The Other McCain

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

Dropped on Her Head Again? Radical Feminist Rants About ‘Intersectionality’

Posted on | March 30, 2014 | 45 Comments

You may remember how, in reaction to a radical feminist’s anti-heterosexual rant — “PIV is always rape, OK?” — Twitter user @conkc2 asked, “Was she maybe dropped on her head?” In recent weeks, the radfem has been on an extended rant about “intersectionality,” the most recent installment being the fifth in the series:

Intersectionality, part V: additional notes
on amnesia and springing from Outercourse

When we can’t see men as the oppressors, men’s violence is suppressed in the unconscious realm (or in the “subliminal sea”) and what remains visible and conscious to us in the foreground is the betrayal by puppeted women orchestrated/remote-controlled by the invisible male lords/puppeteers. . . .

She actually includes two footnotes in the first paragraph to define “background” and “foreground” according to Mary Daly, a recently deceased feminist (see “‘Snools Rule’: Mary Daly and the Radical Feminist School of Atrocious Writing“). Anybody who reads much Mary Daly might start babbling like they had been dropped on their head, and our favorite radfem has read a lot of Mary Daly.

The title of the radfem’s post invokes Daly’s 1992 book, Outercourse: The Be-Dazzling Voyage, which contains 477 pages of the most deranged gibberish ever published by a tenured professor. Daly invokes “amnesia” in the first chapter of Outercourse:

When I went back to teaching in the fall of 1969 I had already begun to change drastically. I had begun to see through the particularities of my experience with Boston College to the universal condition of women in all universities and in all institutions of patriarchy. I had experienced my first explicit encounters with the demons of assimilation — especially taking the form of tokenism — and won. . . .
By Seeing and Naming the connections that had been largely subliminal in the earlier stage of Voyaging, I Moved into The Second Spiral Galaxy of my Outercourse. This involved Acts of Exorcism of the amnesia inflicted by patriarchal institutions, religion in particular, and by the -ologies which they engender and which . . . serve to legitimate them. Exorcism of amnesia required Acts of Unforgetting — Seeing through the foreground “past” into the Background Past — beyond the androcratic lies about women’s history. I found that Breaking through to knowledge of a Prepatriarchal Pagan Past opened the possibility for Radical Naming. . . .

You see what I mean about “deranged gibberish.” What Daly seems to mean by “amnesia” is that there is an unknown past — “a Prepatriarchal Pagan Past” — which has been forgotten because of myths propagated by “patriarchal institutions.” Daly’s habit of making up words can be witnessed in her coinage of “androcratic,” which means the same thing as “patriarchal,” i.e., dominated by male authority. Daly’s eccentricities of rhetoric reflect her disordered mind. It takes a special kind of crazy to cite Mary Daly in footnotes to a blog post, so let’s have a few more slices of the radfem’s  rant:

Failing to see men’s oppression and turning our anger against women is fundamentally based on amnesia: our forgetting of men’s genocide. . . .
Our capacity to feel empathy towards women, to reverse the reversals and to make the connections about men’s violence is deeply and directly connected to our uncovering of the suppressed memories of what men have done to us. When we forget the oppressor, there is no other option than to turn against women, because that’s how patriarchy is configured: there is one oppressor class, men, and one oppressed class, women, and if you’re not against men, then it’s mechanically at the expense of women and of ourselves. There is no in-between, or third outlet: women are the only counterpoint to men’s violence.

To emphasize: “there is one oppressor class, men, and one oppressed class, women.” This is the radfem’s predictable answer to “intersectionality,” which Wikipedia defines as “the study of intersections between different disenfranchised groups or groups of minorities; specifically, the study of the interactions of multiple systems of oppression or discrimination. The term is particularly prevalent in black feminism, which argues that the experience of being a black female cannot simply be understood in terms of being black, and of being female, considered independently, but must include the interactions, which frequently reinforce each other.”

That is to say, black feminists don’t just want to talk about being victimized by sexism, but also by racism. “Intersectionality” is a fancy intellectual word to describe this idea, which sometimes takes the form of black feminists denouncing the “white privilege” of the majority of academic feminists who are not just whiter than Wonder Bread, but also generally from upper-middle-class backgrounds and ensconced in tenured faculty sinecures with six-figure salaries.

The first time I ever heard of “intersectionality” was in relation to the Hugo Schwyzer meltdown (see, “Sex and the Psychotic Professor“), where #SolidarityIsForWhiteWomen became a hashtag pointing out that Schwyzer had dissed a black woman:

The ”retired” self-proclaimed ”male feminist” Hugo Schwyzer used to write for feminist blogs from xoJane to Jezebel, but quit after the years of ”standing up to women’s anger” had ”destroyed his mental health.” Right. . . .
Schwyzer called out a black woman who had criticized him, and no white feminists came to her defense . . .

