The Making of the Global Feminine Class

We are in the midst of the making of a new global class – the feminine class. It’s not the working class, people dispossessed of the means of production and forced to sell their labour to survive. The working class are defined by their not owning the means of production, the means to survive. It’s not the class of women, females subjugated by men and used for labour, breeding and sexual services. The class of women is made up of biological females, those smallish people able to give birth. The new class, being made today, the feminine class, is the class based on gender. It is a class of people who believe they have a feminine essence, that their being is feminine.

Feminists urged women to cast off femininity and be full human beings, people. Instead, under transgenderism, females are being deracinated, uprooted, pulled away from their bodies. Like European peasants in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries who were driven off their land and forced to migrate to the cities, where industrialists needed labourers, women are being driven from their bodies and forced to exist in an ethereal, disembodied state femininity.

Women are being told, forced, groomed to choose a gender identity and in most cases social pressure and violence means the only one they can feasibly choose is feminine. This is the creation of a new class – feminine people. Where fifty years ago there was a revolutionary movement of women decolonising themselves – throwing off the shackles men had forced on them – led by feminists who denounced sex role stereotypes (Jeffreys, 2015), femininity, we are now seeing a massive counter revolution which is creating a new and false class consciousness. Women were starting to see ourselves as a sex-class, oppressed by men globally, nationally, regionally, locally, privately and publicly, at work and in the home. The feminist decolonization movement helped us take control of our bodies, and start to have self determination and to run ourselves. That was unacceptable to men and unacceptable to international capitalism. The creation of the new class, the feminine class will be much better for men and capitalism because men (the oppressor class) can join women (the oppressed) and destroy the revolutionary movement of women from the inside.

Peasants who in the Middle Ages felt tied to the land, to communities, to forests and animals were made into a new type of people – the working class – who accepted longer working hours in factories, the discipline of the clock, the alienation of industrial work. E.P Thompson describes this process in The Making of the English Working Class (Thompson, 1965). A similar process happened from in the 1980s onwards in Africa when subjected to structural adjustment programmes aimed, in Silvia Federici’s analysis outlined in Caliban and The Witch, at creating a new landless workforce (Federici, 2004).

Like peasants transformed into a landless working class, women are being transformed into a bodiless feminine class – just identity (and sadly an identity that has chosen its own subjection). Of course, in reality, we are in our bodies and attached to them, but if our consciousness is of being an identity, born perhaps in the wrong body, it is easier for those in power to make use of our bodies. The woke say it is transphobic to stay attached to your body. The very idea of having a link to the body is biological essentialism. Attachment is said to be wrong. Very few people these days are attached to the land, and even fewer are able to reproduce themselves, to grow their own food and keep warm. It's analogous to the attachment to the body that we are losing.

So what do men and capitalists want to use our female bodies for? They want control of our bodies back. Transgenderism works towards women like the economic structural adjustment programmes (SAPs) of the eighties did towards Africa. It is the key to changing the social and sexual landscape globally in favour of men and capitalists. SAPs opened up countries to trade, exploitation, dependency and ongoing submission. Transgenderism opens up women (and children) to sex, exploitation, dependency and ongoing submission.

SAPs broke down barriers to trade – forcing poor African countries to do away with protectionism and open up to trade. Transgenderism asks women to dismantle any protections we had established against unwanted sex with men. These barriers include lesbianism (now classified as transphobic), safeguarding (now an insult to men’s right to privacy). Hand in hand with SAPs went the development of free trade areas. The widening and deepening of the European Union was followed by the North American Free Trade Area, MERCOSUR and more recently a massive EU style free trade area in Africa, the African Continental Free Trade Area. Borders were broken down and it was often not at all good for people. In a similar way, we are now being transformed now believing that we are borderless identities. We are encouraged to believe that trade (sex) is good for everyone, all the better if it is free trade. We are encouraged to be open, flexible, boundaryless. Women’s shelters are accused of being un-inclusive for keeping men who say they are women out. We are being asked to become emotionally detached from our bodies which will open up new possibilities for exploitation.

The Nordic model illustrates the argument well. Feminists promoted the Nordic model, arguing for the criminalisation of men who buy sex, which is a form of violence against women. The model is taking off and gaining global support from women and governments. This reduces the number of female bodies available to men who want to have sex with them, and reduces the profits to the capitalists who make money off it. The Nordic Model creates a protection for women and a barrier to men and profits. The idea of it has taken off and it has been made policy in some countries, such as Israel. Transgenderism offers to push back against the Nordic Model by creating a new class of spokespeople for women – “transwomen” who are often vocal advocates of sex-work. Many demonstrators against women opposing transgenderism shout the duel slogans “transwomen are women” and “sex-work is work”, showing their beliefs and political objectives.

It's also illustrative to think of a woman as a nation. If a woman has control of herself, (like a nation) if she has self-determination, she would have if she would have the ability to feed herself and to live with dignity, to control her borders and to make choices about her life. When that is taken away by force, by her father, or husband, or the state, or by a man in the street that’s a violation of her sovereignty. You could see it as similar to a nation being invaded.

The making of the global feminine class is a structural adjustment. It's like economic structural adjustment against the newly decolonised countries of Africa, but it’s a social structural adjustment against the newly decolonised women of the world. By breaking the meaning of the word woman, they are breaking the Feminist Fence we built to protect us from the ravages of men. Just as the Iron Curtain protected Soviet nations against capitalism, the Feminist Fence protected women against men. They are bent on destroying our still flimsy defensive fence. The Gender War is the social equivalent of the Cold War.

References

Federici, S. (2004). Caliban and the Witch: Women, the Body and Primitive Accumulation. New York: Autonomedia.

Jeffreys, S. (2015). Beauty and misogyny : harmful cultural practices in the West. [online] Internet Archive. Hove, East Sussex ; New York, NY : Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group. Available at: https://archive.org/details/beautymisogynyha0000jeff [Accessed 30 Nov. 2022].

Thompson, E.P. (1965). The making of the English working class : (3. impr.). London: Victor Gollancz.