The Other McCain

"One should either write ruthlessly what one believes to be the truth, or else shut up." — Arthur Koestler

Guardian Columnist Julie Bindel Says Put All Males ‘In Some Kind of Camp’

Posted on | September 6, 2015 | 125 Comments

 

England’s most influential radical feminist was asked whether she believes “heterosexuality will survive women’s liberation”:

It won’t, not unless men get their act together, have their power taken from them and behave themselves. I mean, I would actually put them all in some kind of camp where they can all drive around in quad bikes, or bicycles, or white vans. I would give them a choice of vehicles to drive around with, give them no porn, they wouldn’t be able to fight – we would have wardens, of course! Women who want to see their sons or male loved ones would be able to go and visit, or take them out like a library book, and then bring them back.
I hope heterosexuality doesn’t survive, actually. I would like to see a truce on heterosexuality. I would like an amnesty on heterosexuality until we have sorted ourselves out. Because under patriarchy it’s sh–.
And I am sick of hearing from individual women that their men are all right. Those men have been shored up by the advantages of patriarchy and they are complacent, they are not stopping other men from being sh–.
I would love to see a women’s liberation that results in women turning away from men and saying: “when you come back as human beings, then we might look again.”

Bindel’s suggestion of rounding up males “in some kind of camp” drew harsh attention from men’s rights activists (MRAs) at mgtow.com, the blog “HEqual” and at Reddit. What was most interesting, however, was the way in which other prominent feminists silently ignored this comment by Bindel, a militant lesbian who is a columnist for the British Guardian newspaper. What conclusion should we draw from the silence of “mainstream” feminists toward those who publicly express their movement’s anti-male/anti-heterosexual ideology?

Are we to suppose that Bindel’s fellow Guardian columnist Jessica Valenti actually disagrees with Bindel? Valenti is heterosexual and married to a man. Does she not bristle at the implied insult of Bindel’s assertion that, like other men, Valenti’s husband is complacently benefiting from “the advantages of patriarchy”? Or what about a young feminist like Laurie Penny, whom Bindel insults by name?

On the one hand you have got utter idiots like Laurie Penny who are simply coming out with the stuff that she does because she knows that the groups she is supporting, that are pro-trans, pro-sex work, and pro- other anti-women nonsense, are run by very high profile, powerful libertarian men. We know that she is doing it for a career move.

Considering that Laurie Penny is a fangirl of Bolshevik commissar Alexandra Kollontai, this accusation of being a mercenary puppet of “powerful libertarian men” is certainly shocking, and yet where is Laurie Penny’s rebuttal? Where is any feminist speaking out against Bindel’s forthright advocacy of “political lesbianism”?

Political lesbians are really crucial, because we were the ones that first said that women should be able to determine their own sexuality. We were the ones that said that all women can be lesbians and that heterosexuality is compulsory under a system of male supremacy. We were the ones that said that until women had a free choice, that we had to speak about heterosexuality as imposed upon us, rather [than] freely chosen. . ..
So I think political lesbianism has a crucial role, because it tells women that sexuality is political under a system of male supremacy. . . .
So radical feminism saw heterosexuality under patriarchy as massively problematic, because it benefited men and it disadvantaged women.

To this we might answer simply, “Cui bono“? Who benefits from heterosexuality? Is it true, as Julie Bindel asserts, that heterosexuality is “imposed” on women, to their disadvantage, by males who thereby derive an unjust benefit? She is certainly not alone in asserting this, as anyone who has read my book Sex Trouble understands. Yet decades of silence by “mainstream” feminists about their movement’s fundamental anti-male ideology has served to shield feminist gender theory — the social construction of the gender binary within the heterosexual matrix — from critical scrutiny. Whenever feminism begins one of its periodic resurgences, as in the early 1990s when a media publicity campaign gave rise to the movement’s so-called “Third Wave,” lesbianism always emerges as crucial to the agenda. The feminist movement at large denies that there is any evidence of causation in this correlation, and internal disputes about sexuality within the movement are generally ignored by the liberal media, which prefers to present feminism as a united and wholly respectable cause, dismissing the movement’s critics as irrational bigots.

 

Few outside the movement’s intelligentsia realize that the celebration of so-called “Lesbian Chic” circa 1993 was anathema to many radical feminists, who reject the “born that way” claims of the gay-rights movement, preferring instead to see lesbianism as “a challenge to the institution of heterosexuality and a form of resistance to patriarchal relations,” as Professor Diane Richardson argued in her 2000 book, Rethinking Sexuality. Probably any college sophomore who has taken even an introductory Women’s Studies class is familiar with this radical critique — a rejection of heterosexuality, per se — which has been endorsed by some of the most prominent feminist in academia, notably including Professor Charlotte Bunch of Rutgers University.

