I Want My Own Vatican City
I like geography and all things related. Contrary to misogynistic stereotypes, I am a chick with a good sense of direction and I love maps. I do sometimes get a bit lost, but I figure things out pretty quickly. It is not my experience that males know where they are going or are handy with a map. My most hilarious experience with this occurred in Hong Kong several years ago. I was doing a visa run from mainland China with a group of people who, like me, had never been there before. We got off the metro and had to find the Chinese consulate using a rudimentary public map posted on the wall. Myself? I got my bearings immediately and worked out the most efficient route in my mind, using visual-spatial skills that girls aren’t supposed to have. Now unfortunately, in our group, there was a tall, masculine, loudmouth, ex-military British fucker, whom I’ll call Prince George. And being be-penised, he immediately appointed himself leader and started telling us all his plan to get us to the embassy. I realized immediately that Prince George hadn’t a clue about how to get to where we needed to go. I piped up and said that he was incorrect, and people should follow me instead. But I was ignored, being female and all. And I hadn’t done military service, so obviously, I was missing some kind of navigating skills. So I said, “See ya,” and left the group unencumbered by dude-funk. Can you guess what happened? Yep, the group got lost under the leadership of the humble Prince, and I sat outside the embassy waiting for them for an annoyingly long time.
Moral of the story: Never follow a man or trust what he says about his abilities or knowledge. First, in his over-confidence and general self-delusion, he always knows less than he lets on and a woman will always have to fix whatever problem he creates. And second, males have little consideration for safety and other practical issues only a woman will think about.
I digress slightly. This is actually a post about geography and problems with dudes.
So in my love of geography and learning, I find myself taking little geography quizzes online. I made it my mission to know all of the 196 countries of the world and where they are located (I include Taiwan in this total, having lived there for a few years and having discovered how much it pisses the Chinese off when you tell them they don’t own Taiwan…). Recently, I found myself taking a country factoid quiz and was faced with the following question:
What is the only country with over 90% male citizenship?
I hesitated for a second, as my mind briefly flashed to one of those gun-toting American survivalist groups declaring an independent state. But then I realized they like rape too much, so there is no way they’d shack up officially with so many dudes. So, it had to be gay dudes or religious dudes. Or both!
Yes, that was it. Vatican City, the citizen (not resident) count of which is somewhere under 600. Under 6% of these citizens are female.
Now, personally, I don’t care if men want to form their own male-only countries provided there are serious protections in place against human (i.e., female) trafficking. I’m perfectly fine with separatism as a concept in practice. Male violence can be confined to its own petri dish, and women can be left out of it altogether. And if the dudes can tap into their natural gay selves (all dudes are omnisexual and thus can choose to be gay), all the better for women!
So, Vatican City is the closest thing to what I’m talking about, and their set-up works for them. I argue that it only works as well as it does because it is not completely male. There are a number of non-citizen females who support the city-state both as non-resident workers and as resident ‘support’ of resident males. Further, Vatican City is a highly respected independent state, greatly funded by the larger Christian world population. As well, nobody attacks them – even Muslim terrorists, despite their chest-beating – because any attackers would essentially be waging war on the entire Western world. Also, no one questions their uber-sexist, backwards, religious worldview. They are essentially allowed to function unmolested in hypocrisy and idiocy without a homegrown army (note: the relatively small contingent of super-faggily-dressed Swiss Guard Pope-protectors (see above) would be no match for a modern military assault), and draws in major tourist dollars from a peaceful, but brainwashed, crowd of Christian sheep.
So here is my question: why can’t women create their own internationally recognized and respected women-only, non-religious ‘Vatican City’? Why don’t women WANT this?
The answer is actually quite simple. Despite the fact that women-only city-states make a great deal of sense, even if women demanded them, they would not be allowed to exist. And to be honest, I think there are actually a number of women who would go for this kind of set-up if it were a possibility. But a female Vatican City would be under constant attack by men. Why? Well, all-women communities tend to be high-functioning and non-hierarchical. While girls are taught to believe from birth that they cannot exist without men, the opposite is actually true. Women function better when no men are present. And when men are faced with the reality that they are unnecessary or obsolete, they not only can’t handle it intellectually, but they feel they must retaliate with violence and try to put a stop to female success and independence. A classic, small-scale case of this actually exists in Kenya in the village of Umoja, which was founded nearly 30 years ago by women and girls fleeing from the male violence inevitable under forced heterosexuality, and has persisted despite several different kinds of attacks by men facing their own inadequacy.
In the West, women have not been so lucky. We are at a point where even women-only events and static non-living spaces have not only come under attack, but have been infiltrated and even erased by men, backed by changed laws and hard core violence. It is not unreasonable to say that Western women have as little freedom today as do women in many countries that are supposedly more ‘backward’ or less ‘progressive’. But when you tell Western women they are so privileged and free, they tend not to stand up for themselves and instead feel guilt at how lucky they are… Anyhow, no matter where you are in the world, it is hard to imagine women successfully creating their own women-only permanent living and working community, nevermind a separate city-state or country, and remaining unviolated by men. Unlike the men of Vatican City, these women-only countries would not have the backing and respect of the world.
But wouldn’t it be fantastic? The idea of having an untainted, demarcated space (city) without a single male – even boy-children – demanding your attention and energy and hyper-vigilance. A country where you wouldn’t have to live in fear. Where you could walk alone, unafraid, at any hour of the day. Where you could sleep under the stars without worrying about getting raped or kidnapped. Where you don’t need locks on your doors. Where you don’t have to get married and agree to be raped for decades and decades by a single man in order to be ‘protected’ from being raped by all the others or to be economically secure enough to avoid having to become a hooker to feed yourself. Where female friendship actually means something and is reliable and stable. Where the concept of family is replaced by something less fragile and dangerous and more inclusive. Where women can finally find their natural selves…
[This post is part of the Year of the Fantasy series…]