more than one economy, a mix of economies, within any society. Why not have two female-centered economies? Caring for the well-being of all Earth and human communities must be the priority, but as the earth recovers, woman-centered economies providing “wants” may evolve and co-exist with subsistence economies.

Gardening and Eating: A First Step

Industrial agriculture is terrible for the Earth.[11] We have to eat! Industrial agriculture – a central part of the male-dominated economy – must be replaced and we can look to the woman-centered economy for the replacement.

Mountain Mother is calling me and it’s spring so the earthworms and the garden are calling extra loud. If you listen, you will probably hear them too. Not everyone is physically able to garden, but everyone can probably find a way to make sure their food scraps feed the earthworms and restore the soil.

With most women (and men) in the U.S. spending so little time gardening (average is under 1 ½ hours a week for women) there is a great opportunity to expand home food production. This expansion could happen really quickly, as it did during both World Wars when the U.S. government encouraged people to plant victory gardens. In 1943, 20 million victory gardens produced 10 billion pounds of food.

Hello earthworms! Creating home and community gardens and small farms can restore the Earth and restore us. There is plenty of work to be done besides the actual gardening, including garden planning, learning about insects, seed saving, cooking and preserving foods and much more. As we become deeply connected to the plant world, our relationships with the life-giving soils and ever-changing winds and waters will grow too. These kinds of deep and real connections can transform our lives, including even our desires and what we think we need. Stepping away from the cell phones and all the rest of the constant bombardment of modern society and slowing down to nature’s pace can open up such a different and awesome world that everything changes, inside and out.

This reminds me of one last insight from Veronika Bennholdt-Thomsen:

“Decommercialization is first and foremost an attitude of mind. Orienting ourselves not to money, but to what we actually need puts all decisions in a new light. Modern insatiability can be replaced by the satisfaction of having a need fulfilled.”[12]

*****

Notes

1. “inequality within countries has also been growing and some commentators now talk of a ‘Global North’ and a ‘Global South’ referring respectively to richer or poorer communities which are found both within and between countries. For example, whilst India is still home to the largest concentration of poor people in a single nation it also has a very sizable middle class and a very rich elite.” More info here.
*****

2. Maria Mies and Veronika Bennholdt-Thomsen, The Subsistence Perspective, p. 17-19.
*****

3. “Money or Life? What Really Makes Us Rich” by Veronika Bennholdt-Thomsen in Climate Chaos: Ecofeminism and the Land Question edited by Ana Isla, 2019.
*****

4. “Mishkos Kenomagwen, The Lessons of Grass” by Robin Wall Kimmerer in Traditional Ecological Knowledge: Learning from Indigenous Practices for Environmental Sustainability edited by Melissa K. Nelson and Dan Shilling, 2018
*****

5. Genevieve Vaughan, For-Giving: A Feminist Criticism of Exchange, 1997.
*****

6. For example, Mies and Bennholdt-Thomsen described how a peasant and craft economy functioned as late as the 1960s in the German village of Borgentreich. Peasants traded their farm products for the goods and services of local craftspeople: blacksmiths, dressmakers, bakers, carpenters and so on. Cash payments were only required when the craftsperson had to buy materials (e.g. fabric) and needed to replace the cash they had spent. But, not every person could pay. Then as Mies and Bennholdt-Thomsen report:
“After waiting in vain, the craftsman would sometimes go to the farmer and pick up a couple of sacks of rye or seed, or maybe a few piglets. But, as one master joiner put it, ‘We also simply forgot about a lot of it.’ The baker said that most people paid their bills at the end of the year, but ‘those who hadn’t a penny to their name got their bread for nothing; in the end you couldn’t just let people starve.’” From Maria Mies and Veronika Bennholdt-Thomsen, The Subsistence Perspective, p. 88-89.
*****

7. Maria Mies and Veronika Bennholdt-Thomsen, The Subsistence Perspective, p. 109-110.
*****

8. For example, Veronika Bennholdt-Thomsen includes a discussion of the maternal gift economy in her 2019 article “Money or Life? What Really Makes Us Rich” published in the Climate Chaos anthology edited by Ana Isla.
*****

9. “Money or Life? What Really Makes Us Rich” by Veronika Bennholdt-Thomsen in Climate Chaos: Ecofeminism and the Land Question edited by Ana Isla, 2019. p. 55.
*****

10. David Holmgren, one of the founders of permaculture, suggests in his article “Crash on Demand” that permaculture activists could initiate a financial crash by reducing consumption and that this could bring about desperately needed societal and ecological changes. Holmgren’s ideas are very interesting, yet have received sharp criticism from some because of the effects a financial crash would have on humans. I am suggesting a gentler approach than Holmgren in which the growth of the subsistence economy would supply people with what we need to live as the capitalist economy (and the damages created by it) diminish through reduced participation. Withdrawing from the capitalist economy and is a matter of ethics! In either Holmgren’s scenario or the one I am suggesting, the actions of a relatively small portion of the populace could have a large effect because of capitalism’s fragility.
*****

11. Industrial agriculture is not only a major contributor to climate change, but also fuels habitat loss, the biodiversity crisis, freshwater drawdown, pollution and more. For an introduction to these issues, check this out
*****

12. “Money or Life? What Really Makes Us Rich” by Veronika Bennholdt-Thomsen in Climate Chaos: Ecofeminism and the Land Question edited by Ana Isla, 2019. p. 60.

A Woman-Centered Economy! Replacing the Male-Dominated Economy (Part 1)

Leave a reply

By Jeanne F. Neath

If you had the choice, wouldn’t you rather live in a woman-centered economy?[1] It’s pretty clear by now that the male-dominated economy – patriarchal capitalism – is a social, ecological and economic failure. What if I told you that there is a choice? Most people don’t realize it, but everyone participating in the global economy is living in two economies, a mix of economies where one is male-dominated and the other female-centered. Why not switch to the woman-centered one and scrap the other one?

