Taking the “ism” out of Feminine.

It is a very contentious word- “the F word”, from those who do and those don’t identify with it, it continues to be one of the most loaded, confusing and misunderstood words of the 20th and 21st centuries.

Talking to a college lecturer recently, he tells me that for many of his students, feminism is a done and dusted deal that was put to bed decades ago. For others, feminism includes equal rights and inclusivity for all marginalized people, especially transgendered. The question of women therefore has seamlessly blended into an Aquarian age mix of transgender identity. Simply put, there is “man” and there is “non-man”, and while the masculine is not subjected to the same erasure as the feminine it is nevertheless neutralized in the great blend of non- gender.

It appears we are in the middle of a “gendercide”.

In terms of the feminine, the last time we witnessed such an onslaught was in the early modern period from the 15th to the 18th century- a time that has been come to be known as the ‘witch hunts’. These days the tactics employed are far more sophisticated and covert, ensuring the support of the public who, with the best of intentions towards individual expression and inclusivity, are unwittingly supporting the erasure of the feminine.

The inner workings of this crusade are rarely obvious but occasionally it gives itself away. For example, in a recent study made by the ‘American Academy of Pediatrics’, concerns were raised which challenged the view that breast feeding is the ‘natural way’ to go. According to the article, nature and natural over medical and interventionist is prohibitive to public health aims in terms of promoting vaccination and other multi- billion dollar pharmaceutical and medical corporations.

Here we see the honest motivation of the agenda, however, in order to win over public opinion, manipulation under the guise of an anti-determinist argument is employed.

At the core of the debate is the perennially thorny question of ‘biological determinism’ and ‘biological essentialism’, a fundamental fault-line in the history of feminist discourse that has ensured the feminine voice has remained splintered and incoherent. From first wave feminism, and taking root particularly in second wave feminism, many feminists argued that equating women with biological functions such as birthing and bleeding bound women to social discrimination and second-class status. It was women themselves who colluded with the lie that female biology was a bind and a deterrent in achieving equal rights and opportunities. It may have appeared that way but only in the context of a society that so blatantly rejects the feminine.

The rejection of female biology is evident in all areas of natural woman- menstrual suppression, artificial wombs and the over medicalization of women’s bodies… Women are now “non- men”, “menstruators” and “persons with a cervix” rather than simply women. The word woman itself has become offensive and non- inclusive to many. A move has been made to eradicate the word “woman” from the cultural lexicon entirely, to be replaced with nonsense words such as “womxn” as it is seen to be more progressive and inclusive of transgender women, and women of non-dominant culture.

Green Party Women, an internal campaign group of the British Green Party, confirmed last year that its preferred designation for the constituency it represented was not, “women” but “non-men”.

This attitude is viewed as progressive.

And here’s the rub… it is not the essential nature of women that ought to be questioned, it is why our society has denigrated the feminine so entirely to the point where it has become not only desirable to turn away from natural woman but is being insisted upon.

It is feminism that is socially constructed not the feminine principle in its natural essence. The “ism” of feminism means that it is forever subject to the chasm of duality, limiting rational thought that separates mind from body, science and technology that seeks to control nature, and endless factions and sub-divisions based upon notions of identity being removed from the Self and only worthy when validated by the image makers.

We will never find the feminine in feminism. The feminine cannot be packaged as a concept or ideal, for if she can then she can be controlled by external forces with agendas towards ownership and manipulation.

Take the ‘ism’ out of feminism and leave feminine.