One thing I find fascinating about anti separatism arguments is it constantly frames it as women retreating from society somehow. Like women associating with each other somehow plucks us away from the rest of the world. Men are the number one separatists and I doubt anti separatists would ever consider this withdrawing from the rest of world.
Men practice separatism when they preferentially hire their buddies to the higher-paying jobs at their companies. They practice it when they hand down valuable keepsakes or estates to their favorite male relatives. They practice it when they socialize amongst themselves while not helping the facilitators of the social events, which are usually women.
They manage to practice separatism while keeping us as part of their world as little as needed. We can do the same.
Youâre saying âseparatism doesnât have to involve retreating from society, look how men do itâ but if a woman calls herself a separatist while married to a man, are you going to accept that?
I think you're making the mistake of treating the word "separatist" as a yes-or-no identity, rather than "separatism" as a series of actions, with degrees of rigidity.
Is it a separatist action to work for a man? No. But most of us don't have the option to make good money under a fully woman-owned/staffed company.
Is it a separatist action to spend spare energy to prioritize developing relationships and skills with your female coworkers over male ones? Yes, that's a good compromise. That's a degree of separatism that doesn't involve retreating from the benefits of current society.
Concerning boyfriends and husbands -