There is a catch. Or, at first look some people think there is. The woman-centered economy is a subsistence-based economy. And that subsistence word scares people. Well, it scares people who are very dependent on or privileged by the male-dominated economy.

In The Subsistence Perspective, Maria Mies and Veronika Bennholdt-Thomsen point out that the village women of Bangladesh or others reliant on subsistence do not find subsistence scary. These Bangladeshi women understand that “what is important is what secures an independent subsistence.” (p. 3, The Subsistence Perspective). Mies and Bennholdt-Thomsen claim that the perspective of the Bangladeshi village women, a subsistence perspective, is desirable, even for people living with a great deal of privilege:

“The utopia of a socialist, non-sexist, non-colonial, ecological, just, good society cannot be modeled on the lifestyle of the ruling classes – a villa and a Cadillac for everybody… : rather it must be based on subsistence security for everybody.” (p. 4, The Subsistence Perspective)

Kenya women farmers

Subsistence-based economies have sustained human life across countless millenia and continue to do so today. With the development of patriarchy, war, colonization and class, other types of economies were created, although subsistence economies endured. These new economies were based on an overclass accumulating wealth through various means such as taking land by force, slave labor, tribute, wage labor and taxation.

Today people’s relationship to subsistence differs based on how assimilated and privileged they are in the capitalist, colonizing patriarchy that now dominates the Earth. In general terms, those in the global North are likely to be well assimilated, feel a part of the dominant society and no longer have “an independent subsistence.” In the global South many people are resisting, fighting to keep their own ways of life, including their subsistence economies. (“North” and “South” here refer more to the “developed” vs. “developing” world than to strict geographies. Even within a country, some groups may belong to the North and others to the South. [2])

Many of us would rather not support the male-dominated economy, but the thought of subsistence scares us or makes us uncomfortable. Yet … what an opportunity we have! We don’t have to wait for a feminist revolution!

My writing today is directed primarily to people in the global North. Many of us there would rather not support the male-dominated economy, but the thought of subsistence scares us or makes us uncomfortable. Yet … what an opportunity we have! We don’t have to wait for a feminist revolution! We already belong to a female-centered economy that can replace the male-dominated one.

By now, you are probably asking yourself: What is subsistence anyway? What makes subsistence a woman-centered economy?

What is Subsistence?

Mies and Bennholdt-Thomsen provide us with a simple definition of what they call “subsistence production” or “production of life” saying that this “includes all work that is expended in the creation, re-creation and maintenance of immediate life and which has no other purpose.” (p. 20, The Subsistence Perspective) The fact that subsistence economies have “no other purpose” is key to distinguishing the subsistence economy from capitalist and state run economies. That “other purpose” is profit, the creation of wealth for a few (mostly men) at the expense of the well being (and perhaps the survival) of the Earth and human society.

Graph showing large size of women's economy It is important to understand the importance and the size of the subsistence economy. Genevieve Vaughan recently discussed research from D. Ironmonger and F. Soupourmas showing that unpaid household work, called “gross household product”, would have cost $11.6 trillion in 2011, if wages had been paid.[3] Compare this to the $15.6 trillion figure for Gross Domestic Product (GDP) in 2011. Even in a highly developed country, the U.S., the subsistence economy is a multi-trillion dollar economy almost as large as the market economy! This economy is critical to the continuation of life and human society and women’s work is central to it.

Despite the magnitude and importance of this woman-centered economy, over the past couple of centuries more and more women have joined the male-dominated economy as wage workers and business owners (while also continuing to do subsistence work). There are many reasons for this movement, including economic need, sexism, feminism and the much higher status accorded the male-dominated economy. There has been a “war against subsistence” at work here, as I’ll discuss in Part 2 of this blog. For now, please keep in mind that status is given and taken away by society and there is no reason to think that the work done for the “other purpose” of money in the male-dominated economy is in any way superior to subsistence work.

What Makes the Subsistence Economy Woman-Centered?

Creation of Life (Biological Reproduction): Women are the creators of human life. The work that only women can do bearing, birthing and nursing children is a key part of what makes subsistence a woman-centered economy. While men have a necessary role in biological reproduction it is fleeting and small compared to pregnancy and giving birth. The continuation of human life is utterly dependent on women, even where capitalist or state economies now sometimes play a (profitable) role through provision of reproductive technologies, doctors and hospitals.

Maintaining Life (Social Reproduction): Raising children is likewise critical to the continuation of human societies. Since this is social, not biological work, men often participate. Nonetheless, across countless societies and historical eras much of the work of nurturing and socialization has fallen to women. This is essential subsistence work carried out primarily by women and a key part of what makes subsistence a woman-centered society.

Across countless societies and historical eras much of the work of nurturing and socialization has fallen to women. This is essential subsistence work carried out primarily by women and a key part of what makes subsistence a woman-centered society.

It isn’t just idle speculation to say that it is mostly women raising children. The U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA) collects data every year on how many “household hours” per week women and men spend doing child care (on average). Yes, women do much more child care! In 2018 we spent about 33 hours per week when unemployed and just a little less (30 hours) when employed.[4] The comparable numbers for men were about 23 household hours (unemployed) and 18 (employed). (In actuality, women and men with young children spend many more hours doing childcare than the BEA reports. The BEA numbers are based on averaging data from all U.S. households, including those that have no children or only older children who require much less care.[5]) Please notice that the BEA statistics do not have anything to say about the quality of childcare provided by men, as compared to women.

Zora, our dog, could walk herself since we live so far off road Maintaining life involves much more than socializing the next generation and women do much of this maintenance work too, even in the global North. You don’t have to have children to play a central role in running a household. For example, do you cook meals? Clean your house? Care for other members of your household when they are sick? Walk the dog? Do yard work? Sew buttons back on your clothes when they fall off? Keeping a household going can involve seemingly endless work and women do much of it! This is true even in households that have many modern “conveniences.”