 Shanelle Matthews described the intersectionality connection:

Schwyzer, a self-identified male feminist made his claim to Internet fame by reworking and packaging up modern male feminism and selling  it to online publications like The Atlantic and Jezebel, for whom he was a paid contributor, and Feministe, which featured an interview with him. Two of these three are notorious for their insensitivity and, on more than one occasion, outright disregard for the importance of intersectional feminism — that is the focal point where feminism and another powerful system meet, say for instance, race. . . . In matters of the heart, their feminist ideology dematerializes — often at the expense of women of color and other marginalized women.

Far be it from me to defend Schwyzer or feminist editors from the accusation of “insensitivity” toward “women of color and other marginalized women,” however, the Daly-citing radfem sees “intersectionality” as just another male-created deception:

Intersectionality, just as any form of anti-feminism, are part of men’s phallic lies and global brainwashing tactics which generate amnesia and the inward-twisting of rage against ourselves and other women. . . .

Whoa! Intersectionality is a “form of anti-feminism . . . part of men’s phallic lies”? Let’s skip back to Part IV of this rant:

We have to understand that cultural and social racism or insensitivity from part of women is integral to our colonisation by the men who occupy us. Racism, sexism, classism, any kind of condescension — all are one and tied to the same anti-woman package, they are inseparable. It’s male-identification.
‘Racist feminism’ or ‘classist feminism’ is an oxymoron, in other words. This means we cannot be feminist without wanting to exorcise all forms of male domination and subordination, without seeing them as interlinked and mutually supportive of women’s oppression. We discover empathy and searing rage for the plight of all our sisters and that in spite of differences, we are all subjected to variations of male rapism. We see patriarchy as universal. By identifying ourselves as women we identify to all women as women, embrace each other as our people and reject male blocking of our movement/convergence. . . .
When I look at intersectional articles, who are they directed against? Women, women, women, women, women, women and women. All of them. It is the primary distinguishing factor of intersectionality. But if women are so oppressive to us, what’s the point of being feminist, may I ask. Either we perceive men to be our oppressors and we’re feminist, or we hate these women who oppress us so much — and we’re misogynist. . . .

In other words, because “intersectionality” leads to one group of feminist women attacking another group of feminist women, it is objectively “misogynist,” obscuring the reality of “male domination,” the result of a failure to “perceive men to be our oppressors.”

All of this proves one point: Feminism is a form of mental illness. Instead of sending crazy women to lunatic asylums, nowadays we send them to university Women’s Studies departments. This does not cure their insanity, but it does train them to blog about rape and abortion and other bizarre obsessions common to crazy women.

Women must ask themselves: “Am I crazy enough to be a feminist?”




45 Responses to “Dropped on Her Head Again? Radical Feminist Rants About ‘Intersectionality’”

  1. Wombat_socho
    March 31st, 2014 @ 12:24 am

    So black feminists’ complaints about white feminists seem to be justified, as this deranged specimen seems entirely representative of the larger group.

  2. Wraith
    March 31st, 2014 @ 12:24 am

    If you want to put this mindset into its proper perspective, just replace all references to ‘men” with references to “space aliens.”
    Then, you’ll either:
    a) understand that these people are half a step from a tinfoil beanie
    b) be convinced that I’m an agent of the Evil Space Alien Conspiracy and therefore nothing I say should even be read, or
    c) think these whackjobs are fellow Scientologists. :p
    Alternately, you could replace the references to “men” with references to “Jews,” and realize something very disturbing about these folks…

  3. Nan
    March 31st, 2014 @ 1:15 am

    She can’t even spell sammich!

  4. Anamika
    March 31st, 2014 @ 1:51 am
  5. K-Bob
    March 31st, 2014 @ 2:07 am

    And here we wuz all worried about Homer Sectionality.

  6. RKae
    March 31st, 2014 @ 2:10 am

    OK, I’m trying to keep this stuff up-to-date, but it’s tough! According to all the raging feminist crapola I’ve read on this site…

    Women become lesbians because of subliminal male oppression. Although ALL women actually are lesbians at birth and only become heterosexual because of culturally inflicted trauma… and then are subsequently transformed back into lesbians by male oppression.

    So I’m not getting how this male oppression is bad if it’s turning them back into the lesbians they were at birth.

