What is that?
The truth is, feminism is so broad – there are several aspects to it – so much so that two feminists may not necessarily fully agree on one thing.
When you come up with this kind of mess that bluntly refers to dissociation from men, you’re not really addressing the equality aspect of the cause. You’re not saying “I am equal to you and should have the same opportunities that you have, men, because I’m a separate, complete being just like you.” Instead, you’re saying “I don’t want to have anything to do with you, and being anything like you is out of the question.”
Women and men are separate entities but neither of the two sexes can survive or keep the earth alive without the other; that’s besides the point. The point is that we are not mutually exclusive.
The word “woman” isn’t equivalent to “half-man. It is disgraceful and disappointing to treat it as such. That is basically what the feminism cause sought to emphasize originally. Whether you call women new names like “womyn” or “mynwo” or “wugagawughu” isn’t the point. We want to be separate entities that co-exist with men in a society that respects everyone equally, irrespective of their gender, so let’s get back on track.
“Women” really is one word. A woman is a womb-man, nothing less, the other kind of man, not a subordinate.
When you come up with this kind of sentimental mess, “womyn,” you’re messing everything up. You’re drifting far away from the cause. You’re not saying what you want. What exactly does it mean to be a ‘womyn?’