Why Female Separatism is a Losing Strategy

Separatism is a defensive strategy, and the best defense is a good offense.

In my previous article, I touched on how both traditionalism and liberal feminism manipulates women into serving men's interests.

This article will discuss Female Separatism, one of the most well-documented theories for opposing patriarchy. Also known as Feminist Separatism or Lesbian Separatism, Female Separatism proposes that resisting patriarchy can be achieved if women separate from men.

Although there are some benefits to female separatism, ultimately it is a losing strategy because it is a defensive strategy, and the best defense is a good offense. Women have been playing defense for far too long. It’s time to go on the offensive.

Background

There has been an ongoing battle on r/femaledatingstrategy between women who use FDS to enhance her dating experience, and female separatists, who do not date men at all. Separatists often say they just “want to be left alone” while simultaneously complaining that the FDS moderators are tyrants for “censoring” them, i.e. removing their “kill all men” posts and banning users that attack women for dating men. This genre of conflict long predates FDS, and traces its roots back to the second-wave radical feminist debate between heterosexual feminism and political lesbianism.

Defining Political Lesbianism and Female Separatism

According to the Leeds Revolutionary Feminist Group, a political lesbian is a “woman-identified woman who does not fuck men”. In other words, political lesbianism isn’t about having sex with women, it’s about refraining from having sex with men.

I’d also like to note that although female separatism is often associated with political lesbianism, they are not exactly the same thing. Not all separatists are lesbians, and not all lesbians are separatists.

In her essay Love Your Enemy? The Debate Between Heterosexual Feminism and Political Lesbianism, Sheila Jeffreys writes that male supremacy is the only system of oppression in which the oppressor invades and colonizes the body of the oppressed. I partially agree with this sentiment, and in my introduction to Feminist Realism, I wrote that men and women are like two nations in which Man (the larger and stronger nation) colonizes Woman (the smaller and weaker nation).

However, where I disagree with Sheila Jeffreys is when she compares heterosexual women to Nazi collaborators. She writes, “heterosexual women are collaborators with the enemy… being a heterosexual feminist is like being in the resistance in Nazi-occupied Europe where in the daytime you blow up a bridge, [and] in the evening you rush to repair it” which I consider victim-blaming par excellence.

Marilyn Frye also helped develop the concept of female separatism. In her essay Reflections on Separatism and Power, Frye describes feminist separatism as a "separation of various sorts or modes from men and from institutions, relationships, roles and activities that are male-defined, male-dominated, and operating for the benefit of males and the maintenance of male privilege – this separation being initiated or maintained, at will, by women”. She argues that separatism is practiced by most women at some point in our lives, often unconsciously, and that it is only treated with controversy when women make the conscious choice to voluntarily separate from men. Frye also points out that men already practice male separatism in the form of gentlemen's clubs, sports teams, military, and most decision-making spheres, which excludes women from the corridors of power.

Again, I mostly agree with Frye here, which is why I don’t think separatism is all bad. In many contexts, separatism can be highly beneficial to women, which is why I will be outlining some of the benefits of female separatism before I move on to my critiques.

Benefits of Female Separatism

1. Supporting women-owned businesses, female professionals, and female artists puts money in women’s pockets, increasing both individual and collective female power.

2. Female-only spaces offer an oasis of safety within the hostile environment that is patriarchy. For example, female-only refuges are extremely valuable for women recovering from trauma caused by men.

3. Creating a thriving community and support network for women is necessary for decreasing women’s overall dependence on men.

4. Separatism can be a great individual strategy for lesbians, asexual women, or even male-attracted women who have zero desire to interact with men.

5. Straight/bi women benefit from taking periodic breaks from the dating scene to work on themselves, level up, and focus on their friendships with women.

6. Whether temporary or permanent, all women benefit from the existence of female separatists. The fewer women who are on the dating “market” at any given time, the more valuable and in-demand the women who are actively dating. Studies show that when men outnumber women, men are more likely to be monogamous and invest in one woman, whereas in communities where women outnumber men, the men are more prone to promiscuity, "playing the field" and are less likely to commit.

Limitations of Female Separatism

1. Permanent separatism is unrealistic for most women, because most women are heterosexual and desire relationships with men.

2. Many separatists are also anti-natalist, and shame women for the completely normal desire to have a family. Separatists generally believe that marriage and motherhood is inherently oppressive to women, and while it’s true that relationships with men are risky for women, and pregnancy/childbirth makes women more vulnerable, the reality is that all living things have an instinct to reproduce. It’s foolish to pretend like female socialization is the only reason why a woman might want to have a family. However, many women make the conscious decision to remain childfree, and their choice must absolutely be respected.

3. Refusing to validate the things that women want is a tactical error, and also creates a pseudo-religion in which women’s completely normal desires are positioned as wrong, sinful, shameful, and a “problem” that needs to be worked through. This is why the Female Dating Strategy has gained far more traction with women than female separatism, because we validate the things that women want, and offer a pathway for women to achieve it.

4. Separatist rhetoric often circles back to misogyny and victim-blaming. In online discourse, female separatists often refer to heterosexual women as whores, “cock worshippers” “cocksuckers” “dick panderers” “cum dumpsters” “contaminated by semen” and refer to pregnant women and mothers as women who have been “nutted in”. Some separatists are “blackpillers” and believe that all men are inherently evil, murderous, pedophilic, sexually depraved, etc. and they blame heterosexual women for continuing to interact with them. There is a pervasive attitude of “well, that’s what you get” in online separatist discourse, because male sexual depravity is seen as inevitable, meaning it’s the woman’s responsibility to avoid abuse by avoiding men altogether. Indeed, the sexual shaming used by some separatists echoes the same hatred, contempt, and smug sense of superiority that conservative religious women use to denigrate sexually active women, i.e. “whores” who bring misfortune on themselves by being promiscuous.

5. Taken to the extreme, female separatism is just rebranded female seclusion. Whether you call it harem, terem, purdah, or feminist separatism, it makes no difference if the seclusion is voluntary when the outcome is the same: isolating women from society, and excluding women from the corridors of power. The rationale for female seclusion is the exact same as the rationale for female separatism: protecting women from male violence and sexual harassment. Much in the same way that we criticize liberal feminists who attempt to reclaim the words "slut" and "whore" on the basis that, while they may claim their hypersexuality is a choice, we cannot ignore the fact that women’s choices are not made in a vacuum. Is it really a choice when women have been groomed their whole lives to base their own value on being sexually pleasing to men? Likewise, while female separatists claim that their separation from men is a voluntary, and that this choice is what makes it different from the aforementioned types of female seclusion, is it really a choice in a world where male violence and sexual harassment is a deliberate strategy to shrink women and discourage us from participating in public life? Neither hypersexuality nor female celibacy challenges patriarchal power structures in any meaningful way; if anything, it just reinforces the Madonna/whore dichotomy. Instead of collaborating with or separating from men, we should be fighting for women's full participation in society. Instead of seeking equality or liberation, women should seek power and control over institutions.

6. Female separatism is ultimately a defensive strategy, and the best defense is a good offense. Female-only spaces are like a fortress, and while it's strategically beneficial to have a home base where women can be safe and protected, fortresses are also vulnerable to isolation and siege tactics. It’s impossible to destroy your enemy and achieve lasting victory while cowering in a castle. Women have been playing defense for far too long. It's time to go on the offensive.