Who is Aline d'Arbrant(and why does it matter?)

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
1 message Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view

Who is Aline d'Arbrant(and why does it matter?)

This post was updated on .
the Queen of Gynarchic Theory

Who, indeed, is Aline d'Arbrant?  At one time it was necessary only to enter her name into the Wikipedia index for the English speaking person to receive the answer to this question. Interestingly, that page was removed in April of 2009, through summary decision of a  certain administrator going by the name of “julian”.  The reason given, if you go to the page noting this deletion  is , quote ...Not notable. Promotional....unquote. Leaving aside the fact that there are tens of thousands (or more?) of wikipedia pages  definable in exactly the same manner, the deletion of the english page describing the person whose works are the ne plus ultra of Gynarchic theory must be seen for what it is: an effort to suppress and contain all discussion of what alternatives exist to the current monoculture of patriarchy which oppresses all genders, all classes(excepting those on the pyramid tip of parasitical power) and all ages. is it worthwhile and necessary to recreate the suppressed information? I think so, and will do it by translating the page which still exists on the French edition of wikipedia, about this question of "who is Aline d'Arbrant.?" With apologies in advance for my non-professional effort, here is that translation.....

"Aline d' Arbrant, French writer, born in Nancy in 1952, author of  Gynarchy.  She, was a close companion of  the American Valerie Solanas whom she met frequently in the United States after her exit of prison. She is the main theoretician of  Gynarchy, the extremist feminist philosophy not to be confused  with Gynocracy (women exercising power) or matriarchy (descent through the maternal line).

 The Gynarchy of Aline d' Arbrant advocates the absolute power of women, in which, according to her, a Golden age of Sapphic society would be recreated, where women would no longer require males even for procreation or any form of sexuality; in turn the male element of society would find happiness by serving the Lesbian sorority. These ideas are displayed with clarity and conviction in the main theoretical work of d’Arbrant: Gynarchy , already translated into English and Italian.

Aline d’Arbrant, an original member of the French group Circle of  Omphale, and  the Swiss Gynarchy Club, is founder of the association Gynarchy International which has as it’s mission the  broadcast Gynarchic ideals worldwide."

Clearly, that submission is as much or more to do with the questions  'What is Gynarchy?," and what has been the role of Aline d'Arbrant in promoting it?, rather than much of a biography of the person who bears the name.  But that in itself can be seen as a reflection of the person Aline d'Arbrant, as one can be sure that she herself would have been the author of said entry.  So we can be safe in saying that Aline d'Arbrant is a woman for whom the questions "what is wrong with our society?" and "what can be done to right this?" are the defining motifs of her life.  We would also be safe in supposing that she is a woman who regards men as intrinsically incapable of being 'human,' and therefore worthy of contempt.  Since we too know that she is not a person who would be content to merely create for herself conditions in which she could be personally free of the 'wrongs' of this society we all live in, we must imagine that she is vitally interested in the project of making other women feel that same contempt.  That can be inferred from the quote "mission [to]...  broadcast Gynarchic ideals worldwide." So to further  understand  the mind of Aline d'Arbrant  we  must look  deeper in to the  question of  what these  Gynarchic ideals  might be.

On the site Gynarchy.org, we can find some explanation as to what, in Ms d'Arbrants' opinion, they are.  "Lesbians are the natural leaders of the Gynarchic revolution. In all parts of the world where Gynarchy is growing, Lesbians are at the head of this revolution. The Lesbian Gynarchist with her castrated submale slave(s) is the very spearhead of this revolution. All the problems that now are threatening Womynkind will be solved when the Female has become the ruling sex. The first goal is evidently to put a stop to harmful and dangerous male activities - political, social, industrial, ecological, military... But Womyn will not exterminate the inferior male sex, there will always be a need for obedient submale slaves. In a Gynarchic society Womyn will live a life of ease and comfort and a large number of submale slaves will always be necessary to perform all the menial and tedious work at the bottom of society. The submale only need some education, hard training and in most cases castration to become useful to Womyn. And the subjugated and castrated submale will find happiness in his servitude, to serve, worship and obey his Female owner will be his greatest joy and pride! ... A submale in a Gynarchic society will have no human rights at all. No human rights whatsoever. Every submale will be the private property of a female and she may use, or misuse, this property in any way she wants. No rights whatsoever for submales! Their status will be lower even than that of domestic animals!

I think with that added to the mix, we can suppose ourselves adequately informed of both the vision of the Gynarchic ideal which Aline d'Arbrant espouses and answer to a large degree the question "Who is Aline D'Arbrant." Of course, it would be the easiest thing in the world to say that she is a woman who hates men, even to the point of a malevolent wish to do them injury.  It seems also fairly clear that she loves women, in the Sapphic sense, and in the wider sense of wishing for them to have the privleges which accrue in the Gynarchic society she imagines.  It is less clear whether she wishes that men should love women. "A female may feel affection for an obedient submale, she may even want to use him sexually, but this has nothing to do with love and the thought of a union between a female and a submale, or any other property of hers, is of course totally ridiculous."  Since they are clearly to obey all women, it must be considered whether this obedience comes from love or from fear.  Most often, in the literary works of the author d'Arbrant, it is decidedly fear which the male is supposed to feel, but this could be interpreted as a literary troupe which has the purpose of supplying an erotic charge to those of her readers who find the issues(and games) of power to be a predominant focus of their psychological makeup.  Scenes of aggression and even violence against another sex or same sex person are regularly exposed in many venues now without condemnation, and are often argued to be simply expressions of sexuality when given labels like bdsm etc., and not to be confused with 'real life' situations.   So it should not present the 'sophisicated' and modern reader any difficulty to see the same troupes brought to bear in the Gynarchical fiction books of Aline d'Arbrant.  But it does, often, and that may be as a result of the deep rooted social presumption of an inherent female "nature" which is benevolent (maternal) passive, and 'well behaved' in some fundamental sense that goes far beyond the silly public offerings that glorify women being 'bad.'

It can be argued, therefore, that the only way of getting clear of this deep seated presumption of immutable female nature is to discourse from a position of such extremity that it cancels out the assumed behavioral predisposition by means of antithesis. Since almost all of our learned methods of social discourse is now grounded in a theory of  dialetics which is seldom challenged or avoided, it could be nothing more than 'normal' for a Gynarchic argument to be of such type...putting together two extremes to form a synthetic position, eg. if the patriarchal system in which we exist is overthrown and inverted by means of a 'matriarchal' system in it's place, perhaps one can look forward to the elimination of all excesses and abuses of either system.  Is it logical to argue for an interpretation of the extreme Gynarchical vision of Aline d'Arbrant from this point of view?  Would she be happy if our society was modified in such a way as to allow for liberty and freedom for all people?  That is very hard to speculate upon, without further opinion direct from the source. But at least from all appearances, it would seem that d'Arbrant represents a position that is fundamentally close to that espoused by Valerie Solanas, in the famous SCUM MANIFESTO,SCUM.rtf a document which without much doubt goes so far as to call for the 'elimination' of males,  and not in a way that precludes violence.  Although her site pointedly gives inclusion to the actual existence of [sub]males when her  Gynarchic society comes into being, they are not 'in' society, but rather, in relation to that society as utility objects similar to household appliances or methods of conveyance.  In sum, it would seem to be of little or no importance to Ms. d'Arbrant whether men love  women or not,  just so long as they  obey them.

Though this position would seem to preclude an acceptance,  or even tolerance, of it's extreme prejudice against all men, in fact, on that same website of Aline d'Arbrants' are statements of support for that same position, from males who claim to be committed to the achievment of her Gynarchic goals.  It must therefore, at least be considered, that there is a possible value to the male potential in the radical Gynarchic vision, although it would be hard to know what it might be without much further evaluation than is goingto be done here at this time.

All of these facts are helpful not just in creating a profile of the author and theoretician Aline d'Arbrant, but also serve to give us some insight into the varied perspectives assumed by the "Womyn" for whom patriarchal society is unacceptable, and who seek its destruction in order to replace it with something which reflects their belief in the right of women to live free of it's shadow.  I want to write more about that theme once I finish this posting by stating, for the record,  my own personal  gleaning of the answer to the question "Who is Aline d'Arbrant, and why does it matter?"

Aline d'Arbrant is the expositor of a radical vision of humanity and it's future which may or may not be correct.  What matters about her vision, more than correctness, is that it is profoundly wholistic, cerebral and emotive at the same time. As such, it carries much more 'gravitas' than any academic or activist critiques of patriarchy, as well as providing a more complete prescription for an alternative, which due to it's radical nature is not hazy, vague and easy to obfuscate for rhetorical purposes. It is, therefore, implacably present, no matter whether one wishes it to be or not.  Therefore, the only way of dealing with her thought is to engage with it....whether for or against, whether one's support is qualified or unqualified. I can predict with confidence that the Gynarchic vision of Aline d'Arbrant is not going to go away, no matter the ebbs and flows of it's public profile at any given time.  Suppression of her ideas will breed an inevitable counter-force, of which this space can already serve as small example.  I have studied and absorbed the thought of Aline d'Arbrant, and I am comfortable both in critiquing and spreading  it, because  I recognize that it, and she are integral to any real or creative debate as to how to figure out and fix what is profoundly dysfunctional about the society we currently live in.  Ultimately, I might hope that she would modify her position towards men,  given that I remain fundamentally opposed to parts of that position as quoted herein, but I would not wish for her to do so unless and until a great measure of success has accompanied the campaign to reregulate society in accord with her Gynarchic principles, because it is the extremity of d'Arbrants position that makes it such a potent agent for  delivering us all from one evil, even if we have to put ourselves into uncomfortable proximity to another one!