The Hate-Filled Legacy of Valerie Solanas Radical feminism can be traced more or less back to Valerie Solanas, author of the. It was first published in 1967, though Solanas began drafting it in about 1959 or 60. In the Manifesto, Solanas calls on women to rise up against men who she sees as biologically inferior and responsible for all of the world’s problems. However, she doesn’t end there.

• English

She refers to the male as “a biological accident” and the Y-chromosome as being an incomplete X-chromosome, making the male an incomplete female. She further calls for men to be exterminated and to assist in eliminating themselves by eliminating each other. There are those who have stated that this Manifesto is little more than a parody of “patriarchy” or a work of satire. They claim to view it as an anti-patriarchal statement, but state that the calls for the elimination of men should not be taken seriously. However, while the work may contain elements of parody and satire, these devices are used to emphasize the message, not to indicate that the author wasn’t serious.

Solanas’ own history would indicate this as she shot pop artist Andy Warhol, art critic Mario Amaya, and attempted to shoot Warhol’s manager Fred Hughes on June 3, 1968, attempting to kill them. In 1977, she claimed that her views had not changed since the Manifesto was published, indicating that she believed what she had written. Further evidence that the SCUM Manifesto was to be taken seriously is found in the reaction of feminist leaders and organizations to Solanas’ Manifesto and shooting of Andy Warhol. Ti-Grace Atkinson, radical feminist and president of the New York chapter of NOW, called Solanas “the first outstanding champion of women’s rights” and heralded her as “a ‘heroine’ of the women’s movement.” Robin Morgan, former editor of Ms Magazine, included excerpts in her book, Sisterhood is Powerful. Other feminist authors such as Amanda Third and Catherine Lord have credited her with creating radical feminism and have stated that the feminist movement would not have occurred if it hadn’t been for Valerie Solanas.

There have also been several books, plays, and movies glorifying Solanas and her actions. There are also those who would dispute the acronym that SCUM stands for the Society for Cutting Up Men.

Reading might be fundamental, but that doesn’t mean we read as often as we should. Everyone has at least one stack of books they stare at sheepishly, knowing they. Document Text. Life in this society being, at best, an utter bore and no aspect of society being at all relevant to women, there remains to civic-minded, responsible.

While this is not spelled out within the document itself, It was stated on the cover of her self-published version in 1967. Later, Solanas would deny that she intended the acronym. Instead she stated that there was no such organization, nor would there ever be. SCUM was a state of mind. It was meant as a reference to empowered women who considered themselves fit to rule. The legacy of the SCUM Manifesto has continued.

It was published as late as 2004 (perhaps since then, though I don’t have a record of it) and has been translated into several languages. Currently there are organizations based on SCUM existing in Sweden (producing materials for high school students) and on the internet (RadfemHub) It has impacted society in many ways which will be outlined below. In New York in 1967 at about the same time Solanas was publishing the SCUM Manifesto, Shulamith Firestone, Pam Allen, Carol Hanish, and Robin Morgan founded a group called New York Radical Women. This short-lived organization adopted a radical feminist ideology that emphasized the patriarchal oppression of women by men similar to that outlined in the SCUM Manifesto.

They claimed that men exercised social dominance over women by creating social roles that divided privilege and power by gender. This group is often credited with the first bra burning at the 1968 Miss America Pageant. However, rather than burn them, they tossed bras and other artifacts of patriarchal oppression into a garbage can. Firestone would move on to found Redstockings and New York Radical Feminists while Morgan would become more involved in feminist activism and writing. Hanish would help found Redstockings and would later edit a journal called Meeting Ground in which she would publish an essay called The Personal is Political and is sometimes incorrectly credited with coining that phrase, although she undoubtedly helped popularize it.

English

In 1969, the radical feminist organization Redstockings published its. The influence of SCUM is unmistakable. It is considerably less violent, but no less hateful. It characterizes “all men” as oppressors of women. It characterizes individual male-female relationships as “class relationship(s)” and provides that all individual male-female conflicts are political, not personal and “can only be solved collectively.” Men are identified as the agents of oppression and the users of physical force to subjugate women. “All power structures throughout history have been male-dominated and male-oriented.

