‘Woman-loving-woman’ Mary Daly dies
The lesbian feminist movement has lost one of its staunchest yet most controversial figures, with the death of Mary Daly on January 3.
Trained in theology, Daly became a prolific feminist writer (Beyond God the Father, Gyn/Ecology: The Metaethics of Radical Feminism and The Church and the Second Sex, among others) and was a vocal advocate of lesbian separatism.
After coming out in the 1970s, Daly wrote extensively about the limitations of male-generated and defined terms for gay and lesbian relationships, and sought to create new terminology. In her Websters’ First New Intergalactic Wickedary of the English Language, she defined ‘Lesbian’ (the capital ‘L’ was obligatory) as “a woman-loving woman; a woman who has broken the Terrible Taboo against Women-Touching women on all levels and rejected false loyalties to men in every sphere”.
Working alongside other self-defined radical feminists, Daly’s often extreme views made her a contentious figure within the women’s lib movement at a time when lesbian feminists were being relegated to the sidelines of the movement and labelled ‘the lavender menace’.
Once asked what she thought of men, Daly bluntly responded that she neither thought about them, nor cared about them, and explained that she considered that the next necessary evolutionary process should include a massive reduction in the male population. It was a view she put into action years later, while teaching a feminist course at Boston College from which she banned male students. The scandal cost her tenure.
Her views on transsexuals, who she considered “contrived and artificial”, were no less divisive and caused women’s groups to splinter over the issue. The debate reached its peak at the Michigan Womyn’s Festival in 1976, which employed a “womyn-born-womyn” policy prohibiting transwomen from the event.
Detractions aside, Daly’s role as a pioneer of the feminist movement cannot be denied, nor can her influence on countless other theorists and women in general, who found her exploration of the themes of the gender binary, religion, and the reclamation of language by women, both challenging and empowering.
On hearing of Daly’s death, feminist theorist Mary Hunt issued a statement expressing how grateful she was for her words and work.
“Her contributions to feminist theology, philosophy and theory were many, unique, and if I may say so, world-changing. Even those who disagreed with her are in her debt for the challenges she offered,” Hunt said.
“She always advised women to throw their lives as far as they would go. I can say without fear of exaggeration that she lived that way herself.”
Lesbian feminist author Mary Daly has died.
She was an out and out witch, a genderist of the first order. The love of Christ was not within her heart. She bought into the secular political racket and left the Catholic Church long ago. Hence, one cannot call her a theologian. And that ugly flannel shirt has got to go.
David Said: “I’d like to know where feminists are lynching transgender people and where the feminist run extermination camps are.”
Considering Daly wanted the ratio of women to men to be 9:1 — as did another feminist — I think it’s safe to say her ilk’s ideals towards men mirrors National Socialism.
Then there’s the matter of feminist-run abortion centres, which are used to terminate unwanted pregnancies. Don’t tell me it’s not a form of “extermination” uses her power to destroy a foetus.
There are many other similarities between National Socialism and feminism: both believe their people, Germans and women, respectively, are ‘superior’ to their ‘oppressors’ enemy; both believe their ‘superior’ people are being held down by Jewish bankers and ‘patriarchy’, respectively; both use the media to spread propaganda; both use academia to indoctrinate the youth into following their hateful agenda.
David Said: “And the state oppressing men? Yeah, right. I had no idea the police force, the high court, parliaments, the military were feminist.”
Errrr, you do realise that the feminist theory on domestic violence is taught — and implemented — to police officers, lawyers, judges and any other law enforcement officer that deals with domestic matters, right? If not, then I suggest you vacate the discussion before you go on to make an even bigger fool out of yourself. I suppose child custodial hearings and divorce gender neutral too…..
The Australian Bureau of Statistics admitted that women receive lighter sentences than men when they’re convicted. Battered Women’s Syndrome and Post Natal Depression are feminist-related causes that are based on unsubstantiated theory, not fact.
Women’s health receives more funding from the state — even though men are more susceptible to falling victim to violence and ill health…
I suppose you’ll argue that the greater amount of men in politics, law and military is “proof” that they’re run for men at women’s expense. If so then you’re committing a huge logical fallacy. It’s stupid to assume that the men who are involved in politics, law and military dedicate their time to improving men’s lives at the expense of women’s. Their actions suggest they care about nothing other than keeping themselves in power, which they do by catering to largest voting block. Women.
Sorry David, but you failed to offer any ‘facts’ to validate your emotionally-laden opinions. All you’re doing is trotting out the sort of stuff that radicals want to hear.
True, Rebecca. This is why this is my last post on this subject. It’s not as if I actually agree with a lot of Daly’s ideology. There’s no point defending someone you only partially agree with and I’m sure Daly’s supporters can cope quite well.
David Skidmore, I agree with everything you’ve said in your posts here. I admire your patience too. After decades, I’ve given up trying to engage with the bigoted and the prejudiced – it’s just too disheartening. They’re not interested in what you have to say. They just want to shout you down.
My, my…what hysteria in the last few posts. Firstly, if transsexuals are oppressed it is unlikely to be because of obscure feminists such as Mary Daly. Queer bashers are likely to be male, anti-feminist and unfamiliar with the works of Janice Raymond et al. Some of them can’t even read.
As for the “feminazi lobby”. That’s a dreary cliche so old it’s probably on its last legs. Anybody who uses it is ignorant of both feminism and Nazism. And there’s no reasoning with such people. I’d like to know where feminists are lynching transgender people and where the feminist run extermination camps are.
And the state oppressing men? Yeah, right. I had no idea the police force, the high court, parliaments, the military were feminist. There you go. But for those who like to revel in hatred and victimhood, the whole world is feminist or Jewish or gay or [insert target group here].
Good riddance to a vile bigot.
Let’s see…
Oppression as defined in Webster’s 3rd International as: “1.a. cruel exercise of … power, esp by the imposition of burdens 2. the act of weighing down …” Going by this definition, I think it is very safe to say that both sexes have been oppressed by women. This state of oppression is precisely what Family Court imposes on a divorced man. He is divorced because she made that call 70% of the time.
In my experience, the state defaults to the woman’s side whenever its power is invoked, eg. should the police be called. This is how women oppress men by proxy. I used to be a passive feminist because I thought it was about equality of opportunity.
Now I understand feminism is about ensuring equality of outcome, along with keeping the pre-feminist perks but refusing to accept the full responsibility of rights.
“Those who bleat about so-called feminist male-bashing have no idea about what oppression actually means.”
The deluded folk who bleak about women’s so-called “oppression” have “no idea bout waht oppression actually means”. If they understood the meaning of the word then they’d realise Caucasian women have NEVER been oppressed! The examples cited by feminazis (IE. not being allowed to vote) hardly qualify as oppresssion, and can be used to argue that most men were “oppressed” because the bulk of men were in the exact same situation.
You never hear the feminazis talk about the impunity women received under Old English Law. Nor do you see the feminazis lobby for the removal of the remnants of Old English Law that benefit today’s breed of women at men’s expense (IE. paternity fraud). On the contrary, feminazis defend the Old English Law system’s refusal to hold women to the same degree of accountability — the ABS confirmed women receive lighter punishments than men when they’re convicted — than was expected of men.
What feminazis mean by “oppression” is not allowing women to live a privileged lifestyle or have an endless amount of choices without having to take responsibility for them.
Daly was a hate-mongering female supremaist who makes most KKK members look tame. The world would have been a better place if some one had have killed the hate-mongering cunt when she was born. Daly and her ilk are living proof that abortion is necessary. Sometimes.
Yeah the world is a better place for having so many transsexuals commit suicide after being denied surgery or having lost their jobs and friends and more because of her and her student Janice Raymond – not!
Sorry but the vile hate-speech of Daly and Greer and others has caused immense hurt to Transgender people. Costing Jobs, costing allies, setting back Transgender rights and costing Lives.
Helping one oppressed people while harming an even more oppressed people? That’s not worthy it’s monstrous. It taints the gains made with guilty bloody fingerprints. Stains that will take later generations of feminists a lot of work to scrub off.
Any article on feminism or feminists usually brings whingeing males who want to revel in victimhood out of the woodwork. The previous bizarre diatribe is so predictable.
Those who bleat about so-called feminist male-bashing have no idea about what oppression actually means. While I have disagreements with Mary Daly’s research and some (not all) of her ideas, I respect radicals who have the courage of their convictions. My main gripe with Daly is that she taught in a Jesuit college – totally inconsistent with her ideology.
Anyhow, the world’s a better place for having the Dalys and the Greers.
The Pill and Feminism’s Future
Part 1 of 2
The Male Contraceptive Pill; and Freedom For Men –
The male pill is on it’s way, and will be with us in less than 5 years, if not from the US or Britain, then from China and India.
The pill for men will be the biggest step for freedom that men have ever had – freedom from the serfdom imposed by fatherhood. So if the present tyrannical feminist British women want their babies, they will have to offer a far better deal to men than at present.
For example –
1
The present marriage laws, and the infamous and secret ‘family courts’ will have to go, and quickly, and the dictatorial marriage and ‘common law’ marriage expectations drastically changed.
2
The constant demeaning of masculinity, particularly on TV in programs such as ‘One Foot in the Grave’, ‘Men Behaving Badly’ and the present ‘soaps’ in general, where men habitually behave in an infantile manner, and are presented in an appalling way, will have to be recognised as highly offensive to men, and dispensed with.
3
The most powerful of the British feminist weapons – the wild and malicious accusations of ‘rape’ and ‘child sex’ – will have to be brought back under civilized law where the accuser will be required to have hard evidence and be held responsible for their actions, both in the making of the accusation, and their part in the incident. The male sex drive is an extremely powerful force, and a woman who provokes it to the point where a man loses his self-control that woman must accept some of the blame. The accused will have to be considered innocent until – and if – proven guilty.
The Rise of Woman’s Dominance –
As far as I know never before in human history has woman obtained such a dominant position in society, and I have puzzled over this for many years. To reason this out I considered that the dominance must coincide with a recent new event, and the rise of science is the most noticeable over the last 100 years.
It seems that the science events most effecting women’s position in society are the invention of domestic labour saving devices – making the ‘housewife’ redundant, the invention of mechanised work equipment – making the ‘male upper body strength’ requirement redundant in the workplace, and – most significantly – the invention of the female contraception pill which gave a woman political power over men by either withholding sex, which she has always been able to do, or rewarding with sex, which for the fear of unwanted pregnancy, she has never been able to do before. It should be noted that recent social science research has found that giving rewards has far more impact on behaviour than giving punishments, which soon lose their effects altogether.
The female contraceptive pill in the 1960s Britain gave British women direct power over sex availability without fear of pregnancy for the first time in human history. There was a popular phrase in the 1960s – ‘free love’, but there was nothing ‘free’ about the ‘free love’ of the 1960s. It came at a price, a price controlled and set by women who seized upon this new ‘pillow power’ with vigour; and some have used this power – unwisely – to disadvantage men in every way possible, thus asserting a position of dominance over men in which she has reduced them to a level of disadvantaged cowed subservience – and infantile behaviour in an attempt to present themselves as children entitled to the protection of the maternal instinct.
The ‘Mad Maternal Instinct’ – the all powerful evolutionary force in women that regards masculine Men as simple mating objects when in lust, and when not, as dangerous predators to be avoided or driven off and away from the precious family group.
Sage1916
Continued –
Part 2 of 2
The Decline of Dominance and Re-establishment of Equality –
The timing of the 1960’s pill and ten years later, the recognition of the feminist movement is an incident that supports the view that they are connected in a cause and effect relationship, but via a third factor.
I would argue that the dominance by women is not a result of feminism, but of the 1960’s pill. Feminism developed out of this dominance. Once the dominance is removed, feminism will dwindle and demise.
The 1960’s pill does give an advantage and dominance via the reward of sex to men. But with an equivalent male contraceptive pill, men can make it quite clear that they are not prepared to have children unless they want to, and are offered a satisfactory position in the family group and society – enforced by law. This would equalise the woman’s power over men’s sex drive with the man’s power over the maternal instinct; and the need to breed. Hence the counter balancing of the power given to women – ironically by male scientists! – by the 1960’s female contraceptive pill.
Once the power of the 1960s female pill is counterbalanced – equalized – by the male pill this yoke of female dominance is likely to be flung off with surprising speed, and retribution and revenge on the British feminist female – and feminist male – is likely to be wreaked, as some wiser and more sensible women have been aware of for some time.
I am very surprised that a social event on par with the 1960s social revolution is within a few years, and the media and people in general have not noticed. I do not intent to attack women in general, but simply to describe – what appears to me – to be in the future.
It appears to me that the combination of –
1 a general grass roots resistance and resentment by modern men to the belligerents and unfairness of feminism,
2 the coming worsening economic decline and worsening male unemployment,
3 the problems of over population,
4 and the balancing of the 1960s female pill with an equivalent male pill
will result in a complete reversal of the present situation and the subjugation of western women into exploited work units with little or no rights at all – and given their attitude to Men over the last fifty years, I would have little sympathy for them; and I doubt if many Men would.
Today belongs to feminism, but tomorrow belongs to Men.
Sage1916
banning men from learning about feminism seems counter productive.