New Publication - DANGEROUS SPACES: Violent Resistance, Self-Defense, and Insurrectional Struggle Against Gender

  • Posted on: 30 September 2012
  • By: worker

<table><tr><td>From <a href=" Press</a>

We are happy to announce our newest publication, Dangerous Spaces.

From the introduction:

We have attempted to compile a selection of articles on revolutionary violence against gender and those who maintain its control and management in our daily lives. When we began putting this together, our focus was solely on the theory and communiques that surfaced in 2010, positing an insurrectional practice against rapists and abusers that, recognizing the overwhelming failure of accountability processes, offered attack as an option for survivors. Much of this original purpose remains, as many of the pieces herein are theoretical critiques of accountability and “community,” as well as report-backs on violence against rapist filth. We have also chosen to include some more recent preliminary texts on the possibility of queer attack on gender. We chose texts that attempt to confront gendering violence in ways that reject the ideology of victimization (passive mourning, non-violent defensive reaction to perpetual attack, victimhood as purity), as well as the state/”community” solutions (hate crime legislation, political change, accountability processes that replicate penal procedure and speak endlessly of justice).</td><td><img title="For the 1001 time... Attack!" src=""></td></tr><...

Each week we see more attacks on capital, on the state, on patriarchy in solidarity with those murdered or imprisoned for heresy against gender. We have included some of the more recent accounts of these attacks, as well as some violent queer attacks from the past we found particularly exciting. When crews form and fuck up a rapist, when comrades decide to attack when queers are jailed or murdered, when friends share in the passionate intimacy of struggle, lines of flight outside of identity politics, pacifism, and reform are developed and elaborated upon.

We hope this publication can contribute in some way to a gender strike that will burn this world to the ground.


Identity politics!

"When crews form and fuck up a rapist" another crime has been committed. The cycle of violence doesn't stop, it merely takes another turn.

What happens if/when the alleged instance of rape wasn't rape at all, but a false claim? Will the self-righteous crew take it upon themselves to "fuck themselves up"?

there is no such thing as the "cycle of violence". that implies that there is some sort of reciprocity between a rapist and the person they rape. that isn't the case; and more importantly, invoking the bullshit "cycle of violence" argument is a form of victim blaming. it allows you to ignore the initial rape. if you don't want to get beaten up for having raped someone, don't rape anyone.

at least 40% of all rape accussations are false whats the difference between an anti-rape mob that beats people up and some random gang (like the bloods) that beats people up?


even if your statistic were correct, false rape claims would be just as big of a problem in the context of a trial or any sort of accountability process.

I'm sure that statistic is totally legitimate.

Also this leads to so many internal questions about concepts of justice/vengeance, how to make people accountable to their actions, and what tactics are appropriate for those situations - it seems either stupid or intentionally disruptive to try and simplify it down to "isn't a gang that beats up alleged rapists exactly the same as a gang that beats up other people for other reasons?"

Well, obviously that statistic is completely and utterly false. But I know of two cases in the PNW where people HAVE been falsely accused of rape by the same person. That person later admitted that both accusations were made simply to ostracize and hurt the accused.

One of the folks who was falsely accused had his head bashed in by a skateboard, was followed home from work repreatedly with people shouting at them, and had a bunch of their shit broken.

Not saying that attack isn't a viable option to repsond to a rapist, but I'm pretty tired of people claiming that folks flat out can't ever question the legitimacy of people's accustations.

This article and and conversation should be a HUUUUGE WAKE UP CALL to all anarchists that if you want to have a stateless society, you better come up with a justice system so that power in mob rule won't go unchecked. There must be accountability with no kangaroo courts. DNA evidence and circumstances that are complex must be taken into account or else you have a miscarriage of justice. A skateboard to the head has killed people before and put people in a coma. Unjustified murder is not justice. It's just murder. I wouldn't want that on my conscience.

"Justice system"? You aint no anarchist, bro.

"Unjustified murder is not justice. It's just murder."
Correct. Similarly, justified murder is not justice. It's just murder.

That later is a contradictory statement. But we know where you stand on the subject matter.

Not really. The words "justice" and "justified" share etymology, but are distinct terms nonetheless. "Justified" generally means "having justification," while "justice" generally has more moralistic connotations or meanings.

there is no such thing as the "cycle of violence"? then you know nothing absolutely nothing about how rapists got to be rapists in the first place.

I've had a hard life too, doesn't mean I'm gonna go around raping people.
Kinda reminds me when I get into debates about the state of Israel with people, I'm reminded of the horrific history the Jews have had and the trials and tribulations they've gone through.
But then of course I remind them of the Roma tribes (gypsies), saying that they've faced the same fate and still do, and they don't use that to justify killing thousands of brown people.

