Sex class is so deep as to be invisible. Or it may appear as a superficial inequality, one that can be solved by merely a few reforms, or perhaps by the full integration of women into the labour force. But the reaction of the common man, woman, and child ā āThat? Why you canāt change that! You must be out of your mind!ā ā is the closest to the truth. We are talking about something every bit as deep as that. This gut reaction ā the assumption that, even when they donāt know it, feminists are talking about changing a fundamental biological condition ā is an honest one. That so profound a change cannot be easily fitted into traditional categories of thought, e.g., āpoliticalā, is not because these categories do not apply but because they are not big enough: radical feminism bursts through them. If there were another word more all-embracing than revolution we would use it.
āShulamith Firestone, āThe Dialectic of Sex: The Case for Feminist Revolution.ā
Anya is live and ready to show you everything. Watch her strip, dance, and perform exclusive shows just for you. Interact in real-time and make your fantasies come true.
ā Live Streamingā Interactive Chatā Private Showsā HD Qualityā Free Actions
Free to watch ⢠No registration required ⢠HD streaming
[So that just as to assure elimination of economicclasses requires the revolt of the underclass (the proletariat) and, in a temporary dictatorship, their seizure of the means of production, so to assure the elimination of sexual classes requires the revolt of the underclass (women) and the seizure of control of reproduction: the restoration to women of ownership of their own bodies, as well as feminine control of human fertility, including both the new technology and all the social institutions of childbearing and childrearing. And just as the end goal of socialist revolution was not only the elimination of the economic class privilege but of the economic class distinction itself, so the end goal of feminist revolution must be, unlike that of the first feminist movement, not just the elimination of male privilege but of the sex distinction itself: genital differences between human beings would no longer matter culturally. (A reversion to an unobstructed pansexualityāFreud's "polymorphous perversity"āwould probably supersede hetero-, homo-, bisexuality.) The reproduction of the species by one sex for the benefit of both would be replaced by (at least the option of) artificial reproduction: children would be born to both sexes equally, or independently of either, however one chooses to look at it; the dependence of the child on the mother (and vice versa) would give way to a greatly shortened dependence on a small group of others in general, and any remaining inferiority to adults in physical strength would be compensated for culturally. The division of labor would by ended by the elimination of labor altogether (cybernation). The tyranny of the biological family would be broken.]
Currently absolutely, embarrassingly, obsessed with Shulamith Firestone. A radical feminist who wrote a book came the Dialectic of Sex in 1970. She was 24 or 25.
She wrote it fast and, I feel, kind of in a mania. The fact that it's a rush job really shows in her structure and her research. But it's also glorious. It's maximalist, she calls for "a sexual revolution much larger than - inclusive of - a socialist one to truly eradicate all class systems". She set out to develop a Marxism for Sex that would expand the material analysis of class back to the animal kingdom.
Then she yelled at walls for a long time. Then she didn't write anything for two decades. Then she wrote about her nervous breakdown. Then she didn't wrote anything for two decades. Then she starved to death in her apartment and nobody discovered her body for a long while
Then her family was interested in what happened to her body suddenly, and the radical feminist community was suddenly interested in making sure she got the respect she deserved. I can't even blame them for that it sounds like she was probably a very difficult person.
I keep reading about her hoping the next line will be "well done you've read enough that you've clipped into the timeline where someone helped, or she found a way to help herself." She was a family abolitionist and a strong believer in radical activism and I want that world where she didn't die alone.
There's that essay going around today - dump your puppygirl. You don't have to read it. I apparently did because I've been cursed with a fascination with problematic but funny feminist writers. It's from the girl who used a fake FBI letter to pretend to be targeted by the government - Tara Knight. I wonder if Shulamith would have been a shitposter in the modern world. I wonder how many times she'd have been the main character on social media for a few days.
Was it better for her that she wrote so little? If the Dialectic of Sex was written now would it just be ephemeral Content, for the churn of social media, casting no shadow? How essential was it that she could tie herself to being physically present for formative moments in the movement? Can we still have formative moments in the movement?
