I'm 73 and can appreciate all types of music but that is not the norm when you want to share content that people will actually watch or read. Tom MacDonald is more rap, not punk but I like his honesty and talent.
I am a spoken word late bloomer. Best wishes in Chiapas. I am envious of you being in one of the recent histories more freedom living areas. Peace, love and freedom, Kman, (Ken)
You might attract a lot more attention and shares if you were to bear in mind that a lot of people read Substack articles during their mealbreaks or bus journeys etc. They also do so from a mobile phone which does not necessarily make it easy to load massive long missives with multi-points that head towards a loose objective.
I read from my laptop. I am retired so I don't often think 'TLDR' - too long, didn't read. Your title was good, it drew me in but the long meander through the various forms of sexism caused me to lose the plot. I kept thinking 'where is this going?'.
I see your answer to another comment here is that punk music lyrics are worth hearing and I am sure they are.... if one could actually decypher what is being said under that barrage of disconcerting chaotic noise.
Finally, with great relief I arrived at the concluding paragraphs and was shocked by them. Are you kidding me? My indignation at being led through a labyrinth only to arrive at a completely erroneous conclusion exploded in my head.
Abortion is a bad business, whatever the reason for doing it. But, given that we can know the sex of a foetus very early in a pregnancy, and would prefer to give birth to one sex or the other works both ways. What about the woman who has had six boys, is approaching the end of her reproductive life and is desperate to have a girl? Is she being sexist when she chooses to terminate the pregnancy if the foetus is another boy?
Like I said. Abortion is a bad business, because I have never known a single woman who went through with an abortion who did not live to regret it. Regardless of what sex the infant might have developed into.
I know one woman who terminated a baby when she was only 17 years old. She never got pregnant again - and she certainly tried.
The other issue I have with your meanderings is the focus on black slavery. The tired old assumption that slavery is an exclusively white on black crime. Is it fuck.
Here in Britain, the Romans invaded before Jesus was even a twinkle in his father's eye. Everyone, regardless of sex or ethnicity was immediately either murdered or enslaved. Many of them were hauled off to Rome to be fed to the lions or forced to fight to the death in the Colosseum. Many concubines in the harems of the Ottoman Empire where white European girls. Blondes are still most valuable in the sex slave markets.
Irish people were enslaved by the British ship owners and sold off to Caribbean estates, British men were press-ganged into working on those ships! The working classes of Britain were working for the aristocracy for a pittance right up to the turn of the 20th century and the rubbish wages we witness today, regardless of our sex is nothing short of slavery still.....
You see what ranging over a bunch of loose subjects causes?
It causes your reader to wonder what the hell your point is..... it infuriates the reader by wandering all over the place when you could have focused on your intended subject, selective abortion without associating it with feminism, sexism or slavery..... because it is none of those things.
Abortion is violence against an under-developed living being which cannot defend itself and it is indicative of a whole society which has a very thin sense of morality.
If you really want to get down to brass tacks about it, we could say that it is on a par with crushing seeds to make flour or boiling them to provide some carbohydrates to an otherwise insubstantial meal.
A lot to reply to here... Thank you very much for the constructive criticism, I very much welcome this type of feedback. I don´t understand you super well though... My erroneous conclusion was what exactly?
This piece might make more sense if you read another of my recent articles, if which I argue for the need to use concrete definitions of political terms and apply them precisely.
This article is also meant to break the ice about critiquing feminism. Over most of my life, a man critiquing feminism has simply been against the unstated-but-nearly-universally-observed rules of Leftism.
I have a feeling that I might disagree with you about race... are you from the U.K. by any chance? The history of English racism is different from the history of racism in the Americas and Carribean and I´d rather not take up this point, if you don´t mind.
It is true that we need to acknowledge that no race has a monopoly on evil. In recent years it has been politically correct to point out all the evil deeds of white people but not the evil deeds of other races. This seems to have created a warped sense of reality in some people. It is not fair to judge white people using a null comparative, that is to say comparing them against an imaginary ideal that never really existed, and is a projections of the social mores of late capitalist propaganda of liberal democracy.
