You are currently browsing the tag archive for the ‘Radical Feminism’ tag.
Another common charge against Gender Critical Feminists or really, Radical Feminists in general is that they are just a small outspoken subset of Feminism, soon to be forgotten with the passage time..bla bla bla. Apparently, as demonstrated by publication in the US newspaper of record, gender critical thought isn’t going away soon, and if anything is gaining more popularity and momentum as time passes.
Lisa Selin Davis, in her opinion piece ‘My Daughter is Not Transgeneder. She is a Tomboy.’, writes the following (pardon, the formatting, these are screencaps):
Wow. :) Identification of gender as the problem, correctly assessing the role of socialization, and realizing the power of gender stereotyping – all in the same article?! I highly recommend going to read the full article on the NYT.
Acknowledging reality, is what this about. Prioritizing women’s struggle against gender or glorifying the concept that enslaves women in patriarchy. Women who dare to speak out against patriarchy, as always, are singled out and laid bare for threats and abuse. Thank you to the brave tenacious women who dare to soldier on with their ‘heretical’ messages and disagreements. Telling the emperor that he has no clothes, speaking truth to power, addressing the root problems of society – this is the wheelhouse of radical feminist politics and ideology.
This is an excerpt from The New Statesmen that describes the power of the ‘newspeak’ gender identity movement and how it is attempting to silence debate and discussion of gender politics and ideology.
“Another thing we are supposed to deny is the differences that now exist among self-identified trans women. The category has broadened over time to encompass more biologically male individuals who have not modified their bodies, and who in some cases do not live permanently as women, but alternate between male and female identities. Their status as women is based on a combination of performative declarations that they are women, and surface features of ‘gender presentation’ like the names they use and the clothes they wear. Nevertheless, they invoke the ‘trans women are women’ principle: if you identify as female then you are female, and should be treated as such by others. In some circles it is considered transphobic for women to question the presence of people with openly displayed male sexual organs in spaces like communal female changing rooms, or for lesbian women to refuse to recognise those people as potential sexual partners (a resistance sometimes referred to as ‘the cotton ceiling’, a phrase which smacks of misogyny and male entitlement). It isn’t just radical feminists who find this problematic: some trans women do too. Is that really just irrational bigotry?
During the debate on the Observer letter, a man who had finally grasped what the trans v TERF dispute was about tweeted (I paraphrase for his own protection): ‘So, you’re saying we have to pretend to believe lies to be nice. Like saying I think cats can fly’. To avoid giving offence to a minority group — or to avoid persecution by its most extreme and vocal members — it’s as if we have all agreed to live in a fantasy world where reality is whatever certain people say it is. My penis is female. It is exclusionary for feminists to talk about female bodies. Cats can fly. Ignorance is knowledge.
A TERF is not someone who disputes trans people’s right to exist. What s/he disputes is the right of a small subset of trans extremists to impose their definition of reality, and their political agenda, on everyone. A TERF is someone prepared to say that the Emperor has no clothes. Though I understand their fears, it troubles me that we have got to the point where people like Mary Beard and Peter Tatchell feel obliged to throw the TERFs to the wolves rather than stand up to the Emperor and his court. ”
Amen to the last two paragraphs.
:/
Woo! Let’s check out all the privilege “cis” women have.
Oh.
Women do not willingly identify with any of the above conditions. This is precisely why the term “cis” resides in the realm of fatuous, patriarchally-approved bullshit. If women (adult human females) actually had the choice to identify their way out of their oppression we wouldn’t have any women left on the planet. It’s almost like there is some sort of material reality that women’s oppression is largely based on.
JB is on the case:
{spoiler alert:biological sex.}
So many conversations start like this:
“If you think trans people are all rapists or degenerates, celebrate when trans people lose rights and get attacked, and deny the sexuality of people who accept trans people, you’re an oppressor and a bigot and nobody should take you seriously.”
