Mater Liberal Feminism (libfem) and Filia Radicalis Feminism (radfem) were birthed in the imperial core. Their enjoyment of punishment and control has always been there. Liberal (bourgeois, petit bourgeois) feminists typically align with imperial projects. From Victorian campaigns to "civilize" colonized women to post-9/11 justifications for war under the banner of "liberating" Afghan women, libfems have been at the forefront. As long as the violence is dressed up in the trappings of female empowerment, it’s cool with them.
Radfems, despite their critiques of liberalism, also support imperialism and its ideology of cultural chauvinism. There's a long history of radical feminist support for carceral and punitive approaches—favoring harsh sentencing, censorship, and moralistic sexual politics. Many radfems embraced cultural essentialism, framing Muslim men as uniquely patriarchal or violent. This fits hand in glove with xenophobic and imperial agendas.
Libfems pave the way, helping the medicine go down when it comes to imperial wars via the maternal language of inclusivity and human rights. Radfems, ironically enough given their enemy "gender as a social construct," increasingly peddle essentialist discourses, framing certain men (Arab) or cultures (Muslim) as inherently dangerous and uniquely misogynist.
Both libfems and radfems are accomplices of empire. Punishment is moralized as liberation—for their own good! Both libfem and radfem impulses are pathological: destructive care and concern that enjoys punishing those who do not conform to their idea of freedom—freedom that, in practice, means not just making the same choices they would make, but wanting to.
Is this maternal and sisterly imperialism more insidious than the Paternal one of old? It's harder to question 'protection,' 'safety,' or 'liberation' when it's wrapped in maternal concern and sisterly advice. This gaze doesn't just dominate; it manipulates, disguising punishment as nurture and imperialism as empowerment. . .
TBC