Women do even more work maintaining households in non-industrial societies where their livelihoods are more fully tied into the subsistence economy. This work can include tasks such as: processing and preserving of food from gardens or fields, carrying water, butchering, house building, weaving textiles, processing hides, making fishnets, manufacturing clothing, making pottery and many other crafts. In non-industrial societies women’s household maintenance work is likely to be higher where men have taken over more of the work of food production.[6]

Maintaining Life: Subsistence Production of Food: Despite all the work described above, in many non-industrial societies women can be heavily involved in subsistence production of food. In a 1986 article in American Anthropologist, Alice Schlegel and Herbert Barry documented the extent of women’s contribution to subsistence food production in 186 non-industrial societies. While men contributed more than women overall, in about half of the 186 societies women did over 35% of the food production. The researchers considered women’s contribution to be high when it reached this level (35%). Women were especially likely to make a high contribution to production in societies that used simple technologies to gather or grow plant food (high contribution in 70% of these societies). This is in stark contrast to societies based primarily in hunting of animals (high contribution in just 13% of these societies).[7]

Backyard chickens We can’t include anyone’s production work from the capitalist economy (in jobs, as business owners) in these considerations as that work isn’t subsistence work and cuts into time available for subsistence work.[8] Today, women make up a major portion of the paid work force.[9] Still, some women in heavily industrialized societies do garden or keep chickens or other livestock for home (subsistence) use. According to the BEA, in 2018 men in the U.S. did a little more home gardening than women (The rough averages in the U.S. are 1 ½ to 2 ½ hours for men, ½ to 1 ¼ hours for women.)

Women in industrialized societies who want to participate more in the women’s economy could work fewer hours at jobs. Traditionally, women have been the gatherers of plants and were the inventors of agriculture. One avenue women could take to reclaim power would be in developing close relationships with and knowledge of the plant peoples. We could become gatherers, gardeners, seed collectors, tenders of the wild, herbalists or subsistence farmers. As has traditionally been the case in some subsistence economies, surpluses can be taken to market for barter or to obtain cash.[10]

Thanks to capitalist, colonizing patriarchy, we are facing an uncertain future where women and their local communities may need to take very seriously the need to focus on providing basic necessities like plant foods and medicine. The food sovereignty movement is important for the global North, not just the global South.

Subsistence is a Woman-Centered Economy

Let’s take stock of all the work creating and maintaining life that women do, as discussed here:

Almost all the biological reproduction PLUS
Most of the child raising PLUS
Most of the household maintenance PLUS
For nonindustrial societies, a very significant chunk of the food production.

Without women’s contributions there would be no subsistence economy and, indeed, no human society or life at all. Subsistence is a woman-centered economy!

In Part 2 of this blog, coming soon, we’ll talk about how choosing the women’s economy can bring the male-dominated economy to an end, while at the same time providing for humanity’s needs.

*****

Footnotes

1. Lorraine Edwalds and Midge Stocker edited a very interesting anthology, The Woman-Centered Economy: Ideals, Reality, and the Space Between in 1995. This feminist anthology was more focused on creating and supporting a woman-centered economy within the existing market economy and did not have an emphasis on subsistence. There is the possibility of conjuring up multiple woman-centered economies, as I will discuss in Part 2 of this blog.
*****

2. “[I]nequality within countries has also been growing and some commentators now talk of a ‘Global North’ and a ‘Global South’ referring respectively to richer or poorer communities which are found both within and between countries. For example, whilst India is still home to the largest concentration of poor people in a single nation it also has a very sizable middle class and a very rich elite.” For more info.
*****

3. Genevieve Vaughan provided the $11.6 trillion figure for 2011 in her talk at the 2022 Maternal Gift Economy Conference. The reference she gave was for a 2012 article by D. Ironmonger and F. Soupourmas. I have not been able to locate that article as I do not have a university affiliation.
*****

4. The numbers I report come from my reading of the BEA graphs and are as accurate as I could make them, but please consider them rough figures.
*****

5. The BEA did not include detailed information on their methodology with their graphs. They say: “our estimates cover the entire economy, and most households do not have minor children present. According to the 2020 Annual Social and Economic Supplement of the Current Population Survey, 40 percent of households had children under 18. Only half of those (21 percent of total households) had children under 13, the ages that require the most direct child care.” If 79% of the households included in the BEA statistics do not have children requiring substantial amounts of care (ie. children under 13), then parents with young children must be doing far more work that the figures they provide and that I have referred to.
*****

6. See p. 145 in “The Cultural Consequences of Female Contribution to Subsistence” by Alice Schlegel and Herbert Barry. In American Anthropologist, V. 88, 1986. You can access the full article for free if you register as an individual on Jstor.
*****

7. See Table 1 on p. 144 for data on women’s contribution to subsistence in societies with various forms of subsistence. “The Cultural Consequences of Female Contribution to Subsistence” by Alice Schlegel and Herbert Barry. In American Anthropologist, V. 88, 1986. You can access the full article for free if you register as an individual on Jstor.
*****

8. See p. 14 in Ecological Revolutions: Nature, Gender, and Science in New England by Carolyn Merchant, University of North Carolina Press,1989.
*****

9. Labor force participation rates for U.S. women are 57% and 68% for men, according to the U.S. Department of Labor. According to the International Labor Organization the current global labour force participation rate for women is just under 47%. For men, it’s 72%.
*****

10. See p. 70 in “Money or Life? What Really Makes Us Rich” by Veronika Bennholdt-Thomsen. In Climate Chaos: Ecofeminism and the Land Question edited by Ana Isla, Innana Publications, 2019.