No, you have no idea what the "cycle of violence" means when it comes to sexual assault. Your analogies show this clearly.

Yeah 'cause what happens to you and your distant as fuck ancestors = the same thing... way 2 disanalogy

Lots of people with hard lives go around committing crime even against people who don't deserve their punishment and even try to justify it. Violence against breads violence when it is wrongly applied. Justice against greedy men, my idea of justice would be to burn down their world of materialism and greedy enterprise system with no one objecting to it even in the slightest. The torture of having all the control and power of people and things stolen away from the them by the very people they control on a daily basis. If there was a hell i could create for the rich industrialist and all the boss's who have fired me in the past for their bottom line that is the hell i would create for them but that would require a lot of cooperation among the radicals who are hell bend on the destruction of empire. We can be stead fast in a lot of things that we're not. What about horizontal powered militias? Where are all the bad ass mofos?

people, such as yourself, use the cycle of violence argument to create a false equivalence between the actions of a rapist and the response from the survivor. that is a form of rape collaboration. but i mean, if you want to spend your time protecting rapists i suppose that's your deal.

Another argument in bad faith. Can't you even try to understand an argument that is different from your own? No, you can't, but I'm a generous type of guy so I'll help you out: *many rapists were themselves sexually abused or were forced to witness the traumatic sexual abuse of people they loved.* The cycle of violence that you don't believe exists (due to your lack of knowledge and/or insight into your own anger) is the violence that abused people (typically children) perpetrate on others, especially when they've grown up and have never had their abuse dealt with in therapy and *no* taking revenge is *not* therapy: it is the cycle of abuse and violence taking another turn.

"Another argument in bad faith"

What the hell? is that Liberal Hedges troll back posting on @ news?

Yes, that's right: objections to arguments made in bad faith are (1) imaginary and (2) only exist in a single person's mind and no one else's. That makes things nice and simple for a nice and simple person such as yourself, doesn't it?

you have to be them, I mean you are accusing people of making argument in bad faith and your smug ass attitude that and your feelings of superiority in regards to those you are arguing with. And if you are not that person, you their almost exact copy.

Look, fool, you are jumping into the middle of a discussion about sexual assault. If you don't have anything to add to it, why don't you shut the fuck up?

because I don't want to, plus we are having our own conversation about how you are either that Liberal Hedges troll or someone who thinks exactly like them.

Who is we? You and I? We ain't discussing shit together. You are simply barging into a discussion to grind your own personal axe.

no, we are discussing, I post a comment and then you respond, thus there is an exchange of words going on and that means there is a conversation.

yes, i am very much aware of the fact that rapists were sometimes (not always, by any means) themselves raped as children. i just don't think that has any relevance in deciding whether or not an adult who commits rape should or should not have the shit beaten out of them. i don't think that survivors should be forced to take the health of their assailants into account. if beating up your rapist will make you feel better, you should do it. and again, pointing out the fact that sexual violence comes from somewhere in no way excuses it; nor does it prove that people shouldn't beat up rapists. and because you ignored it i'll say it again: the actions of a rapist (aka rape) and the consequences they create are not equivalent.

This is where your illogic leads: if raping a woman will make you feel better, you should do it.

Yeah, cuz there's no distinction between aggressive vs. defensive violence, or dominating vs. liberating violence.

(Not who you're replying to, but fuck the implication you're making.)

These distinctions only exist in your head and thus should not be used as a guide in the real world.

So then there must not be a distinction between violence against rapist and the rapist committing a rape that is if the person accused is even guilty. Should be innocent until proven guilty. Anarchists don't like to think about what the new justice system is going to look like because they don't believe in one. Why that would contradict their own principles. We may as well start building 3 branches, one is legislature, the other is judicial, and together is executive since giving the lynch mob the power of all 3 makes for a brutal dictatorship already in the making by reading some of the comments on anarchist news. There's a lot of talk about anarchist theory but not how it would fit into our world on a practical level.

I take my closing statement with a bow. Oh please. No applause thank you. :)

Reality is defined by individual and collective perception, dipshit.

yes, but you wrote that delusional comment, not the collective, shitdip.

If beating up some man you feel is a rapist feels good, you should do it?
Also many are falsely accussed. Feminists have a victim's mentality they are always acting like victims just to get attention.

oh shut up asshole.

Police logic at its finest: "if you don't want to get beaten up for having raped someone, don't rape anyone." If you aren't doing anything wrong you have nothing to worry about, blah blah blah.

I see what you did there.
But yes, in an anarchist society, rapists will pay for what they've done. They won't find any safety with us like they do in this society.

