During these past 2 years, Covid deaths were not the only death toll that caused alarm. Various countries are in uproar due to the increase in femicides. Some States have declared a state of emergency, while others which have not are exhorted by feminist activists to do so. Femicide is a subset of homicide, doubly vilified as a hate crime against females. A less popular alternative term is gendercide -a fatal instance of gender violence- yet this term has not made the headlines as much as Femicide, which has become a rallying cry. In some places, gender violence has come to replace the term ‘domestic violence’ in cases where a male cohabitant abuses a female, despite being a broader term also intended to cover violence targeted against the LGBTTIQ+ population.
At the same time in many countries, abortion rights once again stand precariously, while not yet attained in others, unlawful abortions still considered homicides. Thus, liberal feminists find themselves demanding both body autonomy and state intervention, sanctioned feticide and punitivity with regards to femicide. Their key allies and opponents both coming from Congress and the prosecution stand. Taking the State up on its offer of increased surveillance and intervention inside every household, hoping to find protection behind the thin blue line. Going against the grain of the demands to defund police that followed the uprisings of 2020 in U.S.A., which were a reaction to the many murders by police, various prominent victims were black men, but also women, both cis and trans.
Liberalism finds no contradiction in reforming one law and not another, extending the government’s domain in one area and not another, protecting some rights for some people and not others. But does the state protect women? Liberal feminism relies on the violence of the State to enforce its progress. Yet the State fails them when it fails to prosecute abusers, while women are imprisoned for self-defense against said abusers; when it doesn’t provide abuse victims with the necessary resources, childcare services for working mothers, and sanctioned abortions and contraceptives as part of vital health services.
In contrast, there is said to be a feminism that practices what anarchism preaches, showing the way out of this impasse. A heroic and illegalist feminism scoring high in creativity, relevance and timeliness, with a great capacity to mobilize and hold down space. Bomb-throwing feminists that attack banks and churches. Willing to match femicides, with regicides, clericides, parricides. Pitting homicide against boyfriends, attacking the couple-form itself, and infanticide against their own children. Femicide against Womanhood and the pink-washed State, attacking gender itself. Rejecting the defensive role of innocent victim and becoming the guilty aggressors on the offensive.
What are the unexpected consequences of a feminism that takes up anarchy? How are notions of (conventional and transformative) justice and fairness unsettled in the face of unrepentant and unrestrained hostilities by feminists? How does a sufficiently sophisticated radical decolonial abolitionist intersectional queered transfeminism dispense with anarchism? How does an anarchafeminism or a queered anarchism fare in comparison?