New Radfem Theory

The exclusion of women from the arts is one of the more painful losses women endure under male domination. It gets at our souls, not our bodies. Women painters, sculptors, poets, novelists, musicians, all face almost insuperable odds. Why is this? Why do men find it an affront for women to participate in the arts? Darwin's Theory of Sexual Selection explains why. Human culture is based around two male evolutionary reproductive strategies, while women's strategies are suppressed by the system of male domination. These two male strategies are 1) male competition with each other for mates, and 2) male courtship of females. Art is a way men compete with each other and court females. A female entering the arts is simply irrelevant or gets in the way of the real business at hand. That women have a need for creative expression for their own evolutionary reasons is ignored. That's why men are always trying to take Ms Ian's guitar out of her hands and will never stop. Check out

INTRODUCTION Readers might like to read for themselves Justice Gorsuch's words in the June 15, 2020 US Supreme Court case of Bostock v. Clayton County , interpreting how effectively Title VII of the Civil Rights Act can impact the class/structural nature of employment discrimination. Title VII prohibits employment discrimination based on sex, race, national origin, and religion; the Bostock decision adds LGB and transgender discrimination  to the sex category . As a flagship for US civil rights law, the Bostock holding will control or heavily influence other federal and state civil rights legislation and regulations. In Bostock , Justice Gorsuch announces a new test for proving discrimination under Title VII's sex category, which extends immediately to the other protected categories: " An employer violates Title VII when it  intentionally  fires an  individual  employee based in part on sex." (bolding mine) In short, Gorsuch interprets Title VII to apply only to ind

Where have all the transactivists gone lately? I mean, since June 15, 2020, when the U.S. Supreme Court, for its own reasons, unexpectedly handed them complete victory over women's spaces in the case of EEOC v Harris Funeral Homes, forever now to be incorporated into the case of Bostock v. Clayton County? I would expect them to be filling social media with congratulations, giving interviews, partying, and generally raising the roof with joy.  They've been handed an all-out victory, and their opponents have been handed a total rout. That's all of their opponents, with all their complex motivations: the evangelicals, the Executive Branch, the social conservative libertarians, the radical feminists, the gender-critical women, and the silent majority. Instead, they're quiet.  I think it's because the implications are so momentous they've had to take a pause. They, like their critics, are stunned. It's like watching one of those setups of hundreds of dominoes as