Failure of Revolution

     For those who believe merely recognizing gender roles and sexism in our society is counteracting patriarchy, please reconsider how (despite our protests) we are still products of a patriarchal society. No one would ever suggest simply recognizing the faults of a global economy is sufficient enough to oppose its oppression, then continually engage in free market capitalism (either as a consumer or a capitalist). As with both examples, which of course illustrates patriarchal globalization from the perspective of social relations enforcing pre-existing systems of sexist institutions (which of course then reinforces our personal behaviors)...there is a deep psychological manipulation used through economic and social means that condition every person based on a role we are programmed to believe we are destined to play. Meaning, experiencing and/or seeing the injustices of patriarchy (or globalization) and ethically opposing it in theory only deprogram our faith in these systems, which does not necessarily change the conditioning we've experienced up until that point. We no longer believe it's our destiny to play the games of the government but we've still been conditioned to fulfill certain roles.
    Our habits and tendencies are much harder to break than it is to simply change our beliefs, which only takes a thought. Taking action, like to actually stop biting your nails, requires will-power and many times of falling back into the same pattern before your actions match up with your thoughts, which already oppose biting your nails. Essentially, with changing our daily habits, like when we decide to dumpster or grow our own food than shop at the supermarket, or patch up our pants rather than buy a new pair, we are rerouting our brain's pathways and discovering new routes to go about the same situations (i.e. coming up with a different coping mechanism when experiencing mild anxiety rather than biting your nails).
    Our pre-existing habits and social behaviors is why anarchists, during meetings, purposely make room for women to speak. The behaviors we've accumulated allows a social dynamic of, for instance, men being more comfortable speaking and listened to when being vocal which enables women to be less inclined to speak out and opinions less respected. This is the process of eliminating hierarchy through changing our habits.
    It seems as though every time I am at a social gathering, whether anarchist related or not, not only do people talk past me to my boyfriend (as if I am not there)  but then unwittingly, he continues the cycle by leaving me no room to speak, and by no means am I a shy or quiet person! Yet, there I am staring at my feet hoping for a gap in the conversation where they may or may not hear me due to the mere rapidness and exclusion of their conversation. It makes sense that there is no need for my input considering my boyfriend uses the words "we" and "us" to sum up my experiences, as if he is my spokesperson and I feel awkward bringing up topics that are out of context, as if I can't help but be a secondary conversation partaker. Why, as well, do I fixate on gaining a couple pounds when I am aware of the crisis of eating disorders and oppose this consumer driven society that treats women as objects? The only logical conclusion would be that these are knee jerk reactions.
    Most of us aren't "good" anarchists; "good" meaning up to our ideal standards of what anarchism opposes/stands up for. The failures of our attempted revolutions, as with Occupy, is the unwillingness to reconcile our behaviors to match our beliefs. I expect liberals to bring take-out to the Occupations, but the anarchists...doing drugs, drinking PBRs (as if drugs and alcohol aren't already the reason for failed revolutions)...it's a hypocrisy we are all guilty of (to some degree) but we have the obligation to be the counter-point to these liberals. It's not radical to support large corporations or fund wars due to opiate addiction. What, in fact, is the difference between Chinese take-out and PBRs? At least with the take out you probably aren't supporting a large chain and also putting a little change in a family's pocket.
    It is understandable to feel pressured by this society of greed and oppression, especially as anarchists, but it's not understandable to play into ignorance out of pride. We should recognize our behaviors and hypocrisies as individuals and attempt to change them. Look at the sophistication of television advertisements, enticing us with bright colors, sounds and key words they know from research will peak our interest. Companies are constantly conducting experiments on willing participants (unwilling depending on your point of view) to find ways to draw us in based on our biology and psychology. They know what colors make us angry or excited, and how to make a jingle that can't get out of our heads. I can't even look away from HD, it just looks so cool, and I don't even know what I am watching half the time, because my brain's pleasure receptors are being stroked so efficiently. Pulling ourselves away becomes a constant struggle living in civilization.        
    There are similar problems with the post-left anarchists who believe we are beyond labels, yet, how can you be beyond patriarchy by just refusing to acknowledge it's existence and not using the ideas and terminology to examine your behaviors? This is why I meet men who refuse to acknowledge patriarchy exists and the same reason why even though we know oil funds war, many of us end up at the dealership ready to purchase a car... already prepared with excuses to defend your decision... because it's convenient. Ethical decisions, I assure you, are usually not convenient. This is also why so many people are against the Anti-Civ folks. It's not impossible to live sustainably with the environment, off the grid and rewild - it's just people are afraid. Bugs, storms, diseases (most which would be eliminated outside of civilization), not having all the foods they love; people are dependent on the concrete structures to protect them from their fears that have been instilled since birth. Most people would honestly,  based on their tendencies and habits, stay within capitalism, even when they hate it, based on a laundry list of excuses and quotes from dead white men who hoped technology would save humanity.
   Revolutions fail only because we prevent ourselves from succeeding. We are a society based on realism instead of idealism, which traps us into being "flywheels on the ram-shackle machinery of the awful truth" (Kurt Vonnegut). We intellectualize things to a point of falling back into our Babylonian prison cell. Sometimes we are duped into thinking we're making a difference  and then you look around you and notice your in a group of white males 20-25 talking about minority issues when who knows if any of these people personally knows one person of color. We must witness our hypocrisies and become willing to fix them with the support of our anarchist friends and not shoot down everyone who has a slightly different theory. I do think that within time, people will abandon the old anarchist syndicalist ways and become open minded to the possibilities of life not dependent on technology, which can only quicken the pace of the world's demise.
   Revolutions take place, first, within yourself. That is the main reason why Occupy countered any attempts at mass uprising, because it tamed anarchists to work within mainstream politics. Radicals failed to differentiate themselves from liberals, due to the bureaucracy of large scale consensus, although it is effective in small groups. As soon as Occupy clearly became a reformist movement about better banking and so on, anarchists should have broken up, back into our smaller groups, and took the opportunity while Occupy was still making headlines to start a counter-Occupy movement. Yet, because our theories do not sync up with our actual practice, many of us were drawn into the game of democratic process and trying to convince middle class people how to go about effective direct action (to no avail).
    There is no solidarity between anarchists which leads us into petty discussions about theoretical points instead of looking at practicality and possibility. For instance, though anarcho-primitivisim  is heavily criticized,( in my opinion for an individual's co-dependency with civilization and fear of nature) you will find a fear of feminism. Expecting the effects of patriarchal civilization to magically dissipate into a peaceful feral community, would be to expect HIStorical and archeological evidence to be accurate, which, of course, is doctored and shaped by the society in which we live. This is not to create an argument about whether or not hunter-gatherer societies held the platform for hierarchy (which it quite probably did considering here we are now) but more so to acknowledge the influences this society already conditioned us with, and to hold out the possibility that maybe the Unabomber had a point. The validity and necessity of primitivisim should not be dependent on whether or not natives were peaceful or at times violent. This is petty arguing, and the reality is, to leave rewilding (which in actuality would take generations to fully realize) the hefty task of eliminating patriarchy based on faith of someone's research instead of taking extra precaution to create a genderless society (specifically in regards to division of labor)  would be ignorant of the current attitudes of individuals and their cultural influences. If on the other hand, people applied these theories instead of debating with words we would see in practice if in fact it is necessary to make genderless equality an issue at the forefront instead of relying on what we were told worked for Tribe A or Tribe B.
    Close-mindedness, from liberals to red/green/black anarchists among themselves, is our only detriment and keeps us DE-radicalized. The very premise for anarchism is that we've been conditioned to believe we need leaders, and as we all know reading this, that is a lie, that  before  in theory leaders were believed  necessary until put into practice otherwise. Upon having the opportunity to say what we've been dying to let the mainstream media know, we cowardly watered ourselves down for the liberals and therefore played right into the hands of our big, mean government machine. Revolutions aren't futile, but with the Occupy let down, it will be difficult for another mass movement, and perhaps different tactics are in order. For now, I say unity, small collectives, and groups is, at the current time, the only counter-point to the oppression we experience in the United States, so working on ways to deviate from the capitalist system should be number one priority. Hopefully others will see the possibilities of our own creations once we stop dividing ourselves and mend our hypocrisies. The failure of revolution? Our own thoughts left over from our pre-anarchist days.

A Blog About A Blog

     In this post-2000 world of internet accessibility, where anyone can have a blog, I wonder how relevant my self-publication is. While an individual's freedom for creativity, no matter how seemingly self-indulgent or adolescent, is important, especially in the context of anarchism and activism - when everyone thinks they are the next Paris on Twitter, I wonder how anyone can find my poor old radical feminist blog. Sigh. Blogging is even referenced in popular media. Big name writers that have contracts even have blogs just to screw the rest of us up.

    A long time ago, perhaps 10 years ago, before the digital monopoly over reality, if you wanted to self publish you were making trips to Kinko's quite regularly. I don't know if they're are Kinko's anymore. They are probably all internet cafes. The beauty of the zine making scene was you had to have the will power to see the process through the maze of mapping and folding so it can look like a bonafide flip-able piece of literature. Now, laziness and boredom are the motivations for your urgent need for expression. Just to give a few examples, I 'flipped through' (of course there's no 'flipping' online) the blogs that come before mine, and they are mostly personal journals and movie reviews. I barely trust my friends to give me good movie reviews, let alone Jane or Joe who loves romantic comedies.

    Despite the over lapping of self-interest and the welfare of the general public, even in cyber space there is a need for intelligent reading material. I will not be discouraged to rant about patriarchy even when lines of my articles mysteriously disappear thanks to this perfect technology. To have people willing to use the tools we have is crucial for activism in the anarchist communities to thrive and reach the sensitive minds of the youth who have been brainwashed by Axe commercials and history teachers to think 'anarchy' is a synonym for chaos. To have an accessible record of herstory is a beautiful fuck you to big name publishers who want the voices of protest to be turned down, if possible, non-existent to mainstream folks. 

    So, here I am, the lone warrior, in the vast desert plain of internet blogging hoping some youngster will find this just like a tumble weed in the wind. Us anarchists are outlaws in the cyber wars, supporting eachother's political ramblings is a step towards numbers and recognition. We are relevant citizens and have alot more to say than Jon Stewart. So to movie review person: this town actually is big enough for the both of us. 

The Dichotomies of Consumer Culture

    The most fundamental dichotomy, man/woman, or if you like, day/night, is the basis of modern thought, stemming into religious morality and thus government and rule. Throughout culture, sexism has been persistent. Even the woman-based or goddess based cultures of ancient times were eventually physically put in submission. Patriarchal societies have the upper hand when examining the polarity of feminine/masculine. To this day, in for instance, Feng Shui, the method of balancing one's environment, is based upon Yin-Yang, feminine/masculine, dark/light, night/day. These basic dichotomies are almost universally accepted and become the principal foundation for gender roles.
    At once dualism becomes the structure of collective thought, every concept is divided in two, so day/night becomes light/dark, good/evil, positive/negative. It is easy to see the relationship between day/light/man in ancient culture when the sun was the main focus of worship (sun=son?). This leaves night to represent female whereas night is dark, when the unknown occurs, naturally inspiring fear, longing for daylight. Many children have fear of the dark, vampires, ghosts and nocturnal animals come out at night, making evil interchangeable with night, dark, and female, most noticeably in Western society and religion.
    Upon examining the book of Genesis, the story of Adam and Eve gives much insight into modern association between good/man and evil/woman and the identification of men representing all of humanity. Before Eve, Adam was neither man nor woman, therefore Adam represents all people, i.e. "man kind" not "woman kind". To further reinforce  male superiority and woman inferiority, Eve, is tricked by Satan, i.e. evil, and gets both Adam and Eve kicked out of Eden the beautiful paradise God (a man nonetheless) made. Now, according to Genesis, women suffer painful childbirth for our collective misdeed. This of course is the Judea-Christian religion Western society is built upon, especially the United States, a more recent concoction of religion and state (supposedly separate).
    Religion reinforces the unquestioning of these modes of thought. Religion is one of the main culprits of the evolution of gender roles, why women are submissive and men traditionally the bread-winners. Nowadays, gender-roles have a slightly new configuration after the Woman's Right Movement and politically, on most accounts have equal rights. Equal rights, should not, however, imply overall equality. Women are still fitted into traditional stereotypes of being weaker, still take on domestic roles as well as jobs outside the home, are still paid less than men, and are still objectified through all branches of media. This atmosphere of consumer culture is where more complex dichotomies evolve.
    For instance, we are constantly being advertised and sold products, while watching a weight loss show we are also being shown McDonald's commercials, while watching a cooking show we are being sold diet pills, while looking at anorexic models we are being told "big is beautiful" (then being called either too skinny or too fat), while seeing women run for office we are seeing half-naked women in music videos. These are alot of confusing images, especially for young women. This is a result of the religion/state dichotomy - on one side we have the pure, house maker religious moral side, then the demonized over-sexed pro-women's rights, left. These polarities make it possible for gender roles to be perpetuated and for rifts between other women or feminists to persist over which side to take. Dualism in our thinking patterns makes it black/white as if there is no gray!
    People are politically divided into left/right when, in reality, they are the same people making decisions for whichever company they have sworn allegiance to. Since capitalism is based on the consumer's demand, it is necessary the companies who run our government find a way to please us, or to create demand for their products.
    For example, even if there is no real demand for cheeseburgers there is one created through advertising and other types of psychological manipulation. This is how we have become a brand-based culture and a culture that racks up debt for the newest cars and computers even if we don't need products or can't afford the products. So it becomes necessary to find to the audience to sell to and to box up their characteristics to find a way to reach their vulnerability.  For example, a company needs to sell a new oven cleaner, they have spent millions on animal testing, researching and creating something slightly different than the previous oven cleaner, so to sell it they give deals to stores so it can be sold cheap and also advertise. They figure, who does the oven cleaning in the home? Who is the majority of our audience? Women? Aged 30-50? Are they a parent with a job and busy lifestyle? What do they watch? Oprah, maybe? Soap operas? Therefore they create the right opportunity, during the right time slots have a commercial with a busy mom with alot of things to do, praising how much she enjoys having this fast acting oven cleaner to save her time, then you go to the store remember that catchy jingle and see that it's on sale, then, voila! A company has millions in their pocket and can continue to have political sway.
   This culture makes it possible to continue stereotypes even after the so-called "women's liberation movement". To indulge in this psychological manipulation is indulging in sexism, racism, animal torture, environmental atrocities and political ignorance. Our black/white thinking makes it impossible for our green parties to ever win an election and nearly impossible for individuals to be individual. This why examining the dichotomies persistent in our moral values and political structure become the crux of anarchism and individual liberty. To ignore gender roles, where they stem from and how they persist is going to be the downfall of politics, environment, and freelance information.