I see what *you* did there. You said rapists will "pay" for what they've done -- as if money and money-infected ways of thinking would still exist in "an anarchist society."

I wouldn't.

"another crime has been committed"

Where the fuck do you even get that kind of language from? Are you defining "crime" as being inherently negative? What the hell?

And why are you assuming that there's no way of determining whether a claim is legitimate, or that people are just beating the shit out of dudes the second somebody says the word "rape"?

Revenge is a crime, sorry is you don't like it, but it is.

How are you defining or understanding "crime"? Because legally your statement doesn't even make sense. There's no law against "revenge" per se, and any number of non-criminal acts could be carried out with revenge as the guiding motivation.

Also why do you think anarchists give a fuck what is or is not a crime?

Who said the femi-nazis behind "Dangerous Spaces" are anarchists and not . . . well. femi-nazis?

"or that people are just beating the shit out of dudes the second somebody says the word "rape"?"

Not only is that what has gone on, but this is exactly what is advocated by these people. They do not believe that false rape claims even exist and their definition of rape is so wide to compensate. If a situation is called rape and it isn't, they just widen the scope of "rape" further to justify their actions and then act indignant and condemn people as "rape apologists" if they question anything about any of this.

They put out things like this claiming they're a new tendency, claiming their outside identity politics, claiming all sorts of things to obscure what's really going on. The fact is these people are really deep down always just militant warriors for Political Correctness and unconditional supporters of lesbian separatist ideas. They try to change their language, use the word "queer" to skirt trans-related contradictions, make up phrases like "autonomous feminism" to replace "lesbian separatism" but the message, attitude, and ideas remain exactly the same. Only the language changes. As Boileau once said, "I call a cat a cat." Well, I call an identity politicking, PC-obsessed, anti-anarchist woman separatist shitbag exactly that, no matter what new cloak their using to shroud their disgusting agenda. If you meet any of these people in person, all of this will be immediately apparently in the first 5 minutes. It's only in texts that they get to play with language and act semi-anonymous and get people to go "Hmmm, interesting" but when you seem them in person, all those words really just boil down to them screaming "ALL MEN ARE RAPE APOLOGISTS!" in a meeting.

Here's a little FAQ written by the New York vanguard of gender identity politics. They removed it from the internet because I guess it was too embarassing:

Excellent points. Agree with all of them.

it's still on the internet so idk what your talking about. it's stupid, but i have no idea what this has to do with this collection of writing

It's not on any part of the internet I could find and its relevance is that the authors of several of the texts in this collection are the exact same people who put together this FAQ.

Backed. The people in questions are definitely utter fucking idiots.

VIOLENT resistance! Unlike all that other sissy resistance! I'm such a badass! Woman power!

What is even the point/intent of this comment?

presumably to mock the idiotic posturing of a certain set of totally badass violencists.

Or are women supposed to keep up the perpetuation of being "ladylike" and not fighting back?

Nice straw woman, girl. As if those were the only two choices!

my only problem with this is that it is an example of the font Archer becoming the go-to font for radical texts trying to appear stylish. It's an okay font, but I think all it really does here is remind you of how Politics is Not a Banana used it slightly better.

up this comment! it also makes me start to distrust zines as all being made by pretentious hipster kids with shit analysis.

agreeing party!

Nazis and feminists go hand and hand. They are just reluctant lovers. You know the story. Girl hates boy, boy charms girl, girl loves boy.

Can we start having usernames now?
Or at least the option of usernames AND anonymity?

The trolling isn't even trying to make sense anymore.

How would you propose we do this? Especially given that 100 spam accounts a day are created.

Can you just imagine the feminist systematically exterminating all men who do not bow to extreme feminist idealism and using men as their willing servants to enslave other men via violence and death for not submitting their new world order? This sounds like a sci-fi thriller film in the making.


It's funny if you know some of these people in real life, all the glorification of violence is just a lot of big talk. They wouldn't actually attack real racists and misogynists, much less the institutions of power like the media, schools and police that maintain gender violence. They try to isolate, bully and beat up their own friends! - young, well-meaning guys, who are just as imperfect and confused as they are. From what I've seen, they only attack people who won't argue, fight back or call the police etc.

what anarchists need is an analysis of patriarchy. "I hate men" is not an analysis.

Women running around raping men? That would be a wet dream. jk/

In all seriousness, rape is a very serious accusation and today's definition of rape has broadened. For instance 16 is the legal age limit in Canada for mutual sex to be considered lawful.

-In America 18 is the limit so if you're a man 18 or older having underage sex that is classified as rape even if the women is willing.

