StEver since Trump won the election in the US, the idea of a “sex strike”, combined with a form of women’s activism that started in South Korea, took hold on social media. Like many things that become popularly vocal, it’s actually about much more than the literal meaning of those words.
This iteration”4B movement“It provides a voice and a useful signal for women’s fear and anger against a nation that increasingly refuses to provide basic reproductive rights and health. Women are rarely told about the consequences of an unintended pregnancy or pregnancy complications after the word repealing Roe v. Wade. Moreover, so said attitude gap between grown-up virgins and men – the fact that young people seem to move towards the political right, while virgins have remained more liberal – also adds doubt to what has been labeled by experts as a fertility crisis, but what it is, n. in the fact of the crisis of women’s lack of choice.
Faced with these conditions, the idea of intentional separation from sexual relations with men, domestic societies and motherhood begins as a practical option.
The US 4B trend is a widely accepted feminist initiative, and has also been linked to separatism and political lesbianism. However, this is a mistake of intention and the situation that arises from it. Such responses also point to a lack of knowledge about political feminism and the history of feminism as a revolutionary social movement.
The main problem with the idea of a woman having sex is that rapture exists. Many commenters in response to visible women and arguments clearly make this point, as they respond that young women do not always have a choice. The slogan “your body, my choice”, which has been trending online since Trump’s victory, graphically summarizes this case.
It is also a question whether the idea of hitting the female sex is an act in itself. The problem is when the sex-only ban seems to be somehow new that it plays into the very issues that arguably created the need for activism in the first place. In this institution, gender is work – work that women benefit men, and then they can limit, manipulate or stop the joint demands for better conditions. That is not radical. Gender has long been defined under patriarchy as what men want and women should do. With this kind of understanding of sex, why did rape take so long to be recognized as a crime, for example, because how could a man take away from his wife what he had by right of marriage? Intertwining sex, as women’s work for men results in sex being commodified and objectified, and the problem is that it can be exchanged, traded or sold, even taken. This is not allowed, so it would be called for new things between the sexes.
I never knew what separatism or political lesbianism was actually called – and perhaps there is something that we could learn from the real way of thinking of these movements.
Within the women’s liberation movement throughout the Western world at least, separatism was fully a women’s plan to live with women. Examples are included women’s earth movement – women-only common, small property and business that spread across the US and Europe in the 1970s and 1980s. Separatism was to demonstrate that women could run their own businesses, especially with skills and knowledge traditionally denied to women, such as construction, engineering and mechanics. Women-only communities have helped women to overcome indiscipline in practice, but also to raise women’s confidence by providing an example of their real-life virtue. A living separatist shows that women do not need men. This is not the same as women not want people While there were lesbian communities and businesses, separatism was not an exclusively lesbian activity; women were only alive and political, often with no need or control over the sex of individual women.
Political lesbianism in the UK, meanwhile, can be traced back to a document entitled Is Love Your Enemy?, which began life as a conference paper. a radical feminist conversation eventwrote a collective of radical feminists and novelists based in Leeds, York. It was distributed in 1979 on the Wire, a feminist national news agency for women’s information and research referral service. The paper proved so controversial that it was later published, along with a selection of letters of complaint and comment, in 1981, in the women-only publishing house of the Onlywomen Press. The article attempted to open up a discussion about sexuality in general and disrupt heterosexuality within the women’s liberation movement. He disagreed that sexuality was subject to degrees of social conditioning, and that heterosexuality, at least to some extent, could be expected and institutionalized, with little social tolerance whatsoever.
At the height of the women’s liberation movement and cutting edge social justice movements in the gaiety of liberation and Black power, many felt that a revolution was just around the corner. Radical activists in feminism believed that women should spend all their energies on the women’s movement, not least distracting – not least taking care of the male partner in the domestic sphere, where women are concerned with unequal burdens and high levels of violence. and power The idealized image of the heterosexual nuclear family was already disintegrating by this time. Political lesbianism did not demand sexual or romantic relations between women, but promoted a full focus on the women’s liberation movement.
It’s fun in 4B picturing it as a sex hit by young, marketable, heterosexual women. Or it can reject such sexist constructions of gender and sexuality, and imagine and work towards an egalitarian future where men and women are not divided into predator and prey. More than sex strikes, there is another tried and tested form of activism that is being carried out by women and men around the world: workers strike, the deduction of labor wages, which fuels the capitalist systems that dare us to rule. It’s patriarchy, not sex.