We should be able to point out that African cultures and many West Coast tribes on Turtle Island did practice slavery, though it is worth noting that institutions of slavery differ considerably. I love Howard Zinn´s turn of phrase ¨African slavery is hardly to be commended, but...¨, before pointing out that American slavery was particularly brutal and is arguably unprecedented in its cruelty. Honestly, I agree with him. Do you know what buck-breaking is?
According to my friend Chief Tse´Bsa of the Likht´samisyu Clan, slavery amongst the Wet´suwet´en resulted from the custom of sparing. When the Wet´suwet´en killed off the people of Kitimat during the Gwis war, they did no murder women and children, but adopted them at the lowest run of their society, which was slavery. Over time, they married into the society and ceased to be slaves.
Did I just write an apologia for slavery? No. I´m just reporting here, but I better state for the record that I definitely do not condone any form of slavery. I´ll let the reader be the judge as to what to make of Chief Tse´Bsa´s explanation.
Yes, arabs were big time slave traders, there´s no doubt about that. The Chinese practice of foot-binding surely ranks amongst the cruelest traditions in history, and many South Asians continue to practice female infanticide to this day. The Japanese atrocities during the Second World War were. Turks haven´t even acknowledged the reality of the Armenian genocide, leading me to suspect that they hope to finish the job one day. The evil deeds of white people need to be seen within the context of a world in which evildoers come in all shapes and sizes, skin tones and religions.
That said, you must know something about the Conquista. To argue that white people don´t have a massive lead on the atrocities scoreboard over the past 500 years is simply disingenuous and insincere.
Bill Burr is right. The anti-racist movement was hi-jacked. It´s not made-up like some people on the right seem to think. I am a follower of the Circle of All Nations, the vision of Grandfather William Commanda, spiritual grand chief of the Anishnaabe and holder of the Seven Fires Prophecy wampum belt. He led the movement for truth and reconciliation in regards to Canada´s residential schools. When I was in high school no one knew about this stuff. Now everyone does.
I know that the woke mob has fouled the pool with its hysterical, insincere, and hypocritcal obsession with anti-racist virtue-signalling, but racism is and will be continue to be a hugely important subject.
I have stated multiple times that I believe that the Left has lost the culture war. This means the pendulum will probably swing too far the other way. Racism will surely rear its ugly head again. Demogoguery thrives in times of turmoil.
It´s important for us to be genuinely anti-racist and to hold a consistent position when the woke movement crumbles to dust under the pulverizing weight of its own contradictions.
Your erroneous conclusion was that choosing to select for abortion is sexism when it is actually violence against an under-developed living being which cannot defend itself.
I made it very clear that I am British.
How you have managed to change the topic to racism leaves me askance.
You have done it again. Waxed lyrical until you created a knot of a labyrinth and lost yourself in the process.
Can´t it be both? You don´t think that it´s sexist to choose to abort upon learning the biological sex of the being, or organism, or whatever word you want to use? Is this not sex-based discrimination? I´m confused. I´m presenting this as a clear-cut example of femicide. Do you agree that the term femicide could be properly applied to sex-selective abortion? If not, how come? I´m more confused now than before asking for clarification.
I seem to be aggravating you, so I´ll lay off. I don´t mean any disrespect. But in all due respect, you brought up the topic of racism. Maybe I got off on a bit of ramble, granted, but I like to ramble in the comments section. Is there anything wrong with that?
I don´t feel lost.. If someone is reading this, I´d appreciate if someone weighed in. Am I the crazy one here?
For those of you who are wondering, I am pro-choice and I support a woman´s right to end a pregnancy. As an anti-medical-industrial-complex activist, I think that it would be ideal if a woman´s contraceptive needs could be met without medical professionals, but I don´t judge others for making the choice to end a pregancy because they don´t want to be a mother, or because they don´t want to have the child of a particular man.
