**What if the most radical act of feminism wasn’t raising a fist or rewriting legislation—but reclaiming the earth beneath our feet?**
Let’s play a game. Picture a feminist rebellion. Flashes of pink banners, chants echoing across city squares, maybe a well-placed glass-shattering in the name of equity. Now, strip that scene bare. No skyline, no protest slogans—just a landscape, raw and unscripted. A river that’s no longer policed with toxic dumps. A forest where no one answers to a landlord’s title deed. A field where the right to till isn’t handed down by a court order but by the voice of the ancestors who came before. Was that scene ever on your feminist playlist? If not, maybe it’s time to adjust the volume.**
—
### **The Paradox We Call Femininity in a Colonized World**
Feminism has always been a fire lit in the dark, but for centuries, its warmth rarely touched the soil. We’ve clawed our way into boardrooms, law books, and the public script, but rarely have we questioned *what the world looks like before the world becomes the world*. The myth that liberation means nothing more than equal scraps at the patriarchy’s table is convenient, but it’s also a lie told to us by those who want our fury redirected away from the real monsters: *who decides what is yours, what grows, who walks this land, and who is buried beside which river.*
Here’s the question that cuts: **Have we been too busy arguing about who sits at the highest table to remember that the table itself is a construct of theft?**
Anti-imperialist feminism doesn’t just ask where women are in the boardroom. It demands—it *howls*—for the return of the stolen table itself.
—
### **Land as Feminist Body: What It Means to See the Earth as Sacred**
The Land Back movement isn’t some quaint indigenous slogan for tourists postcard-worthy. It is a political manifesto disguised as resurrection. It declares that every acre of stolen earth, every dammed river, every parcel labeled “vacant” and then gobbled up by a foreign corporation, every burial ground exhumed by a digger’s greed—was once part of a woman’s or man’s or queer’s sacred life. To lose land is to lose a body. To reclaim it is to re-weave the flesh of a people whole again.
The deep ecology feminists whisper about it in seminars: the land isn’t “ours”—we are *its*. Settlers, land appropriators, and their descendants may have written new laws, but they didn’t write the original covenants engraved in the roots of a tree, in the moon’s reflection on a lake. Indigenous scholars like Leanne Betasamosake Simpson call this *kinsekolâkiwin*, the act of thinking like relations—not just with one another, but with the soil beneath, the currents around, the sky above. **Can you imagine feminism without kinsekolâkiwin? A movement that doesn’t whisper to the wind, that doesn’t pause to listen to the creek’s murmurs?**
—
### **The First Feminist Riot Was the Existence of Indigenous Nations**
We’ve been taught to see the arrival of “pioneers” as a blank canvas. But there was no canvas. There was always a tapestry—one of woven knowledge, of shared air, where women chose leaders, where plants were healer-pals to one another, where the land didn’t just sustain but *spoke*. The feminist archivists of history rarely unearth this: the women who held council under sacred pines, who mapped celestial cycles to plant, who birthed their children (and their tribes) within specific wind-directions. These were not mere “peasants.” These were *earthly activists*. Their erasure wasn’t just violence against an ethnic group. It was the defeminization of the planet itself.
The Land Back movement is thus a second-wave, a deep wave—one that knows it’s no longer about access to a male-dominated well of power, but about creating an entirely new well. When a nation of women and two-spirited stewards reclaims the land, they’re not just “filling a gap.” They’re unlearning the entire curriculum of colonized logic. A new law, a new language, a lawgiver born of the soil: that’s where anti-imperialist feminism lands its claws.
—
### **The Men Are Here Too—Or: Why Feminism Must Kill its Monstrous Masculinity (Inside and Out)**
The left often loves to say, “We’re not anti-men, we’re anti-patriarchy!” As if one could slice away “men” as easily as peeling an orange. But it’s far more precise to say: **We are anti-patriarchal masculinity, the kind that sees the earth as a commodity to plunder and a people as a labor force to exploit.** The men who cheer for Land Back are not the ones shoveling coal into the smokestack. They are the ones who step into the sacred and say, “This, too, is mine to protect.”
The radical truth here is that a true anti-imperialist feminism must destroy its own love of male allies. Yes, non-indigenous men can walk with you. But can they leave their nation behind? Can they acknowledge that their masculinity was never *theirs* to start? Until feminism can produce men—men who recognize their own lineage as intrusive, as an unwelcome guest—we will just keep hosting one more interloper at our table.
—
### **”The personal is political”—Reclaiming It (And the Land) in the Dark**
No one hands you the revolution wrapped in pretty paper. In this fight, the personal isn’t just about a rogue boss or a bad date—it’s about knowing with every cell that the land you walk on is *his* stolen love story, and not yours to stay in forever. It’s about watching as they “develop” your ancestral groves into a parking lot for their shopping-mall empires. It’s about the tears of a child playing in river silt—now poisoned, once a river of gods. How does a culture not burn when its people are told their sorrow is not valid, their joy is not land, their history is not their land’s truth?
That’s what anti-imperialist feminism means practically: it means digging into the earth (literally) to find proof that the bodies buried in it are the ones who mattered. It means standing outside the lines at eviction notices, because every notice is a blade slicing at the female body—the original one. It’s showing up with chipped nails and a rifle’s worth of resilience when they bring the bulldozers.
—
### **The Land Back Is a Love Letter to the Wild Feminine**
There’s a reason the patriarchy loves to depict the “untamed” woman—she who bleeds, heeds the moon, gives birth without permission—as hysteric, hysterical, mad. Because when the land reclaims itself, the world shudders at its own imbalance. Feminism must stop trying to be respectable. It must go deep, not just into the boardrooms of men, but into the womb of the land itself.
It’s not a new world. It’s an old one returned, an old one remembered. When an Indigenous woman says, “This land must be whole again, because its soul was stolen from me,” she isn’t making a metaphor. This is a *personal crusade*—one that has been a battle for millennia. **The feminists who understand this don’t ask how to integrate into the system.** They ask how to unmake it, how to stitch it back with new fibers: kinship, not capital; reciprocity, not profit.
—
### **Conclusion: The Land Back Is Not a Metaphor**
They’ll call you “extreme.” They always do. Even the suffragettes were extreme. Even the rioters in the streets. Because this fight is more than a fight. It is a question: **If you call yourself feminist, tell me—what is yours? What did you return to first?**
The desk? The ballot? The bathroom stall? Or finally, the dirt under your hands, the water in your cupped palms: *what you were supposed to have the day you decided who your mother was?* That is the feminism of our grandparents’ grandparents. Now is the time to rise on it. The land remembers which ones were ours.