The thing I keep coming back to is Shulamith believed the revolution would involve 51% of the population "a revolutionary in every bedroom cannot fail to shake up the status quo. And if it is your wife that is revolting, you can't just split to the suburbs". As transfeminists we are stuck with less than 1% of the population that is usually easily discarded. We are alone in a way she wasn't. And Shulamith Firestone died of starvation and nobody found her body for days. I think about this every single day.
I hope all problematic feminist theorists get a sandwich when they need it, and that all puppygirls get love. Gods, all we have is each other.
A revolutionary feministās portrayal of life with mental illness ā Lidija Haas
There is by now a vibrant and contentious literature on the relationship between political change and mental illness. Does despair breed compliance, or can you fight back harder the less you have to lose? Could a shared cause of psychological suffering become a cause, rallying and even sustaining the sufferers? Must a mind unhinge itself from the social and economic order it inhabits to fully analyze, let alone try to interrupt, the mechanism? When attempting to lead a revolutionary movement, does it help to be a little crazy? Will the attempt drive you that way? How can we calculate the psychological toll of political defeat? Can the long-term, repetitive, one-step-forward-three-back efforts required for political organizing or for psychological well-being ever feel sufficient to the urgent crises they address? Will emotional healing inevitably tend toward adjustment to an unjust status quo, or can it serve revolt? Is solidarity the best cure for individual misery, or should safeguarding oneās own mental health be recognized as a prerequisite for collective action?Ā
If some false binaries lurk here, they are those that inevitably waylay readers of the late radical feminist pioneer Shulamith Firestone, who in her early twenties cofounded several key second-wave groups and publications with the likes of Carol Hanisch (āthe personal is politicalā), Robin Morgan (editor of Sisterhood is Powerful), and the formidable Ellen Willis. Having helped theorize the womenās liberation movement and make it impossible to ignore, Firestone was thrown out by her cohort and eventually spent decades mired in illness, poverty, and neglect. She remains best known for the first of only two published books, The Dialectic of Sex: The Case for Feminist Revolution, her incandescent, fundamentally flawed (essentialist, racist), and still evocative 1970 manifesto. Twenty-eight years of silence followed; what was to have been the next project, a sprawling work on womenās art, never appeared. Her second book, Airless Spaces, from 1998, is a set of autobiographical yet insistently alienated vignettes that draw on her repeated hospitalizations for psychosis from 1987 onward: she observes herself, the staff and inmates of the wards, and other āLosersā and āSuicides I Have Known.ā Firestoneās books and fate seem to continually invite and resist the inadequate questions with which I began.Ā
These questions are palpable in Susan Faludiās account of Firestoneās two postmortem services in her quite beautiful 2013 New Yorker article, which serves as the afterword in Semiotext(e)ās rerelease of Airless Spaces. At a memorial service at St. Markās Church in-the-Bowery, Firestoneās second-wave comrade Kate Millett explicitly linked her personal tragedy to a political, collective one. After reading from āEmotional Paralysis,ā a piece from Airless Spaces about a woman who leaves a mental institution reduced to wreckage with āno salvage plan,ā unable to read, write, act, decide, feel elation or desire, Millett said, āI think we should remember Shulie, because we are in the same place now.ā Faludi reports that at the smaller Orthodox Jewish family funeral (to which the feminists were not invited), Firestoneās sister Tirzah found in her political legacy an image of redemption and renewal: āShe had childrenāshe influenced thousands of women to have new thoughts, to lead new lives. I am who I am, and a lot of women are who they are, because of Shulie.ā
Thousands of feminist offspring, an image affecting in its many painful ironies. Tirzah was pushing back, at the funeral, on their brother Ezraās sexist characterization of Firestoneās life as tragic because it lacked the steadying consolations of the nuclear familyāthe love of a husband and children. It seems clear that Firestoneās experience in their family of origin forged both her to-the-death spirit and the specific critique she developed in The Dialectic of Sex. (Along with her mother and five siblings, Firestone was under the thumb of a domineering, zealous father who, during a physical struggle in Firestoneās teens, threatened to kill her, to which she replied, āIāll kill you first!ā) Surely the most literally radical of radical feminist textsātaking on Marx, Engels, and Freud along the wayāDialectic locates the roots of all oppression, of all the ills of human nature, culture, and society (from racism to capitalist exploitation to the death drive to child abuse), in sexual difference and the fundamental oppression of women and children within the biological family. Whereas the nuclear family has often been accused of enabling larger forms of exploitation by softening or sweetening them with the unremunerated labors of love and care, Firestone insisted that it was rotten at the core. The family was the very place where injustice begins and is reproduced, forever, until revolution.Ā
Firestoneās strengths and weaknesses as a political thinker are strikingly linked. Without this totalizing insistence on her own vantage point, through which she claimed to reconfigure world history, Dialectic would not have its existential fury, its still-provocative grandeur and ambition, or its prescience in emphasizing childrenās liberation (as Simone de Beauvoir noted not long after its publication) and the urgent need to harness technology for progressive ends. Nor its painful failures to learn from the Black intellectual and political traditions around Firestone. My copy of Dialectic, an edition from 2003, begins with a statement that could be read as a disclaimer, an indictment of the contemporary state of things, or a defiant self-portrait: āThe author would like to note that this book remains unabridged and unrevised since its original publication in 1970.āĀ
There is an understandable temptation to read Airless Spaces as a symptomatic depiction of genius brought low, of Firestoneās exhaustion and retreat, and with it that of a whole generation, a whole society. The utopian ferment and action of the ā60s and ā70s, when it seemed possible to transform the world together, had given way to the rapacity and despairing individualism of the post-Reagan era. On the surface, Airless Spaces does seem a painful descent from The Dialectic of Sex: bleakness where there was buoyancy, stasis and recursion where there was urgency and thrust, and loneliness where there was collective work. Self-loathing has replaced overweening confidence and in place of an all-encompassing scheme, fragmentation.Ā
Yet Airless Spaces is a remarkable book, the work of an artist who had continued to analyze and critique the conditions in which she was surviving, to observe in and around them larger struggles and injustices. This time, she came to interrogate herself as well. She found a way to record and politicize the fracturing of her own mind and life. The book shares with Dialectic a bold, absurdist sensibility, and an extremity, a willingness to push a subjectāand a readerāfurther than she may ever have wanted to go. It is unlike most memoirs of mental illness, refusing to dignify or shape or wring meaning from suffering. Written in disciplined parables that build their own formal logic within a tiny space, and that emphasize, both thematically and formally, disconnection and repetition, the book recounts the long-drawn-out undoing of its various ālosers,ā including many seeming alter egos and fellow-travelers, whether within the walls of institutions or on the outside. They suffer the same things together, frequently exacerbate their own suffering in similar ways, each alone. They endure the hospital routines, the pacing to pass time, the wars for the thermostat, the ābrutal merrimentā of cops called in to hold them down, the āloveless insomnia,ā āthe glaring lights-on orderlies with their trays, hunting through the rows of comatose bodiesā every morning to take blood, all the ludicrous āactivitiesā one must comply with to gain release.Ā
Firestone constructs a precise kind of tragicomedy in which humiliation, loss, and destruction feel inevitableāand yet are always capable of fresh insult and surprise. Readers encounter the expected disappointment, then some new kind, then more of the old from another quarter, then the recognition that a characterās paltry effort to free or protect herself has boomeranged. The relief of numbness or resignation never arrives. There is tragedy without the sense of individual distinction, comedy without the communal reconciliation. Our dignity and sanity, inextricably connected, rely on small, banal giftsānot least connection to others, which psychosis and institutional life mercilessly attack. You adapt to your appalling circumstances and the adaptation dooms you. Compliance and assertiveness kill in equal measure. āShe always made a point of going in as involuntary. . . just for honorās sake.ā
One narrator shares crucial institutional knowledge with a handsome male new fellow inmate but canāt bring herself to ask a small essential favor in return when he benefits from her advice and makes it out before her. Meanwhile she watches him at night, ālarge and heavy, a husband figure. I could just imagine waking up to that sleeping bulk day after day.ā One of many trompe lāoeil images of escape that contain captivity. Another woman wakes up at home āone spring morning filled with light and peaceā and life force. She writes a letter to an old friend she hopes to visit, a painter in rural Maine. On the next page the impulse ends with the realization she will never see this friend again, or know where he ended up. In an earlier āfit of madnessā that in some way resembles that morning burst of optimism, she has inadvertently cut off this source of air and hope: āI had thrown out not just my pills but my papers and even my Rolodex files and address books in an effort to make a clean start.ā
The bookās least successful pieces are those that allow Firestoneās earlier activities into view, featuring recognizable public figures such as Allen Ginsberg, Valerie Solanas, and Diane Arbus. Here the discipline that illuminates the portrayal of hospital and post-hospital life grows slack. A notable exception, in the last section, āSuicides I Have Known,ā is a portrait of her eldest brother Danny, in which she considers the connections between their fates, whether his death caused her disintegration and vice versa, whether āit had been my own political limelightāāa rare mentionāāthat had brought the heat down on him as a warning to me.ā
Airless Spaces begins with two wry, cunningly structured pieces, each less than a page. The first is narrated by someone who dreams she is seeking refuge in the basement of a sinking cruise liner. As the other passengers manically party and gorge themselves above deck, she entombs herself in an old refrigerator, to keep breathing in its bubble till the vessel is found (the piece suggests it never will be). Firestone sets up a spiraling, irreducible ambiguity as to what is a rebellious gesture or a suicidal one, a move to reach out to others and a viable future or a permanent cutting off. In the next story, told in the third person, a depleted woman emerges from a mental hospital yearning, after her long stretch shakily wrestling plastic wrappers at every meal, for fresh produce and silverware, āespecially knives.ā On her first night of freedom, an attempt to unwrap a cauliflower results in the accidental castration of her pinkie finger; found incompetent to feed herself, she is enrolled in meals-on-wheels. The logic of the hospital, its surveillance, repetition, fake food, and relentless succession of plastics, invades her home as well. In trying to choose life, eros, healthy aggression and appetite, the character finds herself not merely flung back into confinementāinstead the institution itself is what bursts its bounds, making it out into the world, and back inside her.
At one point in Hannah Proctorās 2024 book Burnout: The Emotional Experience of Political Defeatāwhich seeks an approach to struggle that makes room for the intense and ongoing toll it takesāshe notes the airless, all-or-nothing perfectionism of Dialectic and movingly makes the case that one might reread it and Airless Spaces with and against one another to create some generative āfriction,ā opening āa space of ambivalence and strained solidarity among the disappointed,ā in which the āseemingly incommensurable scales of the political and the depressiveā can be brought closer together.
Both books are arresting, thought-provoking, flawed, valuable, cannily made objects that preserve a sensitive and turbulent mindās response to crazy-making circumstance. Both appear to expand and collapse time (the claustrophobic exclusion of world events from Airless Spaces is in productive tension with its precise observation of Firestoneās physical and social surroundingsāpublic services, technologiesāwhich date the action even as its universal, endlessly recurring elements are emphasized). And both have qualities allowing them to live and snag and warp and morph in a readerās mind, to be argued with and mocked and made use of across days and years.