-Then there is a fine line between "rape of unconscious victim" and "sex while under the influence of alcohol/drugs" It can be turned around especially if the female is having second thoughts but has already volunteered mutual sex intercourse. The last step to save face for an embarrassed woman would be to play the rape card and the poor guy spends time wishing he had never drank and met her for a one night stand. Had he known he would have never went out. The real victim in this case has no platform due to the growing bias toward women being innocent of all wrong doing and man being evil intentions. There are men serving time for different levels of rape like statutory and the falsely accused.

-The there is blatant rape like what took place at occupations around the U.S. where women were really not lying and were actually force held down against their will and in many cases, the men who were actually guilty never get any jail time. What's up with that?

I could just imagine the kind of justice system that would exist under an anarchist society where what ever the woman says goes and then the lynch mob. Women with power unchecked can get very ugly and that is not anarchy.

IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH ANARCHY! This is why these articles serve nothing but trouble for our future. They tend to paint everything with a broad brush and disregard how complex things can actually be where fact get thrown in with fiction.

This kind of "justice system" can only be imposed on others by lethal force and you can bet people will resist. There'll be a lot of dead anarchists by the time you try to shove this crap down our throats ends in bloody failure.

The above was a really good comment and very true in my experience. In contrast I don't think patriarchy is really the biggest problem. For example 93% of the people in prison are men, so both genders experience different forms of oppression.

Another boring gender article. How did gender ever come to be the dominant topic of discussion in the north american anarchist scene? wtf?

I can think if issues that affect men, women and children indiscriminately like U.S. bombs raining down on peoples heads and bullets riddling their bodies with blood piss and shit flying everywhere. How does womens issues take the stage over that? I don't get it? What about exploitation that affect women and men and in some cases children in the 3rd world? But women's issues still dominate? What about the destruction of the environment that is our only the life supply that is being destroyed? Fuck that off and there will be no room for life THAT INCLUDES YOU WOMEN!

I just think that women and womens issues and feminism is playing more of a roll and is dominating north american scene and it doesn't seem healthy. It seems very controlling. When are we gona focus on topics and issues that affect everybody and not just one sex? If this continues I can assure you it will only isolate and divide the anarchist community even further which is probably on the agenda of some.

There are other oppressed people living in this world. Not just women and the goal of an anarchist shouldn't be to use gender as a driving motivation for all action. Anarchy is supposed to be about equality. That doesn't mean one issue dominates over all other issues. It's unfair enough that we out of principle are willing to give all issues equal attention even though some issues impact more people than others and now you want to give more attention womens issues?

I didn't know the goal of the north american anarchist movement was to create pockets of resistance that consisted of boys or girls rather than the 2 operating together. I mean come on? Just what in the hell is going on?

Holy shit, this zine actually, genuinely, seriously contains an article that talks about sabotaging newspaper boxes as a way to attack patriarchy. ATTACKING GENDER MEANS MAKING TOTAL NEEEEEEEWWWWWWSSSSSPPAAAAAPRREEEEEERRR BOOOOOXXXEEEEEESSS!

Can we discuss something related to anarchy now?

Hm, it looks like my comment was deleted? is it because I mentioned knowing the authors of some of the communiques personally? and how cowardly they are? Doesn't really seem fair, since the communiques accuse people of things by name, and I didn't even use names.

Anyway, I'll say again, the ones I know have a level of analysis that amounts to "I hate men" and the only people they ever attacked were their own friends. Zines like this are mostly a lot of bluster and hot air. If someone wants to actually produce an analysis of gender and how it's reproduced, and suggest real strategies for fighting violent normativity, that would be something entirely different.

aren't these lots of the same people who were hella fucked up at camp trans back in 2010?


jesussss. the nyc rapist-beaters and the trans insurrectos are different crews. get your shit together, anon.

liek perhaps attacking the structures that reproduce it? which is like what most of this zine is about?

Glad to see this announcement being shit on so harshly by so many. Maybe the U.S. anarchist scene is finally crawling out of the steaming pile of identity it stepped in a few years ago. Never again.

or in other words, we have nothing better to do then go around harassing anarchist guys who slept with some friend of ours and didn't call her later?

the definition of sexual assault has been totally subjectivized by this milieu, and the violence these people glorify has in at least some cases been incredibly unjustified and ruined people's lives and drove away good comrades for no real reason. not just the accused but people who saw what a nightmare their scene was becoming. fuck a bunch of this.

True that, I've some some good projects and good communities go to shit because of selfish feminist women and the women who protect them.

Add new comment

Filtered HTML

  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <a> <em> <strong> <cite> <blockquote> <code> <ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd>
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.

Plain text

  • No HTML tags allowed.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
To prevent automated spam submissions leave this field empty.
Enter the code without spaces.