Coming Back to Mountain Mother

2 Replies

By Jeanne F. Neath

Mountain Mother, I hear you calling me.
Mountain Mother, we hear your cry.
Mountain Mother, we have come back to you.
Mountain Mother, we hear your sigh.
Lyrics by Carol P. Christ [1], Sung to tune of “Ancient Mother” (origin unknown)

What do a bunch of feminist women do while riding a tour bus around the Mediterranean island of Crete? If they are on the Goddess Pilgrimage started by Carol Christ over 20 years ago, they sing songs honoring the Goddess. The song that drew me most from the first time I heard it on the fall 2022 Goddess Pilgrimage was “Mountain Mother.” Not surprising since the rocky, sparsely vegetated, yet hauntingly beautiful mountains of Crete surrounded us much of the time as our trusty bus wound its way up and down and around the island. The Pilgrimage leaders regularly pointed out double mountain peaks, suggestive of women’s breasts and therefore sacred to the ancient matriarchal peoples of Crete.

We were traveling to experience various sites sacred to the ancient Minoan culture, a matriarchal civilization that thrived on Crete from 3000 BCE to 1450 BCE when Mycenaeans from the Greek mainland invaded. We trekked through the stone ruins of large sacred centers such as Knossos and Phaistos (called “palaces” by patriarchally-inclined archaeologists) and climbed up to mountain peaks and caves that were once ritual sites of the Minoan people. We swam and lazed on sandy and stony beaches on the Cretan and Libyan seas where Minoan ships once sailed on trading missions to nearby Africa, Asia and Europe. We even visited Christian churches now standing on the same grounds that once drew the Minoan people to celebrate the Goddess.

Our two and a half weeks on Crete were enlightening, at times awe-inspiring and, perhaps most of all, challenging for two 70+ year old women. Paula dislocated and broke her left shoulder on the first day of the Pilgrimage and continued on the tour anyway with her arm in a sling. I became both personal attendant and pilgrim. I climbed up rough paths to sacred mountain peaks and caves. Near the top of Mt. Juktas, the peak sanctuary of ritual importance to the ancient Minoan pilgrims of Knossos, I braved a wild wind that was so powerful and so erratic I had to deeply concentrate on every step I took to stay in control of where my foot would land. The trail we were following was a little too close to the mountain’s edge for my comfort in these conditions. At the Libyan Sea on the south coast of the island overwhelming waves knocked me off my feet repeatedly as I attempted and finally succeeded in moving from the shallows into deeper waters.

Juktas peak sanctuary

Despite all this, I’ve encountered what is perhaps my biggest challenge now that I am home again, here in the Ozarks.

I have left the mountains of Crete behind, almost certainly forever. Going on pilgrimage to Crete was the only time I have ever flown overseas and, for many reasons, I doubt I will ever fly anywhere again. Yet, the “Mountain Mother” song is staying with me, playing over and over again in my head. I am even singing it out loud to myself, despite the fact that I am one of those people who can’t ever stick to the tune.

The mountains here in the Ozarks are very different than the ones in Crete – not so high and ours are covered by an oak hickory forest. When we got home from Crete after over 24 hours of listening to jet engines and sitting in airports, I was immensely relieved to be back in ‘our’ verdant mountains, with all the familiar sights and sounds. I couldn’t help but hear and feel these Ozark mountains calling me: “Mountain Mother, I hear you calling me.” I had in no way left the Goddess of the Minoans behind me.

I couldn’t help but hear and feel these Ozark mountains calling me: “Mountain Mother, I hear you calling me.” I had in no way left the Goddess of the Minoans behind me.

Carol P. Christ, the now deceased author of the “Mountain Mother” lyrics and the founder of the Goddess Pilgrimage to Crete, wrote in the preface to her book, Rebirth of the Goddess:

“…the Goddess is the power of intelligent embodied love that is the ground of all being. The earth is the body of the Goddess.” (p. xv)

If the earth is the body of the Goddess – and I like thinking of both the Goddess and the Earth this way – then what does it mean to be promising, “Mountain Mother, we have come back to you.”? Is this just a spiritual commitment that entails embracing the Goddess or another Earth-connected spirituality? Or are we talking about material reality – coming back to the Earth herself – too?

The obvious answer to these questions from the perspective of any Earth-based spirituality is both. The very idea of a dichotomy (dualism) between spirit and nature originates in the patriarchal worldview of the Western world. As Carol Christ explained:

“…neither the history nor the contemporary meaning of the Goddess can be understood unless we develop holistic modes of thinking, abandoning the categorical distinctions between ‘God’, ‘man’, and ‘the world’ and transforming the classical dualisms of spirit and nature, mind and body, rational and irrational, male and female, that have structured the worldview we know as western thought.” (p. xiv, Rebirth of the Goddess)

According to C. Christ the spiritual understandings of a culture – its mythos or “culturally shared system of symbols and rituals that defines what is real and valuable” – are deeply connected to the way of life of that culture – its ethos. She explains:

“A mythos supports an ethos, telling us that certain ways of living and acting are appropriate because they put us in touch with what is real and valuable” (p. 160, Rebirth of the Goddess)

And,

“Conversely, the living of an ethos reinforces the sense that the mythos to which it is connected is true” (p. 160, Rebirth of the Goddess)

When I sing “Mountain Mother, we have come back to you” I am embracing the symbols and rituals, feelings and understandings of a Goddess/Earth-centered spirituality, but at the same time I am reaching for an altered way of living that brings me and others back to the Earth, “Mountain Mother”, in very real physical ways.

Our mountains in the Ozarks

Here is that “biggest challenge” I mentioned earlier. I’ve spent most of a lifetime working to change my own ways of living and the way of life promoted and enforced by the capitalist, colonizing patriarchy that is dominating the Earth. Yet, can I truthfully say to Mountain Mother that I have come back to her? That I have already come back to her?

Can I truthfully say to Mountain Mother that I have come back to her? That I have already come back to her?

Paula and I watched one of the recent online Maternal Gift Economy salons and I was delighted when some of the speakers brought up the need to “exit the market” economy and live within the gift (and, I would say also, subsistence) economy. As things stand now in the dominant society, many, many people have been made dependent on the market economy for their basic physical needs. Corporate influences largely determine people’s “wants”, as well.