  7. Anamika
    March 31st, 2014 @ 2:11 am

    Here’s someone who has moved beyond the ideas of feminism of the 60s and 70s: From wikipedia: Rasa von Werder (born Rosa Sofia Jakstas, better-known as Kellie Everts) is a former stripper, female bodybuilder, and founder of her own church.
    “The Stripper for God” “Blessed with impressive features, Everts won the title of Miss Nude Universe in July 1967 and Miss Body Beautiful in 1974. She later made nine appearances (with three articles) in Playboy, and became an exotic dancer.

    “In 1973, Everts came up with the idea a stripper could also be a minister. The combination of stripper and evangelical religious conviction led to the creation of “Stripper for God”.
    “Kellie later changed the emphasis of her mission to the return of Matriarchy and the Feminine Divine. The high point of her ministry was the preaching of the Our Lady of Fatima message,[14] with the aim of bringing about the conversion of Russia, in front of the White House on June 16, 1978….
    “On May 24, 2004, Kellie, under her present name Rasa von Werder or Guru Rasa of the Church of MotherGod, started the Woman Thou Art God Website.[20] She has since developed an Internet presence to pursue her religious mission and authored six books on the subject of matriarchy and spirituality.”

  8. Matt_SE
    March 31st, 2014 @ 5:00 am

    I love the sign in the picture: “No, you make *me* a sandwich!”
    From the looks of it, we’ll have to make her more than one.

  9. Matt_SE
    March 31st, 2014 @ 5:09 am

    “Intersectionality” is obviously the formalization of the race to the bottom: who can rack up the longest list of oppressions?
    I’m waiting to see the elusive black-lesbian-midget-amputee-Down Syndrome-transsexual-hobo-prostitute-octogenarian.

  10. Anamika
    March 31st, 2014 @ 5:16 am

    You left out drug addict and homeless.

  11. Kirby McCain
    March 31st, 2014 @ 7:29 am

    Dropped on the head? No. Mom fell in the tub when she was pregnant with this one.

  12. Kirby McCain
    March 31st, 2014 @ 7:31 am

    You want to be careful handing them to her. I’d hate to see you pull back a nub.

  13. Lunatic Feminist: Meet Mary Daly | Batshit Crazy News
    March 31st, 2014 @ 7:34 am

    […] Feminists who were dropped on their heads or something (also known as “Bat Shit […]

  14. WaltPimbley
    March 31st, 2014 @ 7:37 am

    RT @smitty_one_each: TOM Dropped on Her Head Again? Radical Feminist Rants About ‘Intersectionality’ #TCOT

  15. texlovera
    March 31st, 2014 @ 7:51 am

    These people are mother-effing nutz.

    The only good thing I can see is that at least my state taxes don’t find my way into her paycheck….

  16. RS
    March 31st, 2014 @ 8:01 am

    “Intersectionality”–God, I hate Post Modernism–is the inevitable result of the Left’s obsession with Victims and Oppressors. It is the endgame where all the various groups whose Raison d’être is finding new ways to feel offended, wind up engaged in the Cannibalism of Victims. This like some weird version of Highlander: There can be only one!!!

  17. NRPax
    March 31st, 2014 @ 9:12 am

    Remember the good old days when the mentally ill were put in institutions for their safety? I’m really seeing the good in that.

  18. Dana
    March 31st, 2014 @ 9:13 am

    Our esteemed host wrote:

    The title of the radfem’s post invokes Daly’s 1992 book, Outercourse: The Be-Dazzling Voyage, which contains 477 pages of the most deranged gibberish ever published by a tenured professor.

    Are you certain? That’s a rather high bar to top!

  19. Dana
    March 31st, 2014 @ 9:15 am

    Well, you can see her frustration: while it’s obvious that she’s had way too many sandwiches, no man ever made one for her.

  20. Dana
    March 31st, 2014 @ 9:18 am

    Windy wrote:

    and what remains visible and conscious to us in the foreground is the betrayal by puppeted women orchestrated/remote-controlled by the invisible male lords/puppeteers.

    If these poor women are simply puppets controlled by their invisible male overlords, how can Windy see such as betrayal? For these women to betray their noble feminist lesbian sisters, they’d have to have free will.

    March 31st, 2014 @ 9:57 am

    Why? You’re hanging out here more and more.

    March 31st, 2014 @ 9:57 am

    Why? You’re hanging out here more and more.

  23. RS
    March 31st, 2014 @ 10:17 am

    Logical consistency is the hobgoblin of small minds, don’t you know.

  24. Peregrine John
    March 31st, 2014 @ 11:13 am

    This is too complicated. I don’t know how I’m supposed to oppress any more! I only know it’s supposed to be done with phallic lies, and mine (annoyingly) always tells the truth!