“Lesbianism is a threat to the ideological, political, personal, and economic basis of male supremacy. . . .
“Our rejection of heterosexual sex challenges male domination in its most individual and common form. . . .
“Lesbianism is the key to liberation and only women who cut their ties to male privilege can be trusted to remain serious in the struggle against male dominance.”
— Charlotte Bunch, “Lesbians in Revolt,” 1971

“I think heterosexuality cannot come naturally to many women: I think that widespread heterosexuality among women is a highly artificial product of the patriarchy. . . . I think that most women have to be coerced into heterosexuality.”
— Marilyn Frye, “A Lesbian’s Perspective on Women’s Studies,” speech to the National Women’s Studies Association conference, 1980

“But the hatred of women is a source of sexual pleasure for men in its own right. Intercourse appears to be the expression of that contempt in pure form, in the form of a sexed hierarchy; it requires no passion or heart because it is power without invention articulating the arrogance of those who do the fucking. Intercourse is the pure, sterile, formal expression of men’s contempt for women . . .”
— Andrea Dworkin, Intercourse, 1987

“Sexuality is to feminism what work is to Marxism: that which is most one’s own, yet most taken away. . . .
“As the organized expropriation of the work of some for the benefit of others defines a class, workers, the organized expropriation of the sexuality of some for the use of others defines the sex, woman. Heterosexuality is its social structure . . . and control its issue.”
— Catharine MacKinnon, Toward a Feminist Theory of the State (1989)

“Male sexual violence against women and ‘normal’ heterosexual intercourse are essential to patriarchy because they establish the dominance of the penis over the vagina, and thus the power relations between the sexes. . . . Men’s sexual violence against women is the primary vehicle through which the dominance of the penis over the vagina is established.”
— Dee Graham, Loving to Survive: Sexual Terror, Men’s Violence, and Women’s Lives (1994)

“Patriarchy . . . always depends on the ability of men to control women through heterosexuality. . . . Were large numbers of women to take responsibility for our own sexuality and in so doing reject heterosexuality, the very concepts of woman and man would be shattered.”
— Joyce Trebilcot, Dyke Ideas: Process, Politics, Daily Life (1994)

“There are politics in sexual relationships because they occur in the context of a society that assigns power based on gender and other systems of inequality and privilege. . . . [T]he interconnections of systems are reflected in the concept of heteropatriarchy, the dominance associated with a gender binary system that presumes heterosexuality as a social norm. . . .
“As many feminists have pointed out, heterosexuality is organized in such a way that the power men have in society gets carried into relationships and can encourage women’s subservience, sexually and emotionally.”
— Susan M. Shaw and Janet Lee, Women’s Voices, Feminist Visions (fifth edition, 2012)

Despite this ideology’s long history, most people are shocked when someone like Julie Bindel is caught saying in public what is actually taught to many thousands of university students every year within the academic Feminist-Industrial Complex. This shocked reaction is the result of a gap between feminism’s exoteric discourse (what feminists say when seeking support from the general public) and feminism’s esoteric doctrine (the beliefs shared among intellectuals and activists who lead and control the movement), as I have previously explained:

Like other movements of the radical Left, feminism preaches one thing to outsiders while teaching something else to insiders, and this deception is both deliberate and necessary. Feminists must conceal the truth about their agenda, because if taxpayers knew the ideology that is being propagated in our universities, this would cause such a political uproar that legislators would zero out the budgets of Women’s Studies programs and eliminate funding for much of the “research” done by academic feminists.”

For this reason, so-called “mainstream” feminists must maintain a discreet silence regarding Julie Bindel’s blunt expression of feminism’s anti-male/anti-heterosexual ideology. They must never reveal to the general public how much radical indoctrination and propaganda is being conducted at taxpayer expense. Bindel’s academic affiliations (she is currently visiting researcher at England’s Lincoln University) expose the extent to which radical feminism is subsidized by the “society” that feminists vow to destroy. Students are being taught this fanatical hatred of men in programs funded by male taxpayers with the approval of male officials, all of whom Bindel says should “have their power taken from them” so they can be rounded up “in some kind of camp.”