A key part of the needed transformation of society is to end the dependency on the market by returning to a gift (and subsistence) relationship with the Earth where our human gifts to the Earth would include great care for Her, great care of Her. If we want to come back to Mountain Mother, then receiving our sustenance directly from the gifts of the land and waters we live on is of primary importance, as is the physical care we give to the land and waters that are our home. Our own roots to the land can become deep like the trees living with us on Mountain Mother.

Of course, we don’t have to do all this alone. Other women (and men) are returning to Mountain Mother too and coming to live and work, at least in part, outside the market economy. We strengthen our women’s (and other) communities as each member uses the gifts from the Earth to create more gifts (e.g. making jam from native huckleberries) that then circulate within our communities.

A key part of the needed transformation of society is to end the dependency on the market by returning to a gift (and subsistence) relationship with the Earth where our human gifts to the Earth would include great care for Her, great care of Her.

I hope you aren’t finding talk of the gift/subsistence economy intimidating. Everyone on earth already participates in that economy! We are born into it and rely on it every day. When our mothers give birth to us, they are not paid to do this. Instead they are giving us the gift of life. When we cook dinner for friends or family members or they cook dinner for us we are participating in the gift/subsistence economy.

Almost everyone on earth also participates, to greater or lesser extent, in the market economy. The key here is making the shift away from the the market economy and further into the gift/subsistence economy (until the market economy is ended altogether). Those in the global North who may be deeply trapped in the market economy can perhaps learn from the Indigenous peoples and others in the global South whose original gift/subsistence-based ways of living often survived colonization, at least to some extent.

I will keep singing to Mountain Mother and telling her that “we have come back to you,” because we must come back to her and many of us are trying to come back. The tension I feel from singing what is not yet fully true for me, not yet true for many others keeps me motivated in the work I do for Earth and all of us, her diversity of creatures (including the human ones). The challenge of creating a way of life that is good for us and good for the Earth is one that I choose. What could be more satisfying (and fun) for any of us than getting to know Mountain Mother really well and dumping capitalist colonizing patriarchy at the same time we transform our lives and our communities!

Mountain Mother, I hear you calling me.
Mountain Mother, we hear your cry.
Mountain Mother, we have come back to you.
Mountain Mother, we hear your sigh.

Notes

1. The lyrics given here are adapted by me from two different versions, one on page 128 of Carol Christ’s book The Serpentine Path and the other from the song sheet handed out on the fall 2022 Goddess Pilgrimage.

The War on Women is Real … and Multi-Faceted!

1 Reply

This Newsweek cover declared “Women in Revolt”. We were!

We, at the Kansas City Women’s Liberation Union (KCWLU), celebrated the supreme court’s 1973 court case, Roe v. Wade, the day it happened! The court held that women in the United States had a fundamental right to choose whether to have abortions without excessive government restriction and struck down a Texas’s abortion ban as unconstitutional.

At that time my feminist friends and I believed we were heading towards the full inclusion of women’s rights even though we lived in this patriarchal society. As a result of this 7-2 court decision we were jubilant and full of youthful optimism.

I was 28 and working for TWA as a flight attendant. I was actively involved in my flight attendant union. MS. Magazine was an important news source in my life. The KCWLU had become central to my life, and those women were central to my “coming out” as a lesbian.

Women all over the world were challenging males and male domination of our lives. Men, and the women who allied themselves with men, were unprepared for our rebellion.

What has happened in the last fifty years to overturn this assurance of a woman’s right to control her body and her life choices? No simple answer to this question exists. However, in my exploration of possible answers, I listened to this NPR interview on Fresh Air, finding it to be quite helpful.

Yesterday, June 23, 2022, Terry Gross interviewed law professor Mary Ziegler. Her newest book about the abortion struggles is Dollars for Life. In the interview Ziegler details how the anti-abortion movement helped push the courts to the right, and upended the GOP establishment. It’s quite a story!

https://podcasts.google.com/feed/aHR0cHM6Ly9mZWVkcy5ucHIub3JnLzM4MTQ0NDkwOC9wb2RjYXN0LnhtbA/episode/MmIzMjY2MjQtZDEzOC00NzY3LTk1ZGQtZWRmNTM1NGYyN2Jj?sa=X&ved=0CAUQkfYCahcKEwiAwM-u78b4AhUAAAAAHQAAAAAQIw&hl=en

Discussion in that interview included examples of how the radical right leaders carefully used abortion for their own ends. The growth of right wing radio and cable TV networks became a useful vehicle for confrontation and inflammatory rhetoric. Ziegler also explains how the court case of twelve years ago, Citizens United, deregulated campaign financing allowing big donors to dominate the outcomes of elections in the U.S. Here’s more about that court case.

“The Supreme Court’s ruling in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, is a controversial decision that reversed century-old campaign finance restrictions and enabled corporations and other outside groups to spend unlimited funds on elections. (emphasis mine)

While wealthy donors, corporations, and special interest groups have long had an outsized influence in elections, that sway has dramatically expanded since the Citizens United decision, with negative repercussions for American democracy and the fight against political corruption.”
from https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/citizens-united-explained

I’m now 76. I’m still learning and strategizing. We are still “Women in Revolt”. It’s hard to know what we can do to make a difference. However, learning how we got to this place is one effort I’m making–this interview helped me see the “bigger picture”.

I hope you will listen to the interview with law professor Mary Ziegler. I expect it will bring up questions and observations from your own life experience. Let’s keep talking, reading, writing, and making trouble for those who deny our humanity.

Intergenerational Lesbians: How Can We Learn from Each Other?

3 Replies

By Jenna Weston

The feminist poet Muriel Rukeyser famously wrote, “What would happen if one woman told the truth about her life?/ The world would split open.” What if a dozen women told their truth to each other? A hundred, a thousand, a million? We did just that in the late 1960s and the 1970s. It was called Women’s Consciousness Raising, and it was a powerful method of shaping radical feminist awareness and political action, as well as building a female cultural alternative to the patriarchy.

In these present turbulent times– with judgement, canceling, and factional opposition all in ascendency– I believe the tool of consciousness raising could offer a way for lesbians of different generations to communicate with each other and find common ground.

