You are currently browsing the category archive for the ‘Radical Feminism’ category.
Sometimes terms get fuzzy or lose a bit when translated into arguments. Let’s take a look at the term ‘gender’.
I have seen so many people argue that “gender is a social construct, that means you can label yourself as anything you want” and like that is not how social constructs work.
In fact, social constructs are things which require social recognition.
Money for example is a social construct. It has value because we as a society acknowledge that it does. But if you brought some currency over from another country, nobody would know how much it was worth or be able to accept it.
Social constructs require society’s recognition.
Gender is a social construct–it means other people tell you what your gender is, not the other way around. Because gender is an oppressive force, gender is something which is done to you, not something you freely choose for yourself.
Gender is how people decide to treat you based off their perception of your biological sex.
Gender is which color blanket you are put in to after birth, whether people immediately start whispering to you how beautiful you’re going to be when you grow up or how strong you’re going to be.
Gender is the expectations society expects you to meet because of your biological sex–gender is the expectation for female people to wear make up.
Gender is the code of behavior between men and woman–gender is the expectation that women will apologize more than men, act more shy, and generally just allow the man to think he is more important.
Gender is not some fun game to anyone but those who are privileged along this axis of oppression.
Gender is something that is done to you against your will.
Gender is oppression.”
Women speaking out against the politics of individual identity and exposing the hypocrisy that lies at the base of much of the liberal objection to radical feminist class based politics.
“i’m so tired of this liberal viewpoint that you have to include everyone at all times when talking about politics or else you’re excluding and harming them. just because someone focuses on certain issues doesn’t mean they don’t care about the people not affected by those issues. if a woman wants to talk about abortion with a sign that says “no uterus, no opinion” or respond to trump with “pussy grabs back” there is nothing wrong with this. this isn’t transphobia, these messages don’t even equate the anatomy with womanhood. this isn’t white feminism, WOC are also affected by abortion and sexual assault. you say we can’t exclude anyone from feminism and then in the same breath try to exclude people that want to talk about major issues facing women today.”
Today’s Radical Feminist insight comes from Humble Kitten, reminding us that dudes will be dudes in whatever form they happen to come in.
Apart from the denial of biological fact, it is shit like this. Men do not respect the boundaries set by women. The attempts to shame Lesbians into straight sex is absolutely horrifying. But this is allowed to fly because the authors of said tweets are exercising their male privilege watch them define words and meanings – the power to name things is almost exclusively male in our society. When women push back against this baseless, putrid, tide of inanity they are ostracized, harassed, and threatened.
That, dear readers, is bullshit.
I hope the transactivist antics at the Woman’s March spurred more women to experience their peak-trans moment, to realize that feminism is about centring the needs of females (as in the liberation from patriarchy and patriarchal standards). It shouldn’t even have to be said, yet it must be repeated until the message sinks in – Feminism is for females as a class and their fight against patriarchy.
This whole liberation from patriarchy idea tends to be quite of putting to dudes (whatever their stripe). It would seem that if one is making dudes uncomfortable, then you’re on the right path. The converse also applies, if one is being lauded and supporting by the male types it is quite possible that your actions or beliefs are not really helping much (see much of liberal feminism).
Anyhow, these tweets by transactivists are the embodiment of male entitlement mixed with the inherent narcissism of identity politics (IP being the polar opposite of effective Feminism). Enjoy. (?)
Throw in some zombie lies and blanket denials and there it is.
Well, quite the list if you happen to be interested in what Feminism is about. Here is what the GAG group thinks should be forbidden in a library for Women.
Books to remove:
Admission Accomplished – Jill Johnston
-Against Sadomasochism – Robin R. Linden, Darlene R. Pagano, Diana E. Russell, Susan Leigh Star
-Amazon Odyssey: Collection of Writings – Ti-Grace Atkinson
-Buddhism after Patriarchy – Rita M. Gross
-The Female Man – Joana Russ
-Female Sexual Sl*v*ry – Kathleen Barry
-Feminism Unmodified – Catharine A. Mackinnon
-First Buddhist Women: Poems and Stories of Awakening Susan Murcott
-Gyn/Ecology – Mary Daly
-The Idea of Prostitution – Sheila Jeffreys
-The Industrial Vagina: The Political Economy of the Global Sex Trade – Sheila Jeffreys
-Intercourse – Andrea Dworkin
-The Lesbian Heresy – Sheila Jeffreys
-Nine Parts of Desire: The Hidden World of Islamic Women – Geraldine Brook
-Not a Choice, Not a Job: Exposing the Myths about Prostitution and the Global Sex Trade – Janice Raymond
-Not for Sale: Feminists Resisting Prostitution and Pornography- Of Women Born – Adrienne Rich
-Pornography: Men Possessing Women – Andrea Dworkin
-Radical Acceptance – Tara Brach
-The Sexual Liberals and the Attack on Feminism – Janice Raymond
-Women As Wombs: Reproductive Technologies and the Battle over Women’s Freedom – Janice Raymond
Well, looks like my reading list just got a great deal longer.