* * * * *

While radical feminism is subsidized by academia, my own research is funded entirely by readers who remember the Five Most Important Words in the English Language:

HIT THE FREAKING TIP JAR!




 

Whatever you can give — $5, $10, $20 — will be deeply appreciated.

UPDATE: Welcome, Instapundit readers! Good news:

  1. Our daughter-in-law just gave birth to our second grandson;
    and
  2. “Feminist Motherhood Has Failed.”

Basically, motherhood is not acceptable to feminism, ever.

 

Category: Sex Trouble

Comments

125 Responses to “Guardian Columnist Julie Bindel Says Put All Males ‘In Some Kind of Camp’”

  1. DeadMessenger
    September 7th, 2015 @ 12:11 am

    Perhaps the haggard Arab men might try to make the lesbians wear burkas.

    I’d cough up good money to see that show on pay-per-view.

  2. Fail Burton
    September 7th, 2015 @ 12:29 am

    Stupid, stupid, girl. Who does she think’s on the other end of 911 – lesbians?

  3. Funeral guy
    September 7th, 2015 @ 12:43 am

    I give the Radical Left about another 10 years. More and more they are letting their “freak flag fly” and the Normal Majority is starting to be bewildered by the lunacy of it all. They will soon turn from bewilderment to revulsion and disgust, and as RSM notes the legislatures (that will still be majority male for the foreseeable future) will put an end to this nonsense by cutting off the money supply. Imagine how amusing it will be when charlatans like this Bindel creature and her Sapphic fellow travelers find that the real world doesn’t have much use for their crap. And yes, Ms. Bindel…I would like fries with my burger.

  4. Funeral guy
    September 7th, 2015 @ 12:49 am

    Oh…good lord, man. The picture in my head is burning my brain. I need some lipstick lesbianism from YouPorn…STAT!!

  5. Durasim
    September 7th, 2015 @ 2:37 am

    Probably ruins the lesbian tourist’s fantasy that she’s cavorting in some sapphic utopia with no men.

  6. DeadMessenger
    September 7th, 2015 @ 3:03 am

    Or not…[eyebrow wiggle]

  7. CaptDMO
    September 7th, 2015 @ 6:24 am

    Hmmmm……The Commandant of the POW camp in Seven Beauties came immediately to my mind.

  8. Evil Otto
    September 7th, 2015 @ 6:36 am

    (sigh) Why is the leftist response to everyone they don’t like always “put them in camps?”

  9. Patrick Albanese
    September 7th, 2015 @ 6:59 am

    There are only 2 possibilities….

    Either God designed men and women to be attracted to each other, or via Darwinism, we have selectively chosen only those that would procreate with the opposite sex.

    Ergo, we are what we are. Good luck changing your nature.

    Also, if what she says is true, that women have been forced into heterosexuality, but that their more natural course is homosexuality, then what is the natural course of men? She seems to think that for men the natural course is heterosexuality.

    How do you square that circle? Men desire women, and yet she thinks women desire women but have been talked out of it. Or forced out of it.

    Men must be geniuses! How they accomplished this I’ll never figure out.

    So, according to this fool, either God designed both sexes to desire women, or, via Darwin, Men forced women into propagating the species against their will. And, did such a thorough job that women now have a maternal instinct.

    We are good!

  10. Instapundit » Blog Archive » TO BE FAIR, THAT’S ALWAYS THE LEFT’S PREFERRED APPROACH TO UNDESIRABLES: Guardian Columnist Julie Bi…
    September 7th, 2015 @ 7:01 am

    […] TO BE FAIR, THAT’S ALWAYS THE LEFT’S PREFERRED APPROACH TO UNDESIRABLES: Guardian Columnist Julie Bindel Says Put All Males ‘In Some Kind of Camp.’ […]

  11. Dana
    September 7th, 2015 @ 7:11 am

    Our esteemed host asked:

    What was most interesting, however, was the way in which other prominent feminists silently ignored this comment by Bindel, a militant lesbian who is a columnist for the British Guardian newspaper. What conclusion should we draw from the silence of “mainstream”
    feminists toward those who publicly express their movement’s anti-male/anti-heterosexual ideology?

    Perhaps they simply don’t take her seriously. What she has done is to find a different platform from Tumblr to express herself like a Tumblrina.

  12. Dana
    September 7th, 2015 @ 7:13 am

    That comment is lookist and completely cisheteronormativist, and I denounce you for it!