Second-wave consciousness raising groups were so effective because they were a balance of the personal and the political. They were not study groups or therapy sessions. They were a way of communicating that was designed to honor each woman’s experience– without interruption, argument or debate. We spoke in the concrete, not the abstract about our individual lives. Then together, we drew insights and conclusions from the common patterns that emerged.

We met weekly, usually with no more than a dozen women. Keeping the groups small nurtured the intimacy and trust needed to open one’s self up to the most vulnerable truths of our personal experiences. It also allowed us ample time to fully share, widely explore, and deeply listen.

I was in my 20s when I joined a women’s CR group, as they were called. I was married to a man but knew somehow I was not living authentically. In hearing the stories of other women’s lives I realized I was not alone, and, over time, this validation gave me the courage to radically change my life. I came out as a lesbian, and became an activist. I also learned that other women could be smart, fierce and passionate—not something I experienced from most of the closed, conservative, gender-role following females I’d grown up around.

Especially in the beginning sessions of our CR groups we expressed a lot of anger about the misogyny and domination we had been subjected to. Many of us had suppressed it for years, for fear of retaliation. In the group we could freely name our oppressions and oppressors. We soon came to value our rebelliousness and were amazed at how words came pouring out, given a supportive environment. We appreciated each other for how honest and brave we were. We came to realize we were no longer interested in procuring “a piece of the pie” or being accepted into mainstream society– things the first wave feminists had fought for. We declared that the whole pie was rotten, and we needed to walk away and come up with a completely new recipe.

Sitting together in circles – usually on the floor of someone’s living room – we strip-searched our souls, digging down deep into previously hidden sources of our own women’s knowledge. We identified and repudiated the agents and symbols of our oppression. By throwing off burdens we had been carrying that weren’t ours, we opened a space for a Woman’s Way of Knowing to enter. From that we built a uniquely women’s culture of books, music, festivals, lands, spirituality and politics. It was intersectional, although we didn’t call it that back then, as we came to see and address how all patriarchal dominator hierarchies were connected, systemic and structural.

For a long time our structures and accomplishments went almost unnoticed by the mainstream we had withdrawn much of our energy from. But then the beauty of our creations began to be seen—and coveted. We could not be allowed to live lives that did not revolve around men. A backlash rose up, and it still continues. All lesbians– of every generation– are living under that backlash now.

I believe this is the perfect time for us to come together again in CR groups and share with each other the truths of our lives. Young and old, telling each other what it is like to be a woman, a lesbian, in these harsh times. Inventing and re-inventing our 21st-century selves together, not following some externally-imposed theories. Replacing dogma with discovery– arrived at mutually. Through the process of each woman sharing in turn her own experiences and observations, we can learn so much from each other. We don’t have to be isolated, or depend on outside sources like the media to tell us how to think, what to believe. Our principles and truths can evolve holistically, from our combined parts, and infuse our new coalition of multiple generations with lesbian empowerment.

Note: Jenna Weston’s article was published originally in Rain and Thunder: A Radical Feminist Journal of Discussion and Activism, Issue #77, Spring/Summer 2021.

Hearings on Equality Act: Call Senators Now!

1 Reply

By Jeanne Neath

According to the Coalition for the Feminist Amendments, hearings in the Senate about the Equality Act ( H.R. 5) are happening on Wednesday this week (March 17th). The Coalition for the Feminist Amendments asks that we call members of the Judiciary committee, especially Senator Tillis (NC), and ask that the Senate allow representatives from the Coalition for the Feminist Amendments and the LGB Alliance to testify at the hearings. You can reach Senator Tillis at 202-224-6342. See my recent blog for background information about the Equality Act.

Here’s a short message I came up with for my phone call to Senator Tillis based on information the Coalition for the Feminist Amendments sent me. You are welcome to use it or modify it as you wish.

“I do NOT support H.R. 5, the Equality Act, as currently written. At the Senate Judiciary Hearing please call for representatives from the Coalition for the Feminist Amendments and the LGB Alliance to speak as witnesses, including M. Lynette Hartsell. and Dr. Callie Burt. The Equality Act must be amended and M. Lynette Hartsell and Dr. Callie Burt will provide substantial information for the Committee and Congress on the fatal flaws that exist in the current bill. The bill as it currently exists is harmful to women, to Lesbians and to gay men. I am a Lesbian myself and I oppose H.R. 5, the Equality Act, as currently written. Please make sure that this bill is amended. Thank you!”

You can find contact information for U.S. Senators at this address: https://www.senate.gov/senators/senators-contact.htm. You can email Senator Tillis at: https://www.tillis.senate.gov/email-me

Here is a letter written by M. Lynette Hartsell that the LGB Alliance is providing for anyone to modify and then send to Senator Tillis (and other members of the Judiciary Committee):

“Sen. Tillis, I am writing concerning H.R.5 pending in the Judiciary Committee set for a hearing on Wednesday. I am requesting that the Committee call by remote means the following witnesses: Dr. Callie Burt and M. Lynette Hartsell. We oppose the act as written and ask that you propose the suggested amendments. We can provide substantial information for the Committee and Congress regarding the fatal flaws within the bill. Dr. Burt is an Associate Professor at Georgia State University who has written extensively regarding the Equality Act. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/341804412_Scrutinizing_the_US_Equality_Act_2019_A_Feminist_Examination_of_Definitional_Changes_Sociolegal_Ramifications and https://callieburt.substack.com/p/the-inequality-of-the-equality-act?r=h1zw9&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web&utm_source=copy. I am a retired attorney in North Carolina and a spokesperson for LGB Alliance USA which is part of an international LGB organization. Dr. Burt and I are also part of CoFA (Coalition for Feminist Amendments). You should have received our letter regarding the Feminist Amendment to The Equality Act several months ago. https://feministstruggle.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/FeministAmendments.EqualityAct-FINAL12.14.19.pdf I’m certain that Sen. Tillis would join us in our desire to pass a well-written bill that protects the rights of all citizens. Please review the documents cited in this message and call M. Lynette Hartsell and Dr. Callie Burt as witnesses for the hearing Wednesday. Thank you for your consideration in this matter.”

Stop Passage of the Flawed U.S. Equality Act: Amend!

Leave a reply

The struggle of gender critical feminists to stop the passage of the Equality Act – and amend the Equality Act – now moves to the U.S. Senate. Last Thursday the House of Representatives passed the U.S. Equality Act with a 224-226 vote. Three Republicans voted in favor of the bill. If ever there was a time for everyone concerned with the rights and well being of women to get engaged with the U.S. political system, this is it!

I’ll explain what is at the root of the problems with the Equality Act below and provide an introduction to the Feminist Amendments to the Equality Act developed by Feminists In Struggle (FIST) . But, first, here are two actions you can take right now!

Reach Out to Let Women in Your Community Know About What’s at Stake

XX Amazons has developed a flyer that can be used for outreach to women all over the country to alert them to what is happening in Congress right now. Please print out copies of the flyer (shown below) and put these flyers up anywhere you can think of. Even during the pandemic, women everywhere are still going to grocery stores!

Spread the Word on Social Media

Here’s a graphic that you can copy and use in creating a Facebook or other social media post to spread the word even further.

Write your Senators

The Coalition for the Feminist Amendments (CoFA) has prepared a sample letter that you can personalize and email to your Senators. View and copy the sample letter here. Calling your Senators can be especially effective. You can find your Senators’ phone numbers and other contact information using a simple look-up form.

XX Amazons is part of the Coalition for the Feminist Amendments to the Equality Act. See the information below or on FIST’s website to find out more about the Feminist Amendments.

The Crux of the Problem with the Equality Act

The crux of the problem is that the Equality Act enshrines the concept of “gender identity” into U.S. law. Males base their claim that they are women on this concept which was invented by medical professionals in the 1950s and 1960s (Jeffreys) and latched onto by the transgender movement. Using “gender identity” males are able to say they “feel like” women and, with the Equality Act, the recent executive orders issued by Joe Biden and local legislation, PRESTO, their feelings are turned into what we are supposed to believe is reality.

As Tina Minkowitz, one of the authors of the Feminist Amendments to the Equality Act, has explained, with the Equality Act our legal existence as women is at stake! Here’s how this works. The Senate bill explicitly defines sex to include gender identity, saying that each of three factors – sex, sexual orientation, gender identity – is a form of sex discrimination. Here is where women are erased! Gender identity is made synonymous with sex. Discrimination on the basis of gender identity is considered to be sex discrimination.

Thus, the Equality Act makes it illegal to deny males who say they are women access to what have always been female only facilities. The Senate’s Equality Act explicitly states that there can be no female only private personal spaces: “[A]n individual shall not be denied access to a shared facility, including a restroom, a locker room, and a dressing room, that is in accordance with the individual’s gender identity.”

Giving any male who wants to the right to claim to be a woman has far reaching circumstances that goes far beyond his entry into female spaces, as is documented throughout the XX Amazons website.

Feminist Amendments to the Equality Act

FIST’s Feminist Amendments to the Equality Act protects women, LGB, and transgender people by cleverly creating two new protected classes – sexual orientation and sex stereotypes – while leaving existing protections for sex in place. Each of the three classes are given clear and uncomplicated protection. The Feminist Amendments eliminate all mention of gender identity, providing protection to transgender people on the basis of sex stereotypes. By focusing on sex stereotypes, gender non-conforming people who are not transgender, including Lesbians and gay men, are also protected when they do not comply with sex role norms (demands).

The Feminist Amendments explicitly protects female only spaces from intrusion by males claiming to be women including “multi-stall toilets, locker rooms, changing rooms, communal showers, battered women’s shelters, refuges, homeless shelters, rape crisis centers, jail cells, bedrooms in residential facilities, hospital rooms, facilities providing intimate services such as massage or intimate grooming, or other places where women are sharing private facilities or are in states of undress and/or where their privacy may be compromised and or their safety may be at risk from male-pattern violence against females.” (p. 17, Feminist Amendments Equality Act) Sports programs, scholarship programs, clubs, political programs are likewise protected.

For more information on the Feminist Amendments to the Equality Act, please see:
https://xxamazons.org/feminist-amendments-equality-act/

https://feministstruggle.org/2019/10/19/feminists-in-struggle-fist-launches-campaign-for-feminist-amendments-to-the-equality-act/

Time is Short – Act Now!

“All Beginnings are Dark! Womb Dark!

3 Replies

Our ancient sacred symbols surround us every day…

“… the Old European sacred images and symbols were never totally uprooted; these most persistent features in human history were too deeply implanted in the human psyche. They could have disappeared only with the total extermination of the female population.” This assertion is from Marija Gimbutas in her book The Language of the Goddess.1

Our ancient sacred symbols surround us every day…
All beginnings are dark! Womb dark. Life begins in a woman’s body. “For just as the child is conceived in the womb and there takes shape, so time begins in darkness, when the leaf gives up the ghost and the seed dreams in the ground and each night is longer than the last. All beginnings are dark. The world was without form and void and darkness brooded over the deep.”2

I now believe my own deep, dark motherline extends back thousands of years into the extensive cultures of Old Europe and Old Anatolia. My roots on the North American continent are relatively shallow. My female ancestors lived on the group of islands now known as the British Isles. My bloodline, as is your bloodline, is ancient.

Some women, like me, have been disconnected from our ancestral roots. We are seeking a spiritual tradition and lineage directly connected to our ancestral birth line. I have reason to believe that my own bloodline reaches back to this world described by archeologist and anthropologist Marija Gimbutas.