Men have controlled all political, economic and cultural institutions and backed up this control with physical force.” In SCUM, Solanas outlines a similar concept: “Authority and Government: Having no sense of right and wrong the male feels a need for external guidance and control. So he created authorities — priests, experts, bosses, leaders, etc — and government he sees to it that all authorities are male.” Redstockings states: “We call on all men to give up their male privilege and support women’s liberation in the interest of our humanity and their own In fighting for our liberation we will always take the side of women against their oppressors. We will not ask what is “revolutionary” or “reformist,” only what is good for women.” This is quite similar to Solanas’ call for men to assist in their own extermination and /or work towards women’s goals: “SCUM will kill all men who are not in the Men’s Auxiliary of SCUM. Men in the Men’s Auxiliary are those men who are working diligently to eliminate themselves, men who, regardless of their motives, do good, men who are playing pallsic with SCUM. A few examples of the men in the Men’s Auxiliary are: men who kill men; biological scientists who are working on constructive programs, as opposed to biological warfare; journalists, writers, editors, publishers and producers who disseminate and promote ideas that will lead to the achievement of SCUM’s goals” Redstockings did not take the ideology to the same extreme as Solanas, but the hatred that Solanas felt towards men was obviously present as was Solanas’ influence.

The prevailing attitude of the SCUM Manifesto is that men are to blame for everything wrong in the world and that ridding the world of men will automatically result in improvement. The first portion of this was outlined by Carol Hanish in The Personal is Political in 1969.

Hanish states: “The most important is getting rid of self-blame. Can you imagine what would happen if women, blacks, and workers (my definition of worker is anyone who has to work for a living as opposed to those who don’t. All women are workers) would-stop blaming ourselves for our sad situations? We are only starting to stop blaming ourselves.” She later adds: “Women, like blacks, workers, must stop blaming ourselves for our “failures.”” Of course if women aren’t to blame for their own condition or their own failures, who is?

The Redstocking Manifesto provides the answer: men. “Women’s submission is not the result of brain-washing, stupidity or mental illness but of continual, daily pressure from men. We do not need to change ourselves, but to change men.” The result of this “blame shifting” is that women can deny responsibility for their actions. Any wrong committed by women (or a woman) can be blamed on men or “The Patriarchy.” This “blame shift” has led to disastrous legal consequences for men; most notably in Family Law, domestic violence, rape and sexual assault laws. But while Redstockings was not as extreme as SCUM (at least publically), some of its organizers were. It’s like reading a speech by Hitler, or something.

I actually started to become ill and couldn’t even finish reading it. I instead stuck to TDOM’s commentary. Hats off to you for wading through the stink, and providing some insight into this filth, TDOM. These people are beyond sociopathic. Psychotic is a better descriptor. Prison time, and heavy sedation would be a great solution for these depraved females, since any chance of their rehabilitation is most likely nil. Funny, how there are no “hate speech” laws to punish those responsible for this and to remove them from decent society, isn’t it?

The rabbit hole has no bottom. So based on that quote after the article, Solanas apparently found nothing wrong with dooming the entire human race as well. I’ve said before and I’ll say it again: Valerie Solanas, burn in Hell, you banal piece of inhuman filth. And that goes for the monsters at Radfem Hub, The Talk, the Swedish SCUMbuckets, Dworkin, Valenti, Kimmel, Schwyzer, and ANY who would support this BULLSHIT movement and demonize me and any other man and boy who never did a GODDAMN thing to them and then lie to me and say they aren’t. I defy any feminist to come on this site and tell me otherwise. This is an excellent historical (hysterical?) perspective of the original tour de force of RadFem ideology, that no doubt inspires the young wymyn’s studies major today. Obviously its still alive, but gone underground.

What’s more troublesome is the present day inroads “women’s rights advocates” are making politically. A seemingly small victory of the FBI changing the definition of rape is exactly how its done. “Well OK, give the grrls a win on this one. After all, how can it hurt?” These subtle little manuevers, that go uncontested and unnoticed, is exactly how we’ve ended up where we are. IMHO the obsession with the Radfem contingent is exactly the kind of distraction they’d like the MRM to focus on while bigger things quietly move forward. It’s not a realistic or rational direction to take. So a few bitter hags from the 60’s said some crazy shit.

Nobody cares. It’s not relevant to the present day narrative and positioning.

TDOM, awesome historical analysis connecting the “animals ” of the past to the ” animals ” of the present I am still in utter disbelief at the lack of outrage over what some of these femtwits are able to say in public without serious repercussions. ( Lets rephrase what Wachenfeldt said shall we ” To call a feminist an animal is to pay it a compliment ” ) Thank you for connecting the dots TDOM this is a history lesson that needs to be brought into the education system but sadly, most likely will not. I am glad to see the Redstockings Manifesto getting a bit of much-needed exposure here. It is easy for people to dismiss the SCUM Manifesto as nothing but fringe melodrama, but a serious, down-to-earth document like Redstockings forces them to take things more seriously. Absent from the article, but definitely a point of interest, is that Robin Morgan led a public campaign to get Valerie Solanas released from jail after the attempted murder of Andy Warhol.

Also, I should point out that Evin Rubar does not belong on the list of evil Swedish feminists. She is the one who made the big documentary which exposes those very same feminists.

So, unless I am missing something here, ER is “one of us”. ” I should point out that Evin Rubar does not belong on the list of evil Swedish feminists. She is the one who made the big documentary which exposes those very same feminists.” Perhaps I misread her involvement.

If I am mistaken about her then she shouldn’t be on the list. “I am glad to see the Redstockings Manifesto getting a bit of much-needed exposure here.” It was actually you who exposed me to the Redstockings Manifesto. I’v e been wanting to comment on it since I first saw it on your site. Leaqving Robin Morgan’s involvement with attempting to free Solanas out of the article was an oversight on my part. There were a few things I left out, some intentionally, some not. This was of the inadvertent variety.

It’s what happens when I write something over the period of abut a week through constant interruptions. Feminists are bigots. They are not academics, or ideologues, or even zealots. They are hate filled bigots. They are a grave danger to humanity in general and to men and boys in particular. They aren’t a joke, any more than neo-Nazis are someone to be laughed about. They are bigots in positions of power over us and they must be brought down by having their pure hatred exposed.

Every MRA must commit themselves to their total removal from government and educational positions with a large degree of fanatical determenation. “They are hate filled bigots.

They are a grave danger to humanity in general and to men and boys in particular.” That is a excellent point and one many brainwashed women don’t realize. Feminists don’t just hate the men, but also hate the fact that a majority of women in our society like men ( at least like what we give them haha). It’s obvious that most feminists are enraged that all women aren’t lesbians. All this ranting about killing off most men is just a manifestation of their hopes for a lesbian utopia. In that utopia there’s no room for men, gay men, transgenders or even straight women only lesbians. Guess what you psychos no matter how hard you try you will never turn all women into lesbians or convince them they don’t need men. Now only if those normal women could see us as more then walking wallets and protectors.

I believe most feminists today are influenced by SCUM, knowingly or unknowingly. The ideas were transfused into the movement and began to spread and operate under other names. Feminists born and introduced to the ideas after SCUM may not even know of the connection, but none the less, operate to implement the ideas in SCUM, as if puppets with Solanas pulling the strings.

The covert policy and action of “Unwork” is being implemented by stealth throughout the western world. Affirmative action, paid maternity leave, over zealous restrictions on what females can do in the work place in regards to physical work.eg. Can’t expect them to lift more than 15kgs.all while equal pay is maintained. The abuse of sexual harassment laws etc etc.have turned women into a liability in the workforce.while simulataneously legally mandating that companies must employ them, and even discriminate against males. I fact, I believe the over zealous health and safety work practices that are enforced in work places in Australia now are a result of this. It’s reaching the point of absolute ridiculous.

The warehouse I work in, one of the biggest in the country, moving hundreds of truck loads of products in and out every day, and employing roughly 50% women, is in stark contrast to a similar place of employment that I worked at 25 years ago. Most of the women there, have spent time on “light duties” This is where an injury, however slight, gets you removed from you normal job, and placed into something cushy and easy. Literally every woman I know that works there has spent time in the system, most on multiple occasions. It’s got the point where having an injury, which can be just claiming that your shoulder or other body part hurts.even though no diagnosis can be made, no matter how many scans, x-rays, and ultrasounds are performed. It’s got to the point where this process is considered a career move. Eg, your jobs is picking orders.have an injury.and get moved to helping in the office.and be taught new skills.

When jobs become vacant in the office, your ahead of the pack of applicants because you have first hand experience, and you’ve also been in there brown-nosing with the bosses. We have so many restrictions on work performance in order to avoid injuries, that it has become a joke.

Safety nazies walking around the place pulling people up for lifting a box the wrong way, getting on or off a forklift the wrong way. Blah blah blah.

And we have more injuries and people on light dutiesmostly women.then you can poke a stick. All the measures in the world aren’t going to stop them injuring themselves.because they just aren’t built for the type of work.

The other thing is, all these measures are designed to slow as men down.because we have to follow all the restrictive practices too.this decreases the performance gap that exists between men and women in these jobs.and allows HR to justify continuing to employ more and more women. 25 years ago I worked in similar jobs, with virtually none of the safety bullshit that I have today.and much harder work too.and there was no women doing it.and there was one tenth of the injuries at max. The paid maternity leave that is now legal in Australia which came in a while back is another example.

Several women at work, some of them on light duties for injuries, were planning pregnancies leading up to the introduction of the law. They talked openly about it with no reservations.

The way things are going it will be like the alimony laws in the end. Law will require that you employ women to do jobs they can’t do, and you can’t sack them for not being able to do thembut if they wan’t to leave.you have to keep them in the lifestyle they have become accustomed too.pay them wages for life.with regular increases to make up for advancements they missed out on because they aren’t working. Of course, our societies will collapse long before that stagebut is that the real goal. I’ll agree that certain workplace protections can get out of hand. But I have some mixed feelings about this when it comes to worker safety. Since nearly all onb the job deaths and the vast majority of serious injuries happen to men, worker safety can be a good thing.

But I’ll agree, anything can be carried too far. I like your idea that “unwork” is connected to maternity leave, affirmative action, quotas, and lower physical standards and requirements for women. That hadn’t occurred to me, but certainly rings true. Mr TDOM you have excelled here but not surprised. Thank you for this article.

On another interesting note: The national hub “Sistas Promoting Elemental Radical Matriarchy” or ‘SPERM’ have been at loggerheads with the Boston chapter of the “Eugenics Gals Group” or ‘EGG’ When out of the limelight both groups get on well with the other as their stated goals are similar in desired practice and goal. Recently however, a nasty brouhaha flared up when both groups attended a commemorative dinner in New York as part of the SCUM celebrations for the 75th birthday of Valerie Solanas on April 9 this year. According to bell-girls in attendance at the New York Hilton’s seminar room, nasty words were exchanged by leaders of both groups when someone remarked how the acronyms of both groups were an embarrassment, and especially so if the media were to become aware of the meeting. A tearful Waitress, Anne Poltice said later, “It was horrible, the leader of SPERM Olafina Svart stood up and emptied her plate of freeze dried organic yoghurt and crushed lavender stalk over the head of EGG’s ‘Supreme Sister’ Ima Pugsley. She got mad and responded by throwing a jug of Moonglow Mead at her. After that it got insane.” Through sobs she continued, “Everyone in the room started throwing food at each other and then the claws really came out. Hair was pulled here and there and tables upturned amongst the shouting.

It was very nasty.” Media sources report that nobody at the dinner is talking to them about the incident, but it’s been leaked that both Olafina Svart and Ima Pugsley are in discussion about dissolving both groups to form a uniting group calling itself Sistas Maintaining Eugenics Girls Matriarch Association. I don’t think I have ever read a more massive amount of projections in so very few lines, as she is coming up with here in her descriptions of men. I know for a fact, that I have never met a single man in my entire life, that comes even close to being what she claims all men are. There must be something very seriously wrong with anybody who would want to celebrate a person like that, or even want to remember what she has written. And we all know what would have happened to a man who had written something even remotely close to that about women, if he chose to make it public knowledge: -Instant sounds of multiple sirens approaching in the distance.

Fantasy world of the Sex Kitten by STEPHANIE CONDRON and NEIL SEARS, Daily Mail Last updated at 10:09 01 June 2004 Comments (0) Add to My Stories Kitten Lesbian rebel: Kathryn Pinder She has already proclaimed herself the hardcore Left-wing lesbian of Big Brother. But the father of Kathryn ‘Kitten’ Pinder last night said her tales of being a teenage prostitute are a lie – and slammed Channel 4 for the show’s obsession with sex.

Kenneth Pinder, a retired surveyor, said his daughter was in fact at a £12,000-a-year boarding school at 16, the age when she told fellow contestants on the reality show she was working as a child prostitute in London. She had, however, completed a well-regarded dissertation on prostitution while a university student, so he assumed she must have drawn on that knowledge for her attention-seeking stories on screen. And Mr Pinder, 57, who had to remortgage the family’s detached home to satisfy ‘radical’ Kathryn’s request to go to private school, said the whole family are devastated by her sudden appearance on television.

Prostitution None had been told she was to take part. Mr Pinder and his former wife Elizabeth-Anne – they split in 1998 – were last night understood to be making desperate efforts to persuade producers to remove their 24-year-old daughter from the programme before more harm is done. Since she entered the Big Brother house on Friday – publicly kissing her girlfriend Lianda Gibson and giving cameramen her trademark one-finger salute as she did so – she has already became unpopular with fellow inmates and had all her belongings taken. At his home in St Albans, Hertfordshire, Mr Pinder, who calls his daughter Kat, said: “Kat was having problems at her secondary school in Beverley, Yorkshire, and she chose to go to private school.

“We remortgaged the house, and she chose Denstone College in Staffordshire. “When she reached the age of 16, she was still at Denstone College. She was still there right to the end of the following academic year. “She was nearly 17 when she left. She then came home to live with her parents in Beverley.

“She was a full-time student at Wyke Sixth-Form College in Hull and followed on to Hull College doing A-levels. Private school education “She studied continuously in Hull and was living in Hull right through university until she got her degree in 2003. “She missed getting a first-class degree by a whisker and got the departmental prize. “Only then did she move to Brighton. She never lived in London. “I do not know why she has said what she has said.

Her parents have loved her and cherished her.” He added that she may have found it easy to talk about prostitution on the television show because her degree dissertation had been a comparison of prostitution in London with that in Amsterdam. Mr Pinder said: “My daughter is a pawn in a much bigger game.

The game being played is being perpetuated by Channel 4. Lies “Channel 4 has allowed the contestants to be conned. “I did not know she was even staying with those people until the first programme had been run on the television.

“She kept it all a secret. All the other families were there at the launch. “People’s lives are being destroyed because of this.

Her mother has been totally distraught. “There are frail elderly relatives who have had sheltered upbringings whose lives will be ruined by this. “It is built on a huge fabrication of lies – had it not been for these vile, pernicious, totally sexual overtones and the fabric of lies around these sexual things and prostitution, there is a lot in there that could be entertaining. “But you could not be amused by it and entertained by it because of the sexual overtones and the sexual agenda. “The sexual agenda prevents any semblance of amusement or entertainment. It stifles the entertainment value.” Mr Pinder said he last saw his daughter at her flat in Brighton in April, when he visited her and her girlfriend with Easter eggs and her computer from home. And he said he wished she had not gone into the Big Brother house at all.

“Obviously I would prefer her not to be on the programme,” he added. “I would not like to go any further than that.” Read more:.

Thanks for the find – I don’t remember seeing that article at the time. I must admit to some sympathy for the pain expressed by her dad. At the same time though, I don’t think he is facing up to the fact that without his daughters very evident enthusiasm for her deceits Channel 4 would have very little to work with. Indeed it is still very much moot that Channel 4 was complicit with “Kat” in pulling a fast one with viewers and other contestants. We sure know one thing for sure and that is that if her father was truthful about her education etc “Kat” certainly knew she was being a deceitful liar.