  25. Dana
    March 31st, 2014 @ 12:00 pm

    Well, of course you’re right!

  26. Kirby McCain
    March 31st, 2014 @ 12:42 pm

    These are not the droids you’re looking for.

  27. concern00
    March 31st, 2014 @ 2:10 pm

    I’d suggest she needs a good man, but what good man would want her?

  28. Dana
    March 31st, 2014 @ 2:25 pm
  29. daleyrocks
    March 31st, 2014 @ 3:12 pm

    What happened to the simpler days when I was attending an institution of higher indoctrination when feminism simply meant that I had to sleep in the wet spot?

  30. RKae
    March 31st, 2014 @ 4:16 pm

    Hey! Will you chill?! Don’t work so hard to oppress! There’s no way you CAN’T oppress, so don’t get all worked up about not knowing what to do!

    If you fall into anxiety about your desperate need to oppress, then you’re only going to wind up with performance issues.

    Just relax!

    Simply do what you normally do, and the micro-aggressions will flow from you in a natural manner.

  31. Adobe_Walls
    March 31st, 2014 @ 5:03 pm

    Actually oppressing others is becoming increasingly more difficult as Ol’Remus reported back in September

    “Adult white males, a small part of the population, have more work than they can possibly handle oppressing the rest of the country. In the remote past they only had to enforce behavioral norms and workplace productivity to fulfill their “Poor, Minorities Hit Hardest”
    obligations. It took maybe a few hours a year because voluntary compliance was nearly universal. But even then there was barely enough time left to keep radicals and banksters from taking over the country. Those times are long gone, yet the larger society acts as if oppression was an internship with a waiting list.”

    Unfortunately I can’t provide a link as Ol’Remus doesn’t archive “Woodpile Reports”. That quote is from report 338 9/17/2013

  32. Kirby McCain
    March 31st, 2014 @ 6:32 pm

    Love it. These women should have been writing for the X Files.

  33. Kirby McCain
    March 31st, 2014 @ 6:50 pm

    Are you a stripper?

  34. Bob Belvedere
    March 31st, 2014 @ 7:23 pm

    Hey! The blind need strippers too, ya know!

  35. Bob Belvedere
    March 31st, 2014 @ 7:27 pm

    If we respected her wishes and made her into a sandwich, we could feed ourselves for an awful long time. Although, this desire to be cannibalized is rather odd, don’t ya think?

  36. The Daley Gator | So that is why Feminists are perpetually angry
    March 31st, 2014 @ 10:10 pm

    […] Dropped on Her Head Again? Radical Feminist Rants About ‘Intersectionality’ […]

  37. cmdr358
    March 31st, 2014 @ 10:42 pm

    Penalty Flag!

    Encroachment into the corny zone, 5 yard penalty, repeat first down.


  38. cmdr358
    March 31st, 2014 @ 10:45 pm

    Because along the road to their ultimate self-awareness… PIV!

  39. cmdr358
    March 31st, 2014 @ 10:50 pm

    Keep dreaming…

    She’s got to be a recipient of public aid or a government grant or something!

    Fat, dumb and radfem just doesn’t pay the bills.

  40. cmdr358
    March 31st, 2014 @ 10:52 pm


  41. Some Guy
    April 1st, 2014 @ 11:18 pm

    Last thing that woman in the last picture needs is another sandwich.

  42. texlovera
    April 2nd, 2014 @ 2:43 pm

    I only say that because I’m in a different state. Fed taxes, on the other hand….

  43. Not even slavery. | Dark Brightness
    April 2nd, 2014 @ 3:14 pm

    […] took this picture from Stacey McCain, who wrote a thousand words on intersectionality, including this summative illustration. It’s […]

  44. Politics Linkfest: I Can’t Quit You Baby | Blackmailers Don't Shoot
    April 2nd, 2014 @ 8:24 pm

    […] The Other McCain: Dropped on Her Head Again? Radical Feminist Rants About ‘Intersectionality’ […]

  45. News of the Week (April 6th, 2014) | The Political Hat
    April 6th, 2014 @ 3:57 pm

    […] Dropped on Her Head Again? Radical Feminist Rants About ‘Intersectionality’ You may remember how, in reaction to a radical feminist’s anti-heterosexual rant — “PIV is always rape, OK?” — Twitter user @conkc2 asked, “Was she maybe dropped on her head?” In recent weeks, the radfem has been on an extended rant about “intersectionality,” the most recent installment being the fifth in the series […]