In that, they have something in common with the kind of street-theater protest Firestone and her comrades were so adept at: the invasion of Albanyās legislative hearings on abortion; the burial for traditional āweeping womanhoodā at Arlington National Cemetery; the 1969 Counter-Inaugural Coalition March in D.C. (WOMEN: LETāS GIVE THEM BACK THEIR VOTE); the notorious Atlantic City demonstration against the 1968 Miss America pageant, inaccurately immortalized in the term ābra-burning.ā The effectiveness of such actionsāincluding the risk of misinterpretation and backlash and co-optationācan be endlessly debated, but protest nonetheless can in mere moments alter consciousness, expand the field of possibility, show you how many thousand others share a sense of what is wrong, how many of those are already working and risking to fight what is elsewhere treated as unalterable.Ā
Airless Spaces may be paradoxically the more ambitious of Firestoneās two booksāin that it seems, formally and otherwise, to admit and probe its own limitations. And despite its merciless emphasis on despair and loneliness, Firestone notably chose to dedicate it to Lourdes Cintron. She was, we learn from Faludi, a caseworker at the Visiting Nurse Service of New York who successfully lobbied her employers to take Firestone on despite her lack of health insurance, and she became the lynchpin of a shifting group of women that for years met weekly to offer Firestone practical care, intellectual fellowship, solidarity. Without the support and encouragement of those women, she could not have written Airless Spacesāindeed, once the group disbanded, she began to fall apart again and did not recover. The women considered themselves Firestoneās family in the sense her sister Tirzah meant, not least Cintron, who years before had taken courage from The Dialectic of Sex in her activism for Puerto Rican independence. We know, of course, that political change is never made in isolation. We too easily forget the same is true of most writing that lasts.Ā
Lidija Haas is a writer, editor, and candidate at the Institute for Psychoanalytic Training and Research in New York City.
Hearing other women talk vaguely about how things āused to be bad for womenā saddens me. Things were really bad for women in [INSERT TIME PERIOD HERE]. (Not now though.) Thereās always a sense of distance and indifference. An impersonality, an underlying sigh of relief, āNot that bad, could be worse.ā I think this is a result of disconnection from each other and our histories. And I donāt think itās totally our faults.
In my experience going to school in the USAmerican Midwest, I was taught the barest bones of womenās history. It was totally impersonal, cold, not engaging for me at all. We pretty much solely focused on legislature, and that did not thrill me. (Did you know Jane Addams had intimate relationships with women?) But then I started doing āindependent studyā (reading lesbian feminist writing) once I graduated high school and it was like my brain was exploding. Iām reading The Dialectic of Sex and I still feel that way. I just canāt get enough.
As a result of reading what Iāve read, I feel a stronger connection with women who are different from me because it turns out we have a lot in common. I feel less inclined to say things like āWomen had it bad back in the day, but things are better now,ā because I know not that much has actually changed, and the concrete changes that have been made are new and fragile. (Women in America only had a constitutional right to abortion for fifty years.)
I think if more women read books like Backlash by Susan Faludi, Loving to Survive by Dee LR Graham, and A Passion for Friends by Janice Raymond, we will have a wider perspective and a better shared understanding of our situation and position in our societies. I also think a lot of women would feel less crazy and alone upon reading womenās accounts of our own lives, what we synthesize from our experiences and observations, and how we can do things differently. Thatās the effect feminist work had (and continues to have) on me.
You likely wonāt find these books at a bookstoreāat least thatās the case where I liveābut you can find them online. I use ThriftBooks and Better World Books, and Iāve never received a damaged or illegible copy of a single book Iāve ever ordered, even though theyāre super cheap, usually under $10 for a book. (They sometimes have highlighter marks or notes written in the margins, but I like seeing what the previous owner had to say, and I like to write in them too.) Finding and reading these books is well worth the effort. Talking about them and sharing them with other women is well worth the effort, too. Iād like to encourage every woman to get in touch with her intellectual legacy.
Anya is live and ready to show you everything. Watch her strip, dance, and perform exclusive shows just for you. Interact in real-time and make your fantasies come true.
ā Live Streamingā Interactive Chatā Private Showsā HD Qualityā Free Actions
Free to watch ⢠No registration required ⢠HD streaming
The album inspired by the classic feminist book "The Dialectic of Sex" by Shulamith Firestone had its album art censored on iTunes due to the possibility of the red liquid being blood, and is now mostly released with the censored version of the art (Spotify, for example).