Books should never be banned; they are the life blood of an educated population. Yet banning books, specifically feminist books in The Vancouver Woman’s library is a priority for the group called Gays Against Gentrification. This sort of violent repression is a heinous crime against the notions of the promotion of rational discourse, civilized protest, and of course women and their liberty.
So… friends, let’s understand that if you decide to start banning books that are integral to the movement you want to be a part of, it is a really big hint that you need to be in your own fucking movement. Colonizing Feminism for your particular set needs is going to fail; therefore it is time to take wing and make a movement that really can be all about you, because, Dear Transactivists/queer ideologues/men etc. :
Feminism. Is. Not. All. About. You.
Erasing ‘heretical’ female texts and thus female experience isn’t what is expected of feminists or their allies – is this your #notmytrans movement moment? (Too fucking late for that now, the jackboots are already in motion in Vancouver.) – yet this is the shit move (banning feminist books in a library for Women) undertaken by the queer group GAG. (see the entire petition on Facebook here). Are you feeling the inclusive love from this group that is dictating what females are allowed to read? I know I certainly am.
Let’s follow Charles Rae in his article on The Fifth Column as she describes the situation –
” This has got to be the first time a library was accused of violence. In an interesting display of the blooming neoliberal tendency to turn the world into their self-defined “safe space,” an organization ironically called GAG (Gays Against Gentrification) has demanded the new Vancouver Women’s Library (VWL) ban books written by women. Feminist Mary Lunetta already created a petition in favor of freedom of thought, urging VWL not to ban any books.
The trend of the neoliberal left controlling and condemning thoughts and words is widespread, and damages the movements they are attempting to protect. In this particular example as a case study, GAG came out of the gate demanding an outright ban of women’s books instead of asking for a respectful dialog. But then, what would this dialog consist of? What books (and therefore thoughts) are allowed? Anyone who champions freedom of thought wouldn’t entertain such a debate, and women shouldn’t be demanded to comply to such restrictions.”
Follow the link to the petition and sign it. Better yet, go to the Vancouver Women’s Library website and donate to them.
“These demands presume feminism, and women, are or should be completely monolithic. That everyone should already implicitly and entirely understand their ideal of accepted language and thought. If you don’t know or accept their concepts, there is no conversation to be had. You are a bigot, and you should get out (like the books).”
How about NO. The sifting sands of your ideology serve only to reinforce the patriarchal conception of gender. No one should take a knee to such a corrosive ideology which, essentially, is the antithesis of radical feminist theory and praxis.
“The reasoning presented in their introductory paragraph is because “the ongoing violence against trans women, sex workers, and IBPOC (Indigenous, Black, and People of Colour),” and as was quoted, “settler-colonial violence”. But what connection a Women’s Library has to the violence anyone anywhere faces remains to be seen, and is not detailed in their demands. As seasoned feminists know and center in their messaging, violence is perpetrated (in a large majority) by men. Furthermore, violent males aren’t taking their cues from women’s books and libraries.“
Harassing libraries is easy, fixing male-violence isn’t. Looks like its coming up harassing libraries all across the board, because actually being an ally and working with women is too fucking hard.
“GAG goes on to say that “TERF”s and “SWERF”s are complicit in violence and liken them to Nazis. How long have feminist been called Feminazis? Where was the Holocaust perpetrated by “cis white women”? One of the SWERFy books they want banned is called Not a Choice, Not a Job: Exposing the Myths about Prostitution and the Global Sex Trade by Janice Raymond. Doesn’t that sound more like a book which exposes violence rather than perpetrates it? I’m going to have to give it a read.”
Men do need access to prostituted women after all. Definitely should be a priority for Feminists amirite?
“GAG’s attempt to give proof of violence was to call out women who stand in opposition to the sex industry, and the particular exclusion of a male who identifies as a woman into a woman-only space. Their demands to silence women are ill-founded at best, harmful to the women’s movement at worst, and ironic on all accounts. GAG says they will not sit down with the women of the VWL for discussion because they claim they are being gaslit– as they call women nazis and violent without a shred of hard evidence of physical violence. “
Typical male supremacist behaviour. Sorry folks, you can’t identify out of being part of the oppressor class, and shit like the GAG list of demands to silence women only proves that point.
“Furthermore, the books and ideas they are looking to ban are ones that are still under debate within the feminist community, such as the example of the sex industry, and whether it should be abolished or embraced. These demands are an attempt to control this ongoing dialog, as well as the outcome of it. Any kind of a book ban would, without a doubt, hinder feminist movements. Feminists, all movements with all ideologies, would be strengthened by robust debate and spaces of free thought, something libraries stand for, and something women have been denied time and again since men took the mantle as head of the home and state.”
Yep. What Charles said. My conclusion would have had more swears in it, but Charles sums up the situation nicely.
Stay Tuned, I’ll have the feminist books to be banned list up in a jiff.
**UPDATE** – Queer Transactivst Group Vandalizes Library
**UPDATE** – Video of dudes and handmaidens at the Library.
bleatmop
Mystro
The Arbourist
Dead Wild Roses 
Your opinions…