Having an abortion because you would prefer having a male child? I don´t think that´s a morally defensible decision. It´s certainly not congruent with a feminist ethos. Can we at least agree on that?
I´d also be curious as to how you define feminism. Could you offer a definition please?
I was clear but you seem confused. I pointed out that a decision to abort can work both ways. I even gave a clear example - a woman who has 6 sons wants to have a daughter. It is YOU who imagines that only female foetuses find their way to the trash bin. That is not true at all.
I did not bring up racism in my comments. You did.
I don't want to define feminism because it is a nonsense to me and always has been. I am feminine and do not require the assistance of an ism to help me fully enjoy that.
I dont want to be nitpicker, but I dont like being gaslit. You did bring up racism in your initial comment, albeit without using the word racism itself. I quote:
¨The other issue I have with your meanderings is the focus on black slavery. The tired old assumption that slavery is an exclusively white on black crime. Is it fuck.
Here in Britain, the Romans invaded before Jesus was even a twinkle in his father's eye. Everyone, regardless of sex or ethnicity was immediately either murdered or enslaved. Many of them were hauled off to Rome to be fed to the lions or forced to fight to the death in the Colosseum. Many concubines in the harems of the Ottoman Empire where white European girls. Blondes are still most valuable in the sex slave markets.
Irish people were enslaved by the British ship owners and sold off to Caribbean estates, British men were press-ganged into working on those ships! The working classes of Britain were working for the aristocracy for a pittance right up to the turn of the 20th century and the rubbish wages we witness today, regardless of our sex is nothing short of slavery still.....¨
You´re clearly talking about racism, and complaining about anti-white racism, or arguing that anti-white racism is treated differently.
There is a case to be made, there, but I think the reason that leading thinkers like Cudenec, Davis, Webb, etc dont bring it up is because of a little something called PERSPECTIVE. Europeans are 500 years deep on the plunder of the Americas, and theyre not slowing down.
You could say its not about race but you might feel differently if foreign invaders enslaved your people and raped your homeland.
Thanks for the feedback. It must be admitted that I´m not much of people-pleaser, so I´ll probably keep doing what I´m doing. If you don´t like punk music, I would still recommend listening to t
Even if you don´t like the music, the lyrical content of this songs are excellent. You will have a greater appreciation for punk if you listen to them.
I think you misunderstood Federici because your critique is exactly hers. When private property created wage slavery, women were excluded, and without wage for their work, they were dependent on their men for money. This is her exact critique of unpaid labor and the idea of wage labor in relation to private property, how it relied on women being unpaid and the system of patriarchy to sow the seeds of capitalism. She seems quite critical of this transition from a more shared-gift-economy style of labor existing during communal land ownership
okay maybe I need to revisit her work. I loved Caliban and the witch but thought she was arguing for extending capitalist class dynamics into the family, the one sphere in which a gift economy still predominates. It's entirely possible I misunderstood.
She presents the problem but solutions from *within* the broken, patriarchal system are up to interpretation. I would argue it’s unfair to expect a home to function as a gift economy when the home itself is private property, and the food is coming from private property farms. This challenge of the system is the value of feminism (anarchist / leftist feminism that doesn’t exclude male struggles within the patriarchal capitalist system)
What would be the reason for aborting girls in Canada? Ideas and values about the female sex? Isn’t that full circle, as expressing the importance of upholding women as valuable, self sufficient, relies quite a bit on treating them as capable of deciding on their own bodies.
Some people would rather a male baby. To a significant extent, it's a cultural thing. My mom is a nurse and tells me South Asians are notorious for aborting female babies after finding out they're female. Then they get back to work on making a baby in the hopes the next one will be male.
I don't know about you, but to me that's a "Heaven cries out for vengeance" kind of crime. But feminists won't talk about it.