“The woman’s body was regarded as parthenogenetic, that is creating life out of itself. This ability was celebrated in religion. In Neolithic times and earlier in the Upper Paleolithic, religion centered on the feminine power, as shown by the abundance of female symbolism. Just as the female body was regarded as the goddess creatress, so too the world was regarded as the body of the goddess, constantly creating new life from itself. The imagery of Neolithic art is overwhelmingly feminine: the female body, and particularly the generative parts–vulva, uterus, or womb—are predominant. These symbols appear not only on figurines or larger sculptures of goddesses, but also on vases, cult equipment, and in tomb and temple architecture.

The goddess is nature and earth itself, pulsating with the seasons, bringing life in spring and death in winter. She represents continuity of life as a perpetual regenerator, protectress, and nourisher.”3

Our lives are guided by the symbols we hold dear whether we acknowledge this fact or not. As Z Budapest, witch, tarot card reader, hereditary priestess, and one of my early teachers declared, “Religion controls inner space; inner space controls outer space.” Patriarchal religion and the other patriarchal institutions seek control of all the symbols we build our lives around from designer labels to business logos, from academic credentials to sports team loyalties.

Please consider the possibility of reclaiming the term religion from the patriarchal versions we know all too well! Margot Adler reminds us in her 1979 book Drawing Down the Moon, the root of the word religion “means ‘to relink’ and ‘to connect’, and therefore refers to any philosophy that makes deep connections between human beings and the universe.”4

Claiming the ancient goddess religion as my own
As a consequence of my deep engagement with the women’s liberation movement, which I embraced in the early 1970s, I became a woman seeking an authentic spiritual tradition connected to my own ancestral birth line. How to start such an enormous undertaking? One inspiration came during the 1978 keynote address by Carol Christ at the Great Goddess Re-emerging Conference, Santa Cruz, CA. This astute observation from Carol struck me, “Symbol systems cannot simply be rejected; they must be replaced. Where there is no replacement, the mind will revert to familiar structures at times of crisis, defeat or bafflement.”

I’d already begun my own self-education learning to love women and to reclaim the history of women’s resistance erased by the institutions of patriarchy. The clarity of these directions and the warning that our minds “will revert to familiar structures at times of crisis, defeat or bafflement” has echoed in my consciousness for decades!

I find it interesting how our intuitive selves are drawn to symbols before our “knowing” mind catches up. When I look around my decorated house today I see multiple depictions of reindeer, both large and small. In late December, I happened upon Judith Shaw’s article about the reindeer goddess of Northern Europe where my paternal line originated in Denmark. Shaw wrote, “The Reindeer was a sacred animal to our ancient ancestors of Northern Europe. The doe was seen as the giver of light and life. Their horns were associated with the tree of life and often times they were depicted carrying the sun, the giver of life, in their horns.”5

One of my favorite parts of the article: “Reindeer are the only members of the deer family whose females have horns and are stronger and larger than the males. The males shed their antlers in winter, leaving it to the Deer Mother to fly through the long, dark night of Winter Solstice. The Reindeer was a sacred animal to our ancient ancestors of Northern Europe.”6 Please visit here for more discussion.

We are now a week past the winter solstice. That longest night of the year births the short days of midwinter (at least in the northern hemisphere). Life begins in the dark interior of a woman’s body. The vulva, our external genitalia, is seen “as the concentrated life-producing part of the Goddess in her birth-giving functions”. This symbol of the Mother Goddess is encountered by archaeologists on rocks around the globe including an engraving on a one-and-a-half ton limestone rock at Abri Castanent, a collapsed rock shelter in France dating to about 37,000 years ago (reported in Archeology Magazine January, 2013).

Respect for women and respect for the earth cannot be separated. Vulva, uterus, womb are the essential source of human life. Pornographic representations of women and our genitalia deny this basic reality. Disregard for our interconnections, the web of life on planet earth, is yet another pornographic lie.

Other women, and people living in other cultures, especially native cultures and indigenous cultures, have not been disconnected from their ancestral roots and ancient homelands allowing them to claim their spiritual traditions and their understandings about the central place of women in “the processes and patterns of continuous creation”. I value and respect the knowledge these indigenous women are willing to share. I can glimpse my own past in their present. Katsi Cook shares her vision as a midwife.7

“In my vision as a Mohawk midwife, reproductive justice and environmental justice intersect at the nexus of women’s blood and voice; at the very centrality of woman’s role in the processes and patterns of continuous creation. Of the sacred things that there are to be said about this, woman is the first environment; she is an original instruction. In pregnancy, our bodies sustain life. Our unborn see through our eyes and hear through our ears. Everything the mother feels, the baby feels, too. At the breast of women, the generations are nourished. From the bodies of women flow the relationships of those generations, both to society and to the natural world. In this way our ancestors said, the earth is our mother. In this way, we as women are the earth.”7

“…we as women are the earth.” Those ancient cave drawings found in different areas of old Europe and Old Anatolia and around the world appear to be expressing the same understanding. A community of women and their clan gathered to press their hands along the rocks of mother earth. This simple, yet complex, understanding existed in our ancient ancestors who learned to honor and cooperate with mother earth. ‘Woman is earth’ is deeply implanted in the human psyche both yours and mine.

Notes
1 The Language of the Goddess: The World of Old Europe 1989 p.318
2 The Return of the Goddess: A Divine Comedy, a novel by Elizabeth Cunningham, 1992 p.19
3 The Living Goddesses, Maria Gimbutas 1999 p.112-113
4 Drawing Down the Moon: Witches, Druids, Goddess-Worshippers, and Other Pagans in America Today, Beacon Press 1979 p. 12
5 https://feminismandreligion.com/2016/12/18/the-reindeer-goddess-by-judith-shaw/
6 https://feminismandreligion.com/2016/12/18/the-reindeer-goddess-by-judith-shaw/
7 Quote from Katsi Cook “Powerful Like a River: Reweaving the Web of Our Lives in Defense of Environmental and Reproductive Justice” essay in Original Instructions: Indigenous Teachings for a Sustainable Future, 2008 ed Melissa K. Nelson p.155-156
8 https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/ancient-women-artists-may-be-responsible-for-most-cave-art-1094929/