Skip to content

To Condone or Condemn

November 9, 2009

There is a very decided effort on the part of most “feminists” to obscure the role female people play in male supremacy by labeling it “victim-blaming.”  There is a difference, however, between discussing women’s actions before males attack or otherwise affront them, and critiquing women’s actions after such an offense.  You see, when someone makes an unwanted advance, imposition, or assault on another, the victim’s response can only ever be either a condemnation or a condonation of that behavior.

Now, given that we live in male supremacy – that is, we, as female people, live under conditions of class oppression/victimhood, even when we have not necessarily been affronted individually – there are, of course, all manner of justification for the condonation of male insult and injury against us: fear, whether real or imagined; coercion, whether economic or familial, etc.  Despite the fact that there may be rationalizations for it, though, it doesn’t change the fact that male behavior toward female humans is condoned; we, on a large scale, do in fact condone male supremacy, our own oppression.

I’m not sure why women want to pretend as if the existence of justifications for condonation of male supremacy somehow renders the fact of the condonation entirely irrelevant.  If women’s condonation were irrelevant, after all, male people wouldn’t go to such lengths to provide us with justifications for our continued forgiveness.  Our forgiveness is necessary to male supremacy.  As I’ve said before, male dominance in the absence of female submission (and, yes, condonation is submission) is simply a reign of terror ; male supremacy, on the other hand, is a system, a social contract, an agreement to bring up future generations to believe in, maintain, and further the oppression and enforced inferiority of the female.

I want to reiterate, here, that I’m not talking about female behavior “causing” male violence or offense that would otherwise be unprovoked.  That, of course, would be appropriately labeled victim-blaming.  I am, however, talking about the ways in which female behavior after the fact (which fact might be an individual affront or, if you’re more broad-minded, male supremacy altogether) encourages males to continue their behavior and fosters male entitlement to our continued forgiveness.  To address this integral facet of male supremacy is not “victim-blaming.”  It is necessary to a meaningful condemnation of male treatment of female human beings.  Male supremacy will never be ended if it is not first condemned rather than condoned.

  1. November 9, 2009 2:52 pm

    And it just occurred to me, as I read my last sentence, that most women want *males* to be the ones doing the condemning of their male supremacy, even as they benefit from it, while women remain unwilling to condemn it themselves, although it is our oppression.

    • atheistwoman permalink
      November 9, 2009 5:29 pm

      Well, and I say this seriously, it would be certainly easier that way (if they did the condemning and it just went poof!). I know, I know, unrealistic. But it would be easier for us lazy types. Ha.

    • November 10, 2009 8:16 pm

      What exactly would be “easier” about it, though? Males deciding they’d like to change things is still male supremacy. Males deciding they have a problem with the particular way that male supremacy is wielded currently and changing it to suit their new-found sensibilities wouldn’t change the fact of male supremacy. Seems to me like women don’t want an *end* to male supremacy; they want a “kinder, gentler” male supremacy.

    • atheistwoman permalink
      November 11, 2009 2:12 am

      I didn’t mean it like that. I just meant if they just magically (in the initial post I said it was unrealistic) stopped with their bullshit and left us alone, that would be nice. It was kind of a throw away comment.

    • November 11, 2009 12:43 pm

      I don’t know. I guess, for me, it wouldn’t be desirable even if it weren’t unrealistic. But I think most women do feel as though a “kinder/gentler” male supremacy would be very much desirable, and the wish for it and hope for it *instead of for female freedom*. despite the fact that it’s unlikely and unrealistic, and despite the fact that it would still be male supremacy – meaning males would always have the option of going back to their more violently demanding ways.

    • atheistwoman permalink
      November 11, 2009 11:09 pm

      Oh I agree with what you are saying, but I am not in that group of women.
      for the most part (and for all intents and purposes of the comments here, it should not be concluded that I am at all*).

      All I meant was, leave us alone (as in, alone alone) permanently, of their own or outside volition. All I was doing was dreaming up a scenario which would not be such damn hard work. Unless laziness is male supremacist, I don’t see a problem with what I was saying. I am not sure how much more I can explain the concept I am trying to get across.

      *The most part bit only means that I *understand* why some women long for the kinder gentler male supremacy, it does not mean that I am in that group of women, or that I condone their desire.

    • atheistwoman permalink
      November 11, 2009 11:10 pm

      That period after women should not be there. I think it is probably just my computer but the comment box ends up stretching behind the ads and such and I am no longer able to read what is written. Sorry.

    • atheistwoman permalink
      November 12, 2009 4:57 am

      Aaah. I have just reread the comment, and it came off quite rude. Sorry, that is not at all what I was going for.

    • November 12, 2009 6:10 pm

      Oh, yes, it would definitely be nice if they would leave us alone, but males condemning their actions is, to me, a different thing than their just leaving us alone. It seems like males condemning it would be a matter of males trying to get other males to see the error of their ways, to see that their current treatment of women is wrong. I don’t really care if they ever get it. So, that’s, I think, where I was finding disagreement with you – I wasn’t taking the idea of males condemning male supremacy to be about males leaving us alone. They seem different to me.

      Aside from that, though, we are on the same page.

    • atheistwoman permalink
      November 13, 2009 12:17 am

      Oh I think I get it. You only meant verbal condemnation?

  2. not ya mammy permalink
    November 9, 2009 5:27 pm

    “Male supremacy will never be ended if it is not first condemned rather than condoned.”

    Well, let me just say that those of us who DO condemn male bullshit are quickly dismissed as feminazi bitches, called crazy and backward, man haters you name it, hell YOU live it I’m sure.

    But you are right, very few “feminist” women are willing to come out and just say maleness is fucked up and needs to be done away with. I am one such woman who will say it, mean it, and stand by it compelte with all the hatred and back lash males give out for saying such. But women, heterosexual women especially, are too forgiving of men. It’s a false sense of hope Margie. It truly is a false sense of hope that causes us hetero women to forgive, but you are absolutely RIGHT though to appropriately point out the difference between holding women accountable for the ways we condone male stupidity and the victim blaming males (and some females) do when challenged for their bullshit.

    I’ve had men tell me “women benefit from patriarchy too” as if that is some sort of goddamn excuse for it to exist. I’ve heard men say “I refuse to feel bad for a woman who makes more than I do” when discussing how porn is RAPE and how it is WRONG for them to participate in women’s oppression by commodifying us in that, and many other, way(s).

    I feel that the condemnation is received better when coming from men, because the fuckers won’t listen to us women folk, period. We are ALWAYS marginalized whenever we say anything about our truth and our realities. But just because the assholes will listen better when it is coming from a man, doesn’t mean that women should behave as if we’re damsels in distress either!

  3. November 10, 2009 8:17 pm

    “Damsels in distress” is absolutely right, not ya mammy. And if males ever do come to the “rescue,” female people will still be living at their whim.

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: