Feminist Realism: An Introduction

Why settle for crumbs when we can take over the entire bakery?

There has been much debate over what type of feminism Female Dating Strategy represents, ever since the creation of the r/femaledatingstrategy subreddit in February 2019.

Female Dating Strategy (FDS) borrows considerably from radical feminism— “radical” meaning “root” in that we acknowledge the patriarchal roots of inequality between men and women. Patriarchy is a system in which men as a class dominate women as a class, and in which men use their power over women to privilege themselves and to extract sexual, reproductive, domestic, and emotional labor from women.

FDS is aligned with radical feminism in our opposition to liberal feminism, particularly our anti-porn, anti-prostitution, and anti-BDSM stances. Many radical feminists support FDS for these reasons. However, some radical feminists critique FDS, and argue that we are not sufficiently critical of heterosexual relationships, marriage, motherhood, and beauty standards. Others argue that FDS reinforces traditional gender roles because we expect men to pay for dates and we tell women not to chase men. Some radical feminists are female separatists, and disagree with the entire premise of having any relationships with men whatsoever.

We often say that “FDS is a strategy, not an ideology” in that we welcome women from all political backgrounds, and because we focus on practical strategies to ruthlessly advance women’s interests. Our goal is maximizing female benefit, regardless if she wants to be a career woman, a stay-at-home mother, or somewhere in between. However, since we launched the Female Dating Strategy Podcast in March 2021 and its political spinoff, Female Political Strategy (FPS) in December 2021, it has become increasingly clear that Female Dating Strategy is a feminist movement in its own right.

I consider FDS a form of Feminist Realism. By “Realism” I am referring to Realpolitik, a school of thought within political philosophy. Coined in 1853 by German writer and politician Ludwig von Rochau, he argues that the law of power governs the political world much in the same way that the law of gravity governs the physical world. Realpolitik is defined as a system of politics or principles based on practical rather than moral or ideological considerations. The opposite of Realpolitik is political liberalism, which emphasizes cooperation and idealism. I think of Female Dating Strategy as the feminist application of Realpolitik, much in the same way that liberal feminism is the feminist application of liberalism.

The concept of Realpolitik emerged in the context of the 19th century collision between Enlightenment-era liberal idealism, and the brutal realities of power politics. Likewise, FDS emerged in the context of the collision between liberal feminist idealism and the brutal realities of male power and patriarchy. A feminist application of Realpolitik therefore focuses on practical strategies to increase female power, as opposed to liberal feminism which strives for equality, or radical feminism which strives for female liberation.

In international relations theory, Realpolitik evolved into Realism, a theoretical framework that characterizes global politics as a conflict between state actors seeking to advance their own interests. Realism is state-centric and assumes that states are primarily motivated by rational self-interest, and desire power as a means of self-preservation. This is in contrast to Liberalism, which rejects power politics, emphasizes peace, and recognizes non-state actors such as non-governmental organizations (NGOs).

In my view, men and women are like two nations. Under patriarchy, Man is a nation that uses his superior physical strength to invade, dominate, control, occupy, colonize, and extract labor from Woman, the smaller and less powerful state. This occurs on both an individual and societal level.

On the micro scale, male dominance over women might take the form of an abusive relationship in which the man expects the woman to provide him with certain physical, emotional, and sexual services; and if she does not comply, he uses emotional punishment, manipulation, coercive control, financial abuse, attacks her self-esteem, and even physical violence to force her to serve his interests.

On a macro level, men exert power over women through various laws and social norms, the sex industry, sexual harassment and discrimination, male violence against women and girls (which functions as a form of stochastic terrorism), and false binaries such as the madonna/whore complex, etc.

Our critics often accuse us of having a “combative” or “competitive” approach to dating and relationships rather than a cooperative one, but the unfortunate reality is that it is impossible to have peaceful relations with a nation that is actively attacking you. Women didn’t start this war, men did. Women are finally fighting back.

Another unfortunate reality of current male-female relations is that female power is extremely taboo. Or, women are only given power (“empowered”) if it serves male interests. Female socialization indoctrinates women into sacrificing our own wants and needs for the benefit of others, especially men. Women’s self-preservation instincts are beaten out of us from a young age, both literally and figuratively, whereas men and boys are encouraged to seek status and compete for power. Powerful men are seen as great leaders, “alpha”, and worthy of admiration, whereas powerful women are seen as domineering, controlling, calculating, manipulative, mean, greedy, evil, unlikable, and deserving of punishment. This double standard is as old as patriarchy itself, and is a deliberate strategy to declaw women and make us feel immense guilt, fear, and shame at the thought of wielding power. 

Instead of power, liberal feminists often talk about “empowerment”— that porn, prostitution, and appealing to the male gaze makes them feel empowered. “Empowerment” is defined as “authority or power given to someone to do something” meaning that the power is granted by a higher authority for a specific purpose. The liberal feminist vision of “empowerment” is not true female power because it is dependent on male patronage, and is conditional on serving male interests.

A similar phenomenon occurs in traditional cultures where marriage is the only way that women can obtain security for herself and for her children. Right wing women believe that by submitting to her husband and offering him various caretaking and sexual services, that he will respond in kind by protecting and providing for her. Unfortunately, traditional men don’t always hold up their end of the bargain; and when they do, the security he provides her comes with the heavy cost of sacrificing her freedom and decision-making power. She is completely and utterly at the mercy of his will.

Both liberalism and traditionalism mislead women into believing that women benefit from cooperating with men and serving their interests. Feminist Realism asserts that for every crumb of benefit that women receive as reward for serving male interests, men get the entire loaf. Why settle for crumbs when we can take over the entire bakery?