Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 49

Thread: SCUM Manifesto?

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    399
    Rep Power
    11

    Default SCUM Manifesto?

    This is probably (yet another) ignorant question, but could anyone give me some background on this? Both on the work, and on Solanas? I'm currently reading through it, and I know that as a male I'm... not really the audience, and probably biased. I really can't see much validity to the majority of her points, though.

    Am I just reading poorly, or ill-informed, or is this the generally held view?

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    7,583
    Organisation
    IWW
    Blog Entries
    3
    Rep Power
    183

    Default

    There's a good wikipedia article about Valerie Solanas.

    Background on Solanas? Well, she had a tough life and was mentally ill. No doubt those factors colored her ideological output vis-a-vis "SCUM".
    "Win, lose or draw...long as you squabble and you get down, that's gangsta."

  3. The Following User Says Thank You to Os Cangaceiros For This Useful Post:


  4. #3
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    U.S.A , Maine
    Posts
    6,572
    Organisation
    Kasama Project, Rev-Left Study Guide Project
    Blog Entries
    18
    Rep Power
    81

    Default

    THE REV-LEFT STUDY GUIDE PROJECT
    Contribute today and help facilitate the spread of revolutionary knowledge.

  5. The Following User Says Thank You to TheGodlessUtopian For This Useful Post:


  6. #4
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Tukwila, WA, USA
    Posts
    2,448
    Organisation
    Revolutionary Alliance of Trans People Against Capitalism
    Rep Power
    65

    Default

    The SCUM Manifesto can be read as misandrist, proto-radical feminist nonsense. "Males are bad because of their chromosomes," etc. Or it can be read as satire.
    "I have declared war on the rich who prosper on our poverty, the politicians who lie to us with smiling faces, and all the mindless, heartless robots who protect them and their property." - Assata Shakur

  7. The Following 8 Users Say Thank You to Danielle Ni Dhighe For This Useful Post:


  8. #5
    blake 3:17's Avatar
    blake 3:17 is offline Global Moderator Supporter
    Forum Moderator
    Global Moderator
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Toronto
    Posts
    4,179
    Organisation
    NOTA
    Rep Power
    62

    Default

    I'd read it as a sort of satire. I can't believe nobody;s mentioned the film I Shot Andy Warhol.

    My main criticism of Solanas was not having slightly better aim.

    Stewart Home, in his Assault On Culture, describes it as ultra-feminist in the same way that some of the Black Mask quasi-Situ stuff can be read as ultra-Left.

  9. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to blake 3:17 For This Useful Post:


  10. #6
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    399
    Rep Power
    11

    Default

    So it is satire? Reading through that wikipedia article you linked, it doesn't seem like Solanas intended it to be read that way (unless I'm missing the point, of course, I suppose 'dead serious' could still be satire).

  11. #7
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Tukwila, WA, USA
    Posts
    2,448
    Organisation
    Revolutionary Alliance of Trans People Against Capitalism
    Rep Power
    65

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Hermes View Post
    So it is satire? Reading through that wikipedia article you linked, it doesn't seem like Solanas intended it to be read that way (unless I'm missing the point, of course, I suppose 'dead serious' could still be satire).
    Only Solanas really knows what she intended, so I don't think the matter will be settled now.
    "I have declared war on the rich who prosper on our poverty, the politicians who lie to us with smiling faces, and all the mindless, heartless robots who protect them and their property." - Assata Shakur

  12. The Following User Says Thank You to Danielle Ni Dhighe For This Useful Post:


  13. #8
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    al-Buu r'Qhueque, New Mex
    Posts
    1,273
    Organisation
    mayonnaise clinic
    Blog Entries
    1
    Rep Power
    23

    Default

    If the 'manifesto' was written as satire, it was written in very bad taste. I'm surprised that some here have heads too thick to realize even this. Hell, I'm surprised that people on a leftist website are taking that hate seriously. Just because the hatred is coming from the oppressed doesn't give it any validity. Just because she's a she and she wasn't a big fan of patriarchy doesn't mean she should get special treatment.

    Quote Originally Posted by Danielle Ni Dhighe View Post
    Only Solanas really knows what she intended, so I don't think the matter will be settled now.
    Mind you she was very clear that the work was intended to be taken literally.

    The fatal flaw in feminism is that the men are blamed, rather than the conditions that both genders are put into from birth. This general idea is what's wrong with all identity politics, in fact.

    It's the shallow and childish assumption that the oppressing group is oppressive by some inherent personal quality (maleness, whiteness, heterosexuality, whatever) rather than the conditions that both groups are subjected to.

    There's a reason us commies harp on about those oh so important material conditions, while liberals sit around the campfire and foolishly blame the big bad white straight male anglo-saxon hate machine. When men are born into positions of control and are encouraged to be controlling and unemotional from birth (to better fulfill their gender role in perpetuating said conditions) and women likewise are taught to be selfless and petty so as to not challenge such conditions, the feminist goes on to exclaim that the evil of men is inherent to maleness, but there is nothing in women that causes them to be weak! Bullshit. There is nothing inherent to either gender that brings such qualities.

    How fucking convenient it is that the feminist acknowledges that any "weakness" of the female gender is due to upbringing, but ignores all this for the man and claims him to be horrid and brutish from birth!

    edit: I might open up a thread about feminism / identity politics in general.. Or I'll wait for someone else to do it.
    Last edited by Sea; 15th November 2012 at 07:41.
    BANS GOT YOU PARANOID? I MADE A GROUP FOR YOU! http://www.revleft.com/vb/group.php?groupid=1349 NOW OPEN FOR EVERYBODY!!!

    "Think for yourself; question authority."
    - Timothy Lenin

  14. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Sea For This Useful Post:


  15. #9
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Sheffield
    Posts
    2,734
    Organisation
    AFed, IWW
    Rep Power
    126

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sea View Post
    The fatal flaw in feminism is that the men are blamed, rather than the conditions that both genders are put into from birth. This general idea is what's wrong with all identity politics, in fact.
    Wrong. Feminists don't blame men for the oppression of women, rather the patriarchal values our society promotes which lead to gender roles and the different sets of expectations we're supposed to live up to based on our gender. Certainly men can be sexist on an individual level and it is their responsibility to challenge the sexist values that they may hold, and many women also hold sexist values, but sexism is more structural.

    Quote Originally Posted by Sea View Post
    It's the shallow and childish assumption that the oppressing group is oppressive by some inherent personal quality (maleness, whiteness, heterosexuality, whatever) rather than the conditions that both groups are subjected to.
    Simply being a male doesn't make you some kind of enemy of women, and doesn't automatically make you an oppressor. However, as a male you're playing the game of life on the "easy" setting relative to a woman of similar social standing.

    Quote Originally Posted by Sea View Post
    There's a reason us commies harp on about those oh so important material conditions, while liberals sit around the campfire and foolishly blame the big bad white straight male anglo-saxon hate machine. When men are born into positions of control and are encouraged to be controlling and unemotional from birth (to better fulfill their gender role in perpetuating said conditions) and women likewise are taught to be selfless and petty so as to not challenge such conditions, the feminist goes on to exclaim that the evil of men is inherent to maleness, but there is nothing in women that causes them to be weak! Bullshit. There is nothing inherent to either gender that brings such qualities.
    I think this is a bit of a straw man. Did anyone actually "sit around the campfire foolishly blaming the big bad white straight male anglo-saxon hate machine" (whatever that means exactly)? I doubt you'll find anyone on this website doing so, and if they do they'll be ripped to shreds. Why would feminists talk about gender as a social construct and aim to abolish patriarchy (i.e. gender roles) if they blamed sexism on men? If sexism was in inherent quality of men, there would be no point in feminism because we wouldn't be able to deconstruct gender roles and stop men from being sexist.

    Quote Originally Posted by Sea View Post
    How fucking convenient it is that the feminist acknowledges that any "weakness" of the female gender is due to upbringing, but ignores all this for the man and claims him to be horrid and brutish from birth!
    Feminists don't do this though.

    Quote Originally Posted by Sea View Post
    edit: I might open up a thread about feminism / identity politics in general.. Or I'll wait for someone else to do it.
    Try this thread.
    "Her development, her freedom, her independence must come from and through herself. First, by asserting herself as a personality, and not as a sex commodity. Second, by refusing the right to anyone over her body; by refusing to bear children unless she wants them; by refusing to become a servant to God, the State, society, the husband, the family, etc. ... by freeing herself from the fear of public opinion and public condemnation. Only that, and not the ballot, will set woman free, will make her a force hitherto unknown in the world, a force for real love, for peace, for harmony; a force of divine fire, of life-giving; a creator of free men and women."
    ~ Emma Goldman

    Support RevLeft!

  16. The Following 8 Users Say Thank You to Quail For This Useful Post:


  17. #10
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Europäische Union
    Posts
    2,203
    Organisation
    Comité de salut public
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    It's silly sexist nonsense written by a lunatic. It's really not worth the air wasted talking about it.

  18. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to l'Enfermé For This Useful Post:


  19. #11
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    al-Buu r'Qhueque, New Mex
    Posts
    1,273
    Organisation
    mayonnaise clinic
    Blog Entries
    1
    Rep Power
    23

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Quail View Post
    Wrong. Feminists don't blame men for the oppression of women, rather the patriarchal values our society promotes which lead to gender roles and the different sets of expectations we're supposed to live up to based on our gender. Certainly men can be sexist on an individual level and it is their responsibility to challenge the sexist values that they may hold, and many women also hold sexist values, but sexism is more structural.

    Simply being a male doesn't make you some kind of enemy of women, and doesn't automatically make you an oppressor. However, as a male you're playing the game of life on the "easy" setting relative to a woman of similar social standing.