But does *rather* not imply sexism? Why have a preference? Sexism can be predominant in any culture and the feminists within will challenge that (not the abortion, the reason)
I have, personally, come across feminists that have spoken about the preference for a male child and about the killing of (after birth) baby girls in China. I, personally, don’t seek abortion debates. However, my point is that the concern is where the preference comes from, not the right to the abortion. As a feminist, I’m concerned about what brings people to think a male baby is better than a female baby (not about forcing mothers to carry a fetus they don’t want). I am anti force. I’d like to challenge you to think beyond what you have personally witnessed self-labeled feminists speak of, and focus on the definitions of feminism, specifically anarchist feminism since that aligns with your views, and its criticisms of living in a world of a hierarchy. Male hierarchy means male = more power/better which means more likely to abort a woman. Main Problem = male hierarchy. Problem can include right to abortion, frequency of debate topics, but those are branches, not roots, and going after branches can sometimes strengthen the roots.
okay... well I honestly think that a big part of sex-selective abortion is economic - a man is likely to earn more money, and hence be able to provide for his parents more effectively when they are old.
It's very selfish. But in countries without welfare, people need to plan to have family members provide for them in their old age.
So the problem goes back to capitalism, which generates poverty in equal measure to wealth.
But I might be wrong. I haven't studied sex-selective abortion in depth.
I agree with you. I find feminism to only work as anarcha-feminism. Does it need a separate name? All anarchists are feminists. I find the separate title to feminism just denotes extra attention to problems women face under male hierarchy, and arguably for the issues male face under their own hierarchy (pressure to provide, less value of life, etc). Similar to anti-racism. All anarchists are anti racists, but that doesn’t mean extra attention isn’t warranted to white supremacy. However, at the end of the day, the problem is power & hierarchy over others, capitalism being a big proponent by means of money. I think we agree there!
I'm 73 and can appreciate all types of music but that is not the norm when you want to share content that people will actually watch or read. Tom MacDonald is more rap, not punk but I like his honesty and talent.
I am a spoken word late bloomer. Best wishes in Chiapas. I am envious of you being in one of the recent histories more freedom living areas. Peace, love and freedom, Kman, (Ken)
Tom McDonald has some good songs, but watch this and youll never trust him again: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RV7oI_Z68Pk
You might attract a lot more attention and shares if you were to bear in mind that a lot of people read Substack articles during their mealbreaks or bus journeys etc. They also do so from a mobile phone which does not necessarily make it easy to load massive long missives with multi-points that head towards a loose objective.
I read from my laptop. I am retired so I don't often think 'TLDR' - too long, didn't read. Your title was good, it drew me in but the long meander through the various forms of sexism caused me to lose the plot. I kept thinking 'where is this going?'.
I see your answer to another comment here is that punk music lyrics are worth hearing and I am sure they are.... if one could actually decypher what is being said under that barrage of disconcerting chaotic noise.
Finally, with great relief I arrived at the concluding paragraphs and was shocked by them. Are you kidding me? My indignation at being led through a labyrinth only to arrive at a completely erroneous conclusion exploded in my head.
Abortion is a bad business, whatever the reason for doing it. But, given that we can know the sex of a foetus very early in a pregnancy, and would prefer to give birth to one sex or the other works both ways. What about the woman who has had six boys, is approaching the end of her reproductive life and is desperate to have a girl? Is she being sexist when she chooses to terminate the pregnancy if the foetus is another boy?
Like I said. Abortion is a bad business, because I have never known a single woman who went through with an abortion who did not live to regret it. Regardless of what sex the infant might have developed into.
I know one woman who terminated a baby when she was only 17 years old. She never got pregnant again - and she certainly tried.
The other issue I have with your meanderings is the focus on black slavery. The tired old assumption that slavery is an exclusively white on black crime. Is it fuck.
Here in Britain, the Romans invaded before Jesus was even a twinkle in his father's eye. Everyone, regardless of sex or ethnicity was immediately either murdered or enslaved. Many of them were hauled off to Rome to be fed to the lions or forced to fight to the death in the Colosseum. Many concubines in the harems of the Ottoman Empire where white European girls. Blondes are still most valuable in the sex slave markets.
Irish people were enslaved by the British ship owners and sold off to Caribbean estates, British men were press-ganged into working on those ships! The working classes of Britain were working for the aristocracy for a pittance right up to the turn of the 20th century and the rubbish wages we witness today, regardless of our sex is nothing short of slavery still.....
You see what ranging over a bunch of loose subjects causes?
It causes your reader to wonder what the hell your point is..... it infuriates the reader by wandering all over the place when you could have focused on your intended subject, selective abortion without associating it with feminism, sexism or slavery..... because it is none of those things.
Abortion is violence against an under-developed living being which cannot defend itself and it is indicative of a whole society which has a very thin sense of morality.
If you really want to get down to brass tacks about it, we could say that it is on a par with crushing seeds to make flour or boiling them to provide some carbohydrates to an otherwise insubstantial meal.
A lot to reply to here... Thank you very much for the constructive criticism, I very much welcome this type of feedback. I don´t understand you super well though... My erroneous conclusion was what exactly?
This piece might make more sense if you read another of my recent articles, if which I argue for the need to use concrete definitions of political terms and apply them precisely.
This article is also meant to break the ice about critiquing feminism. Over most of my life, a man critiquing feminism has simply been against the unstated-but-nearly-universally-observed rules of Leftism.
I have a feeling that I might disagree with you about race... are you from the U.K. by any chance? The history of English racism is different from the history of racism in the Americas and Carribean and I´d rather not take up this point, if you don´t mind.
It is true that we need to acknowledge that no race has a monopoly on evil. In recent years it has been politically correct to point out all the evil deeds of white people but not the evil deeds of other races. This seems to have created a warped sense of reality in some people. It is not fair to judge white people using a null comparative, that is to say comparing them against an imaginary ideal that never really existed, and is a projections of the social mores of late capitalist propaganda of liberal democracy.
We should be able to point out that African cultures and many West Coast tribes on Turtle Island did practice slavery, though it is worth noting that institutions of slavery differ considerably. I love Howard Zinn´s turn of phrase ¨African slavery is hardly to be commended, but...¨, before pointing out that American slavery was particularly brutal and is arguably unprecedented in its cruelty. Honestly, I agree with him. Do you know what buck-breaking is?
According to my friend Chief Tse´Bsa of the Likht´samisyu Clan, slavery amongst the Wet´suwet´en resulted from the custom of sparing. When the Wet´suwet´en killed off the people of Kitimat during the Gwis war, they did no murder women and children, but adopted them at the lowest run of their society, which was slavery. Over time, they married into the society and ceased to be slaves.
Did I just write an apologia for slavery? No. I´m just reporting here, but I better state for the record that I definitely do not condone any form of slavery. I´ll let the reader be the judge as to what to make of Chief Tse´Bsa´s explanation.
Yes, arabs were big time slave traders, there´s no doubt about that. The Chinese practice of foot-binding surely ranks amongst the cruelest traditions in history, and many South Asians continue to practice female infanticide to this day. The Japanese atrocities during the Second World War were. Turks haven´t even acknowledged the reality of the Armenian genocide, leading me to suspect that they hope to finish the job one day. The evil deeds of white people need to be seen within the context of a world in which evildoers come in all shapes and sizes, skin tones and religions.
That said, you must know something about the Conquista. To argue that white people don´t have a massive lead on the atrocities scoreboard over the past 500 years is simply disingenuous and insincere.
Bill Burr is right. The anti-racist movement was hi-jacked. It´s not made-up like some people on the right seem to think. I am a follower of the Circle of All Nations, the vision of Grandfather William Commanda, spiritual grand chief of the Anishnaabe and holder of the Seven Fires Prophecy wampum belt. He led the movement for truth and reconciliation in regards to Canada´s residential schools. When I was in high school no one knew about this stuff. Now everyone does.
You might be interesting in this story I wrote about residential schools: https://nevermoremedia.substack.com/p/facing-what-consumes-you-is-the-only
I know that the woke mob has fouled the pool with its hysterical, insincere, and hypocritcal obsession with anti-racist virtue-signalling, but racism is and will be continue to be a hugely important subject.
I have stated multiple times that I believe that the Left has lost the culture war. This means the pendulum will probably swing too far the other way. Racism will surely rear its ugly head again. Demogoguery thrives in times of turmoil.
It´s important for us to be genuinely anti-racist and to hold a consistent position when the woke movement crumbles to dust under the pulverizing weight of its own contradictions.
Your erroneous conclusion was that choosing to select for abortion is sexism when it is actually violence against an under-developed living being which cannot defend itself.
I made it very clear that I am British.
How you have managed to change the topic to racism leaves me askance.
You have done it again. Waxed lyrical until you created a knot of a labyrinth and lost yourself in the process.
Can´t it be both? You don´t think that it´s sexist to choose to abort upon learning the biological sex of the being, or organism, or whatever word you want to use? Is this not sex-based discrimination? I´m confused. I´m presenting this as a clear-cut example of femicide. Do you agree that the term femicide could be properly applied to sex-selective abortion? If not, how come? I´m more confused now than before asking for clarification.
I seem to be aggravating you, so I´ll lay off. I don´t mean any disrespect. But in all due respect, you brought up the topic of racism. Maybe I got off on a bit of ramble, granted, but I like to ramble in the comments section. Is there anything wrong with that?
I don´t feel lost.. If someone is reading this, I´d appreciate if someone weighed in. Am I the crazy one here?
For those of you who are wondering, I am pro-choice and I support a woman´s right to end a pregnancy. As an anti-medical-industrial-complex activist, I think that it would be ideal if a woman´s contraceptive needs could be met without medical professionals, but I don´t judge others for making the choice to end a pregancy because they don´t want to be a mother, or because they don´t want to have the child of a particular man.
Having an abortion because you would prefer having a male child? I don´t think that´s a morally defensible decision. It´s certainly not congruent with a feminist ethos. Can we at least agree on that?
I´d also be curious as to how you define feminism. Could you offer a definition please?
I was clear but you seem confused. I pointed out that a decision to abort can work both ways. I even gave a clear example - a woman who has 6 sons wants to have a daughter. It is YOU who imagines that only female foetuses find their way to the trash bin. That is not true at all.
I did not bring up racism in my comments. You did.
I don't want to define feminism because it is a nonsense to me and always has been. I am feminine and do not require the assistance of an ism to help me fully enjoy that.
I dont want to be nitpicker, but I dont like being gaslit. You did bring up racism in your initial comment, albeit without using the word racism itself. I quote:
¨The other issue I have with your meanderings is the focus on black slavery. The tired old assumption that slavery is an exclusively white on black crime. Is it fuck.
Here in Britain, the Romans invaded before Jesus was even a twinkle in his father's eye. Everyone, regardless of sex or ethnicity was immediately either murdered or enslaved. Many of them were hauled off to Rome to be fed to the lions or forced to fight to the death in the Colosseum. Many concubines in the harems of the Ottoman Empire where white European girls. Blondes are still most valuable in the sex slave markets.
Irish people were enslaved by the British ship owners and sold off to Caribbean estates, British men were press-ganged into working on those ships! The working classes of Britain were working for the aristocracy for a pittance right up to the turn of the 20th century and the rubbish wages we witness today, regardless of our sex is nothing short of slavery still.....¨
You´re clearly talking about racism, and complaining about anti-white racism, or arguing that anti-white racism is treated differently.
There is a case to be made, there, but I think the reason that leading thinkers like Cudenec, Davis, Webb, etc dont bring it up is because of a little something called PERSPECTIVE. Europeans are 500 years deep on the plunder of the Americas, and theyre not slowing down.
You could say its not about race but you might feel differently if foreign invaders enslaved your people and raped your homeland.