  13. Fred234
    September 7th, 2015 @ 7:18 am

    She is one ugly woman. And how she looks is not so great either.

  14. Dana
    September 7th, 2015 @ 7:19 am

    Seems to me that the radical feminist lesbians are very much ahead of their time: they yearn for a day in which they — really meaning other women, not themselves — can reproduce without the necessity for a male. Considering that some of them would have difficulty getting a male to copulate with them under any circumstances, I can see why they have a problem!

    Well, once interned in said Man Camp, I shall refuse the Womyn Sperm Collectors who wish to use my seed for artificial inspermination (not a typo, but a Danaism), and I suggest that we all do so.

  15. dtrumpet
    September 7th, 2015 @ 7:43 am

    Sadly ISIS is going to have a lot of fun with her because I don’t think they care what she thinks. It would be interesting to see her say this in Syria, et al. I have often wondered why radicals always create their own means of destruction. Hatred really does corrupt and debase an individual. It also create an ugliness to those who practice it.

  16. Fatherless
    September 7th, 2015 @ 7:59 am

    This is a very important article.

  17. Benschachar
    September 7th, 2015 @ 8:21 am

    I’m kinda disappointed that no one in the links is talking about the whole “convert women to lesbianism” and “destroy heterosexuality” thing.
    What are the general politics of those sites?
    Because ignoring the “I want to turn more women into lesbians” suggests to me that they’re pro gay marriage.

  18. daialanye
    September 7th, 2015 @ 8:25 am

    Two observations:
    Minor: In a world with concentration camps for males, Julie Bindel would be wise to always prominently display some form of sexual identification.

    Major: Her form of picaresque fantasizing bears an uncanny resemblance to clinical examples of the rantings of grandiose paranoids. The frontal lobe of her brain ought to be inspected for lesions.

  19. Demonrat Plantation
    September 7th, 2015 @ 8:30 am

    Is that Mike Meyers?

  20. sez-who
    September 7th, 2015 @ 8:36 am

    You can have my man when you pry him from my cold, dead hands.

  21. Lowell McCormick
    September 7th, 2015 @ 9:03 am

    I’d volunteer for a camp if it kept me away from bull dykes like her.

  22. SClanding
    September 7th, 2015 @ 9:33 am

    Society used to have institutions to house and treat the criminally insane….now they are shipped off to universities campuses and people are forced to call them Professor.

    Since when has it ever helped any decent society to give mentally unstable loons access to their vulnerable children and teens?

    Insanity has taken full control of the progressive community.

  23. peckerwood
    September 7th, 2015 @ 9:43 am

    The meaningless blatherings of a bull dyke.

  24. Matthew W
    September 7th, 2015 @ 10:34 am

    Seriously, That’s John Goodman on Saturday Night Live ??

  25. davesnothere
    September 7th, 2015 @ 10:38 am

    I’ve finally solved the “feminist problem.” Let them write. Nobody will ever take them seriously after that.

  26. emersonushc13
    September 7th, 2015 @ 11:26 am

    She’s too fat and ugly for me to take her genocidal Stalinism seriously.

  27. doug johnson
    September 7th, 2015 @ 12:17 pm

    LOL, straight men should all call in sick one day just to teach these haters a lesson. They’d be screaming for us to get back to work by noon. And those camps? I give them 3 months before they’re begging US to let THEM in.

  28. Pat Loudoun
    September 7th, 2015 @ 12:26 pm

    I’d love to be in the room the day she finds out that the only reason anyone is even allowed to believe such garbage is only because we let them.

  29. Quartermaster
    September 7th, 2015 @ 1:33 pm

    Of course we’re good. Men invented electrical power systems, cruise controls, jet aircraft, Calculus, General and special relativity, Quantum Physics, multi-story buildings, medicine, and myriad other things. Not to mention civilization itself.

    Why did we do these things? For women and children natch. But, note well, I did not mention wimyn at all anywhere in this. No one does a thing for those harpies.

  30. Quartermaster
    September 7th, 2015 @ 1:33 pm

    I wouldn’t trust her with fries or the burger.

  31. Quartermaster
    September 7th, 2015 @ 1:35 pm

    Sadly, I’m still a lesbian trapped in a man’s body.

  32. Quartermaster
    September 7th, 2015 @ 1:38 pm

    That would be a crime against humanity.

  33. jas
    September 7th, 2015 @ 2:14 pm

    Why are the ugliest women the biggest leftists? Hmmm. Or maybe, the bigger the leftist you are, the more hideously ugly you are. Yeah, that is more accurate.

  34. MarkJ
    September 7th, 2015 @ 3:46 pm

    Interesting you should mention all this….

    http://www.returnofkings.com/32053/this-accidental-experiment-shows-the-superiority-of-patriarchy

  35. News of the Week (September 7th, 2015) | The Political Hat
    September 7th, 2015 @ 3:47 pm

    […] Guardian Columnist Julie Bindel Says Put All Males “In Some Kind of Camp” England’s most influential radical feminist was asked whether she believes “heterosexuality will survive women’s liberation” […]

  36. Daniel Freeman
    September 7th, 2015 @ 4:29 pm

    http://www.nytimes.com/images/blogs/laughlines/thehugemanatee.jpg

  37. Daniel Freeman
    September 7th, 2015 @ 4:39 pm

    That one never gets old.

  38. Daniel Freeman
    September 7th, 2015 @ 4:41 pm

    I wouldn’t trust her to punch in my order correctly on a touchscreen with pictures.

  39. Ernie Paulson
    September 7th, 2015 @ 4:58 pm

    That’s some pretty sick shit

  40. Durasim
    September 7th, 2015 @ 5:57 pm

    Whenever the leftists and feminists denounce these anti-homosexuality laws, they always blame British colonial influence and/or American evangelical missionaries, trying to pretend that aversion to homosexuality is entirely an invention of the West.

    They shriek that were if not for evil white people, then Africa and Asia would all be rainbow-shitting homosexual dream lands.

  41. Dana
    September 7th, 2015 @ 7:26 pm

    ‘Twould seem to me that if they believe that they can “convert women to lesbianism,” then they have destroyed the argument that homosexuality is not a choice.

  42. Richard Jefferies
    September 7th, 2015 @ 8:02 pm

    Ya just can’t get mad at this kind of abject stupidity. It takes a special kind of narcissism to have these type of delusional ideas, and then a complete lack of cognitive dissonance to express them.

  43. theoldsargesays
    September 7th, 2015 @ 8:52 pm

    Hey Abbott!

  44. Funeral guy
    September 7th, 2015 @ 10:14 pm

    The end result of Communism and Marxism since these inception of these vile ideologies.

  45. MAKE $98/HOUR BY GOOGLE JOBS
    September 8th, 2015 @ 5:00 am

    my mate’s mother makes $98 consistently on the PC………After earning an average of 19952 Dollars monthly,I’m finally getting 98 Dollars an hour,just working 4-5 hours daily online….It’s time to take some action and you can join it too.It is simple,dedicated and easy way to get rich.Three weeks from now you will wishyou have started today – I promise!….HERE I STARTED-TAKE A LOOK AT…..svb…..

    ???? https://googlehomejobsnetspotworkonline/earn/$98/hour…. ???????????????????????????????????

  46. bedfordthegreat
    September 8th, 2015 @ 12:31 pm

    You look at who made the quote and you can see why she is so bitter. She almost looks like a man.

  47. Grandson Of TheGrumpus
    September 8th, 2015 @ 1:13 pm

    As as time goes by, I marvel at how much SJW/SJB/feminists/statists/etc reveal themselves to be people developmentally “stuck”– both mentally and emotionally– at the “me! me! mine! mine! gimme! gimme!” level of character.

    Any definition, explanation, argument, discussion/debate always reduces to how the subject relates to their desires and wants— how fulfilling their whim relates to everyone else’s position, Liberty, even life, is of less than no consequence… that they’re hurting/destroying other people is irrelevant and, as a matter of course, won’t even be acknowledged as impinging on the discussion.

    It’s a phenomenon I wouldn’t have believed possible in “adults” if I had not witnessed it countless times first-hand!

    Absolutely horrendous!

  48. Opetke
    September 8th, 2015 @ 1:17 pm

    Wow! Sexy occupation force!

  49. Grandson Of TheGrumpus
    September 8th, 2015 @ 1:23 pm

    I never considered your point, but there might just be something to it…

  50. Daniel Freeman
    September 8th, 2015 @ 2:50 pm

    Fraternal twin boys, separated at birth?

    http://www.tottenhamjournal.co.uk/polopoly_fs/1.2853872.1381159801!/image/770301057.jpg_gen/derivatives/landscape_225/770301057.jpg

    http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-gKSAJ68t4fU/Ubf7krwMhUI/AAAAAAAANUg/GZeSFpaZiR8/s1600/Elton+John-7.jpg