Never let it be said that we ignore our newbies. Since several saw fit to impugn my dedication to the advance of People of Gender, I thought it would be justified to lay out a few basic principles of anarchofeminism, such as it is.
To critique patriarchy is to move necessarily in the direction of anarchy, since the state is finally patriarchy manifested as a political economy, yet there remains a propensity among many, perhaps most, feminists of my acquaintance to view the ascension of this or that woman to a position of importance and influence within the state apparatus as a general good. Thus it is taken, with caveats, as a sign of progress that Condoleeza Rice is the Secretary of State, or that Nancy Pelosi is the Speaker of the House, or that Hillary Clinton is a prominent contender for the Presidency of the United States. In reality this isn't advancement, but retrogression. It's like claiming J. Edgar Hoover and Roy Cohn as examples of queer advancement.
TGGP recently reminded me of a classic Spooner article called ""Against Women's Suffrage." A brief excerpt:
If the women, instead of petitioning to be admitted to a participation in the power of making more laws, will but give notice to the present lawmakers that they (the women) are going up to the State House, and are going to throw all the existing statute books in the fire, they will do a very sensible thing[.]Yet there remains a belief that the mechanics of political power and broader admission to the political process are necessary precursors to gender equality. The truth is that women will never be equal in the nation-state. To agitate for the bait-and-switch comforts of Title IX psuedo-equity is to ask for a more comfortably furnished cage.
As a proponent of queer rights, I have long found myself at odds with soi-disant queer activists who persist in believing that judicial and legislative remedies will for the basis of sexual equality. There are certainly queer radicals and anarchists, as there are feminist radicals and anarchists, but we are in the substantial minority, especially when compared to the political-activist class. Queer agitation for "gay marriage" is a perfect example of ideological fecklessness: admission to a state-run, mutual-contractual obligation doesn't constitute advancement toward sexual equality, unless of course you accept that the ne plus ultra of equity and justice consists of a series of enumerated state grants to individuals.
In the interests of its own stability, our state has occasionally consented to extend participatory rights to women, racial minorities, sexual minorities, etc. This should not be confused with "progress."