I like the written word/video mashup. Well done. But most people I share with would be turned off by the heavy metal. Such is life....Kman
Thanks for the feedback. It must be admitted that I´m not much of people-pleaser, so I´ll probably keep doing what I´m doing. If you don´t like punk music, I would still recommend listening to t
Even if you don´t like the music, the lyrical content of this songs are excellent. You will have a greater appreciation for punk if you listen to them.
I think you misunderstood Federici because your critique is exactly hers. When private property created wage slavery, women were excluded, and without wage for their work, they were dependent on their men for money. This is her exact critique of unpaid labor and the idea of wage labor in relation to private property, how it relied on women being unpaid and the system of patriarchy to sow the seeds of capitalism. She seems quite critical of this transition from a more shared-gift-economy style of labor existing during communal land ownership
okay maybe I need to revisit her work. I loved Caliban and the witch but thought she was arguing for extending capitalist class dynamics into the family, the one sphere in which a gift economy still predominates. It's entirely possible I misunderstood.
She presents the problem but solutions from *within* the broken, patriarchal system are up to interpretation. I would argue it’s unfair to expect a home to function as a gift economy when the home itself is private property, and the food is coming from private property farms. This challenge of the system is the value of feminism (anarchist / leftist feminism that doesn’t exclude male struggles within the patriarchal capitalist system)
Tom MacDonald is not perfect but you don't throw out the baby with the bathwater for one song..Cheers, Kman
What would be the reason for aborting girls in Canada? Ideas and values about the female sex? Isn’t that full circle, as expressing the importance of upholding women as valuable, self sufficient, relies quite a bit on treating them as capable of deciding on their own bodies.
Some people would rather a male baby. To a significant extent, it's a cultural thing. My mom is a nurse and tells me South Asians are notorious for aborting female babies after finding out they're female. Then they get back to work on making a baby in the hopes the next one will be male.
I don't know about you, but to me that's a "Heaven cries out for vengeance" kind of crime. But feminists won't talk about it.
But does *rather* not imply sexism? Why have a preference? Sexism can be predominant in any culture and the feminists within will challenge that (not the abortion, the reason)
I haven't seen any feminists write about sex-selective abortion. Have you?
I have, personally, come across feminists that have spoken about the preference for a male child and about the killing of (after birth) baby girls in China. I, personally, don’t seek abortion debates. However, my point is that the concern is where the preference comes from, not the right to the abortion. As a feminist, I’m concerned about what brings people to think a male baby is better than a female baby (not about forcing mothers to carry a fetus they don’t want). I am anti force. I’d like to challenge you to think beyond what you have personally witnessed self-labeled feminists speak of, and focus on the definitions of feminism, specifically anarchist feminism since that aligns with your views, and its criticisms of living in a world of a hierarchy. Male hierarchy means male = more power/better which means more likely to abort a woman. Main Problem = male hierarchy. Problem can include right to abortion, frequency of debate topics, but those are branches, not roots, and going after branches can sometimes strengthen the roots.
okay... well I honestly think that a big part of sex-selective abortion is economic - a man is likely to earn more money, and hence be able to provide for his parents more effectively when they are old.
It's very selfish. But in countries without welfare, people need to plan to have family members provide for them in their old age.
So the problem goes back to capitalism, which generates poverty in equal measure to wealth.
But I might be wrong. I haven't studied sex-selective abortion in depth.
I agree with you. I find feminism to only work as anarcha-feminism. Does it need a separate name? All anarchists are feminists. I find the separate title to feminism just denotes extra attention to problems women face under male hierarchy, and arguably for the issues male face under their own hierarchy (pressure to provide, less value of life, etc). Similar to anti-racism. All anarchists are anti racists, but that doesn’t mean extra attention isn’t warranted to white supremacy. However, at the end of the day, the problem is power & hierarchy over others, capitalism being a big proponent by means of money. I think we agree there!
https://www.reddit.com/r/AskFeminists/comments/p3i4vh/should_we_oppose_legal_bans_on_sexselective/
https://www.reddit.com/r/AskFeminists/comments/10clqy5/gender_selective_abortions/