    I think this is a bit of a straw man. Did anyone actually "sit around the campfire foolishly blaming the big bad white straight male anglo-saxon hate machine" (whatever that means exactly)? I doubt you'll find anyone on this website doing so, and if they do they'll be ripped to shreds. Why would feminists talk about gender as a social construct and aim to abolish patriarchy (i.e. gender roles) if they blamed sexism on men? If sexism was in inherent quality of men, there would be no point in feminism because we wouldn't be able to deconstruct gender roles and stop men from being sexist.

    Feminists don't do this though.

    Try this thread.
    *sigh*

    Don't take any of that personally, I was tired and pissed off (here I go making excuses again) when I wrote that. It was mainly directed against those feminists with all their edgy fringe and hate-mongering, not all or even most feminists.
    BANS GOT YOU PARANOID? I MADE A GROUP FOR YOU! http://www.revleft.com/vb/group.php?groupid=1349 NOW OPEN FOR EVERYBODY!!!

    "Think for yourself; question authority."
    - Timothy Lenin

  20. #12
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Chicago area, Illinois
    Posts
    478
    Rep Power
    15

    Default

    Jesus! What an insane person. I've saw someone talking about this a while back, but I've haven't read about this until now.
    FKA: The Mza
    2012 Favorite Noob

  21. The Following User Says Thank You to Jesus Saves Gretzky Scores For This Useful Post:


  22. #13
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Tukwila, WA, USA
    Posts
    2,448
    Organisation
    Revolutionary Alliance of Trans People Against Capitalism
    Rep Power
    65

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sea View Post
    I'm surprised that some here have heads too thick to realize even this.
    Was this comment really necessary?
    "I have declared war on the rich who prosper on our poverty, the politicians who lie to us with smiling faces, and all the mindless, heartless robots who protect them and their property." - Assata Shakur

  23. #14
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    11,673
    Organisation
    IWW
    Rep Power
    274

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sea View Post
    *sigh*

    Don't take any of that personally, I was tired and pissed off (here I go making excuses again) when I wrote that. It was mainly directed against those feminists with all their edgy fringe and hate-mongering, not all or even most feminists.
    idk what you mean by those feminists
    I'm on some sickle-hammer shit
    Collective Bruce Banner shit

    FKA: #FF0000, AKA Mistake Not My Current State Of Joshing Gentle Peevishness For The Awesome And Terrible Majesty Of The Towering Seas Of Ire That Are Themselves The Milquetoast Shallows Fringing My Vast Oceans Of Wrath


  24. #15
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    514
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by #FF0000 View Post
    idk what you mean by those feminists
    I think s/he means ultra feminist weirdos like Solanas.

  25. #16
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    275
    Rep Power
    12

    Default

    In case anyone is interested in reading it:
    http://www.womynkind.org/scum.htm
    [FONT=Arial Narrow]"Body tissue deprived of life energy turns cancerous. Cancer is the hysteria of cells condemned to death. Cancer and fascism are closely related. Fascism is the frenzy of sexual cripples. The swastika owes its magnetism to being a symbol of two bodies locked in genital embrace. It all stems from a longing for love. Comrades, make love joyously and without fear."

    [/FONT][FONT=Tahoma]Khrushchev: "It’s interesting, isn’t it? I’m of working class origin while your family were landlords."
    Zhou: "Yes, and we each betrayed our class!"[/FONT]

  26. The Following User Says Thank You to Robespierres Neck For This Useful Post:


  27. #17
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    1,467
    Organisation
    Illuminati
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    If Solanas is an ultra-feminist, Pol Pot is an ultra-lefist. Her "feminism" boils down to men are bad so shoot them.

  28. The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to Yuppie Grinder For This Useful Post:


  29. #18
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    514
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by GourmetPez View Post
    If Solanas is an ultra-feminist, Pol Pot is an ultra-lefist. Her "feminism" boils down to men are bad so shoot them.
    Point taken. But I didn't know what else to call her.

  30. The Following User Says Thank You to Rugged Collectivist For This Useful Post:


  31. #19
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    1,467
    Organisation
    Illuminati
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    Mentally ill?

  32. The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to Yuppie Grinder For This Useful Post:


  33. #20
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Chicago area, Illinois
    Posts
    478
    Rep Power
    15

    Default

    Has anyone heard of Cell 16? I saw it while look this up. It's a feminist (magazine/zine?) and it's fairly similar to this. It's about being a celibate and separation from men. It's pretty sad these types of "feminists" exist, they've made people believe man-hating is what feminism is about.
    FKA: The Mza
    2012 Favorite Noob

  34. The Following User Says Thank You to Jesus Saves Gretzky Scores For This Useful Post:


Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 15th April 2010, 15:10
  2. Far-Right Scum
    By RedAnarchist in forum Politics
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 23rd April 2004, 14:54
  3. scum manifesto
    By DKAnarchy53 in forum Literature & Films
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 2nd August 2003, 11:22

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •