On fourth wave feminism

Or, the long-awaited backlash to sex positivity.

(Note that I will be using the term “fourth wave feminism” in this article to describe second wave feminist sentiment among gen Z women. There is uncertainty on what this term means, as Wikipedia defines fourth wave feminism as beginning in the 2010s, but I am using it in this way since the current radical feminist community on reddit is called r/fourthwavewomen.)

I posted on my X account earlier, that I believe the next wave of feminism will be a direct product of young women becoming disillusioned by millennial sex positive culture. I plan to expand upon that here.

In this UnHerd article written by my X mutual Katherine Dee (aka default_friend), young women’s’ disillusionment is catalogued. Dee as well defines political movements as a product of social events we witnessed, which I will as well elaborate upon.

The political pendulum is swinging, but its in a conservative direction. This is obviously not the outcome I want. I don’t think its good for women, nor is it good for LGBT people. Since I am a bisexual transwoman, I obviously want homosexual marriage and medical transition for people with dysphoria over their sex characteristics to remain available options in our society. Though, I do not support the superseding of sex in law and social life with the nebulous quasi-religious construct of “gender identity”. Despite my criticism of transgender ideology, I do not regard myself as gender-critical. Core to gender-critical theory is the belief that the differences between the average man and the average woman are only flesh deep, that the difference is only in body. I reject this notion and believe that the ignoring of average psychological sex differences led feminism to the mess it is in today. The relevant trait to be discussed: sociosexuality.

Sociosexuality is defined as an individual’s willingness to engage in sexual activity outside of a committed relationship. It has been written extensively on by feminist author Louise Perry, who’s book The Case Against the Sexual Revolution inspired much of my writing on this (Katherine recommended the book to me a little over a year ago).

Sociosexuality is much higher in men than it is in women. That is to say, men are much more likely to desire to engage in casual sex, women are much more likely to prefer committed intimacy. Individuals can be exempt to this (I am extremely low in sociosexuality, and am a biological male), just like individuals can be exempt to the average height differences between the sexes (I am a male who is the height of the average female of my nationality, too).

The reason I believe reducing all non-physical sex differences to an artificial construct of “gender”, is because it has allowed men to leech off of feminism to the detriment of women, as well as allowing a small minority of women atypically high in sociosexuality to screw over most women. I do not believe that all stereotypes about women are rooted in biology. This is why I differentiate between “male-defined femininity” (artificial performances designed to arouse men), and “natural femininity” (women’s average dispositions that differ from men’s).

Using false concepts of tabula rasa, a coalition of manipulative leftist males and sexually atypical women tell anyone with low sociosexuality (most of whom are women) that we need to “get over puritan upbringing” and “become sexually liberated”. The situation young feminists are in is illustrated below in a series of memes sent to me by a friend on Discord:

Through a series of linguistic mangling and sex difference denial, male lust and female subjugation (e.g. pornography, prostitution, hookup culture) have been redefined as “feminist” and it has been re-defined as “anti-feminist” to oppose them.

Politics as products of individual psychology

The reason I choose to speak in psychological terms, rather than in political terms, is because I believe politics are just values derived from our personal psychologies and experiences.

For example, the politics of Andrea Dworkin were a direct product of her own horrifying experiences with male sexuality. Dworkin’s memoir is titled Heartbreak, and this is for a reason. This is a woman who’s romantic aspirations were repetitively shattered by the loveless lust of the men she encountered. She writes “How did I become who I am? I have a heart easily hurt. I believed that cruelty was most often caused by ignorance. I thought that if everybody knew, everything would be different. I was a silly child who believed in the revolution.”

My own sex-negative feminism

I echo Dworkin’s words, I too was an ignorant child who believed that cruel people could simply learn better for a long time. I have also had my aspirations marred by male sexuality. Feminine and transsexual males are not treated equally to men at large just because of our sex, we are treated as objects of either ridicule or lust (might as well be synonyms when it comes to men). I had naive aspirations, that someone would one day love me as a cherished wife, just to discover that most people who desire me are kinky sadistic men who think another male will be more willing to indulge their loveless hypersexuality.

Although I do not believe in socialization theory, I also do not believe in the naturalistic fallacy. Just because someone is naturally predisposed to a certain impulse, does not mean it is good and that society should permit it. The feminist solution (I use “feminist” to mean “prioritizes the good of women”) to the dilemma of sexuality between the sexes, would be to produce social norms that ostracize men who enact extreme lust and to encourage young heterosexual boys to be more conscientious to the romantic aspirations of girls. These would be cultural steps to solve individual problems. I believe more institutional problems such as prostitution and pornography should be legally regulated, and legally recognized as discrimination against women.

If young women can wake up to the sociosexuality gap, and realize how we’ve been conned by third-wave feminism, the cultural tides can be turned. I believe many women realize their discomfort with the sexual culture, but mute those thoughts due to it being socially disapproved of to do so, and how we’re gaslit and told we just need to get over our so-called “puritanism”. Besides, why is the assumption that low sociosexuality people should resocialize ourselves to be more like high sociosexuality people? Since most people with low sociosexuality are women, I can only see misogyny in this. The presumption is that male culture is better and women should emulate it, and on that I wholly disagree. Male sexual culture is cruel and treats other people as sexual objects to be purchased and consumed (unfortunately true of most LGBT males as well, as I have personally bore the brunt of). Male sexuality often focuses on dominance, power, and conquest (e.g. BDSM, another sexual practice I am critical of and view as male-centered) and not on love and mutual affection. The feminist (female-prioritizing) solution would be to culturally assert that intimacy is not a financial transaction, “getting sex” is not a human right, and sex is simply an extension of love and mutual pleasure. To prioritize the desires of women would be to culturally view sex as a side-effect of romantic relationships, and not something to be obtained in it of itself.

I will certainly be called conservative, puritan, or anti-feminist for the opinions expressed in this article. However, only confirming my argument, most (or all) of such accusations will come from males.

I think, and hope, that the next wave of feminism will be one that acknowledges sex differences and, as such, is not able to be tricked into prioritizing male desires. I believe the disillusionment with sex positivity will be a major crux for acknowledging the values of women, and prioritizing them over the values of men. Signs of this coming cultural shift among young women have shown, and I believe it will continue. This cultural shift lifts my spirit, and I can’t wait to see it continue.