Note that the site is in archived, read-only mode. You can browse and read, but posting is disabled.
Welcome to Anarchy101 Q&A, where you can ask questions and receive answers about anarchism, from anarchists.

Note that the site is in archived, read-only mode. You can browse and read, but posting is disabled.


+5 votes
Lies: A Journal of Materialist Feminism is a new journal that I've seen mentioned in discussions on Anarchist websites, even though it seems to be an updated Marxist Feminism.

Is this just another way for Marxists to be in vogue or is Material Feminism actually interesting to anti-authoritarians or anarchists ? Is this just more of that Communization strand that vaguely combines Marxism and Libertarian ideas.

Lies journal seems to be popular among Libertarian Communists and the Marxists at
I totally forgot that I posted this question. I did it anonymously because I wasn't sure what the feedback was going to be. The Lies journal seemed popular among some radicals I knew but I have not heard a single thing since then about the journal and what it stood for.

1 Answer

+8 votes
by (53.1k points)
you are so not going to get away with this.

Thank you for playing. now, elaborate please....
i was basing my answer on what i know of the people who wrote for the journal (i don't know any of them, but know OF a few of the main people), and on how they behave IRL, more than what was written in the journal. but in both, these folks are perhaps more vigilante-ish than your standard feminist, but don't seem to be breaking any new ground.
(i will absolutely acknowledge that new ground can be difficult to recognize from a distance, and i welcome information that invalidates this assessment.)
this is somewhat relevant because the social scene around LIES was at least as meaningful as the actual journal/writing, and was fairly toxic (at least from the outside).

the main thing that stands out from this journal is the term not-men, as a way to isolate and differentiate something that is man (apparently mostly a cultural characteristic rather than a biological one), from all who are not-men.
at best possible reading this is similar to people who talk about whiteness as being a cultural indicator (or perhaps, an attitude), not a skin-tone or biological one; but race conversations have NOT been made better (so far) by the nuances of this wording, and i have a hard time seeing how either the practice of the LIES people (some of them, anyway) or the jargon, will make discussions of the roles of gender and power and bodies more interesting.
if anything they seem to be heading back to a pre-foucaultian concept of power, although not in so many words.
i should revisit the journal, probably.

(also, my answer was funny. funny is important!)

edited to add context.
Well done, dot.  context is good.

It seems sometimes that everyone is crafting smaller and smaller pots, for the sole purpose of standing in it and pissing out at everyone else's pots.
Whenever, lately, i ask about some hyphen or another ... i never fail to regret the asking.

context is good.  humor is gooder - it's often my sole redeeming virtue.
(religious puns intended.)
i reflect frequently on the point someone made:
"when anarchism is hyphenated, it disappears."

has certainly been true for anarcha-feminism. :(
true dat!  (the truth requires 12 chars)
cb: "humor is gooder "   <-- true dat too!