radicurious answered:
I disagree with transgender ideology, yes, but that doesn’t mean that I hate transgender people or that I want them to be attacked, murdered at high rates, discriminated against and harassed on the street. I want all transgender people to be safe from violence and discrimination, so I definitely wouldn’t celebrate any kind of violence or discrimination towards them. Let’s take a much discussed example – the bathroom issue: I don’t think all transgender people are rapists or “degenerates” – I know that the vast, vast majority of transgender people are decent people just wanting to be accepted and allowed to express themselves and live their lives as they please. That being said, transgender women have the same crime rates as “cis” men – also when it comes to violent crime. This means that they, statistically, are just as likely to assault or rape a women as a “cisgender” male would be, and thus placing them in the same bathrooms, changing rooms and shelters as biological women would compromise the safety of the biological women using said restrooms, shelters and changing rooms. There’s no doubt in my mind that the vast majority of trans women simply want to pee without experiencing the risks and the dysphoria that going to the mens room might involve, but allowing a group which is statistically as violent and as sexually aggressive as “cis” men into women’s restrooms and changing rooms is a recipe for disaster. Just look at some the numerous cases of biological males claiming to be/dressing as women attacking and harassing biological women in women’s changing rooms and bathrooms. My worry about letting transgender women use the women’s bathrooms doesn’t come from irrational hatred of transgender women – it comes from statistics and recorded cases which prove that allowing transgender women in women’s bathrooms would pose a threat to biological women’s safety.
I share ‘Radcurious”s assessment of the situation. And it comes down to this, which is a of a higher priority – the feelings of men or the physical safety of women? And if it is ‘transphobic’ to prioritize the safety of females, so be it, because it is the right call in this situation. Women are under constant male threat and surveillance in our society and should have spaces where the panopticon of male dominance cannot reach.
That being said, I am also in full favour of having 3 washrooms available in public spaces, and that space should be taken from existing male facilities when new ones cannot be constructed to accommodate the variable gender constituency of our populations.
[Source]
Yet more evidence that identity politics is bad for women.
“Pregnant woman” is not an identity. It is a social reality. A pregnant woman’s ever-contracting rights – whether she can choose to end this pregnancy, whether she will risk imprisonment for drinking too much, whether she will lose her job, whether she will be murdered by her partner – can only be seen through the filter of her inferior social status: that of woman. She neither chooses nor identifies with this status and it matters that the restrictions it places on her and others be fully acknowledged. Hundreds of women died today because of the way in which pregnancy intersects with their political and social status as women. The term “pregnant people” denies them the specificity of their deaths and masks the cause.
What gender-neutral pregnancy campaigning has achieved is wholly negative, making it impossible to articulate why there exists a class of people who are not granted full sovereignty over what lies beneath their own skin. It has located the abortion debate (which should not be a debate at all) back where conservatives want it: on the status of the foetus, not that of the woman. It has allowed the misogynist left to consolidate their definition of woman as “passive fantasy girl with tits” as opposed to “person with independent physical functions, emotions and needs.” Above all, it has created the illusion of an opt-out to being placed in the inferior sex class. Well, there isn’t, at least not until you can be bothered to challenge the fundamental idea that half the human race is inferior (oh, but that’s so much harder than messing about with words!).”
I find it curious that when it comes to feminism as a movement it is often decreed that it must be “inclusive”. Here is the thing though, feminism is the struggle for female liberation from the patriarchal structures and mandates of society. The only requirement for membership in feminism is, hold on to your (pussy)-hats, being female. Encompassing more than half of the world’s population should satisfy any musings about inclusivity and the like.
Concomitantly one can identify what feminism is if the stated goal or objective in question happens to is to aid in woman’s struggle against patriarchy. If you’re not working toward increasing female liberation from patriarchy you are not ‘doing’ feminism.
So here is Empress-radfem expressing her thoughts on the recent Woman’s march, and she compares the feminist movement to other movements struggling for liberation. She asks very important questions in the first paragraph that makes me wonder why it is beyond the pale to foist up an #all lives matter at a #BLM rally, but females in feminism can make no such claim.
Why is that?
“it’s no coincidence to me that liberals have taken aim at women holding signs about vaginas, uteruses, and specifically female-centered issues during the women’s march, but wouldn’t dare suggest that “black lives matter” activists should include “white lives” or “blue lives” in their signs and slogans too, nor did they see fit to inform occupy wall street protesters that its “not all rich people.”
women are the ones who have to step aside and make room at the podium for others. women are the ones who have to be reminded that it’s not okay to put ourselves first. women are the ones who need to sacrifice precious time, space, and voice at a public demonstration to make sure others are heard and seen, too. women are the ones who have no specific experience worth naming and discussing, no specific interests worth protecting.
woman does not exist.”
bleatmop
Mystro
The Arbourist
Dead Wild Roses 
Your opinions…