Skip to content

Colluding is Colluding

December 18, 2007
Colluding is colluding, unless of course, we create levels, strata, and degrees indicating which type of colluding are superior to one another. Nevertheless, layers will do nothing but create a hierarchy and everyone who ever played “king” of the hill understands the concept of hierarchies. Hierarchies designate who is superior, thus should not be shat on, and who is inferior, hence, deserves to be shat on. How is it okay to blame women, hate women, insult women, obsess over women for having sex with men, hence colluding with men, but it is perfectly okay to admire women for colluding with capitalism and most things predominately male-centered? Is it not the mechanisms of capitalism that exploit women all over the world? Is it not the mechanisms of capitalism that provide money to men so those men can go and demand things from women? Yet for some women (incidentally, these women do not have sex with men, how convenient for those who must for some reason compete in the marginalisation marathon to have this position), it is viewed as a superior position to collude with men in ways that exploit more women in general than it is for a woman to have a one-on-one relationship (collude) with a man.

To navigate this hypocritical trap, these women claim that by having sex with men it reinforces a man’s attitude that he is entitled to expect sex from women, yet, in some cognitive dissonance realm it is perfectly okay, even admired, held in high esteem in fact to turn a blind eye on how pursuing and obtaining (worshipping) more and more money in a man’s world is reinforcing his entitlement ten fold. “If they want it and or after it, then we menz must be doing something right and good. Just the other day I heard how there was a woman who traveled aboard to get her a little piece of action. {wink, wink}” But this aspect is ignored because the one must feel superior to the other. This stance is utterly misogynistic. By taking and having this stance, these women get to beat up on whom? You guessed it! Other women. Misogyny lives. Therefore using logical deduction, in the battle against patriarchy whose side should these women who beat up other women be playing on if they were really honest with themselves?

“But, but but we are doing it to get ahead, to survive, to thrive, that is why we are working within the system, that could not possibly be why your type are working within the system. You-you-you are just anti-us! Why don’t you get with the problem program and beat up on women like the rest of us instead of poking holes in our theory and exposing our hypocrisy”

  1. Verging Writer permalink
    December 18, 2007 9:17 pm

    OK, Kitty – fascinating post – I’m trying to keep up – so, if I follow you . . . these women won’t have sex with men but they will exploit other women? Or, are you saying that they have sex with men & exploit women? I’ve always said that some women are as big a barrier to feminism as many men – I just don”t quite understand the sex part.

    Forgive my obtuseness – it’s been one of those months……….

  2. Kitty Glendower permalink
    December 18, 2007 11:28 pm

    They don’t have sex with men and they use that as a the reason to elevate themselves above women who do have sex with men. It is as if having sex with men is the ONLY way women collude with the patriarchy and that no other things that women participate in such as capitalism, greed, consumerism, etc exploit women, or if they admit that it does, it supposedly does on such an insignificant scale that nothing should be discussed about it because nothing is more detrimental to the plight of women but women having sex with men. In other words if you are not on a self sustaining island you are exploiting a woman somewhere, so what is with the need to say capitalist loving high powered women who withdraw from men are superior to women who marry (even though she is anti-porn and anti-prostitution). It seems there is a need to nail the having sex with men woman to a stake for her colluding with the patriarchy but their colluding gets a free pass. Colluding hierarchy designates what women are open to be hated and what women are free from being hated. Why not spend the vile for hating men.

  3. Kitty Glendower permalink
    December 18, 2007 11:37 pm

    By the way, I’m not talking about women who have sex with men through prostitution or porn, I’m referring to relationships where consensual relationship sex is involved or even relationships between men and women when sex is not involved, really, because this type of woman is supposedly colluding if she wants anything from him other than his death.

  4. Kitty Glendower permalink
    December 18, 2007 11:51 pm

    Of course, it is a trap for me as well which is how it is for most theories, because if I talked about them talking about women then I am talking about women as well. Which I can only say in my defense is why I am writing about it. First, because as a woman I am sick and tired of hearing other women beat up on women when men are getting a free pass, and second, as an assertive woman who refuses to be abuse in the name of being a woman, I feel a need to check misogyny. Misogyny needs to be called out regardless of who is doing it. But still as the cycle continues, the real beneficiaries of patriarchy go on his merry way. Apparently, misogyny is just so damn seductive that the very victims of it cannot avoid engaging in it.

  5. Verging Writer permalink
    December 19, 2007 1:13 am

    ! Wow – now I get it! I had no idea I had been colluding with patriarchy by engaging in sex with men! Who knew?!

    This is so silly. If the sex is consensual & we are in control of our actions, our desires, etc. – what’s the colluding part? How is denying our sexuality, our sexual desires going to help eliminate patriarchy?

    Again – this is silly. Beyond silly.

  6. Unsane permalink
    December 23, 2007 1:03 am

    Very interesting!

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: