Relationship of GC to Rad Fem?

submitted by Anna_Nym from self.GenderCritical

This is a question inspired by a conversation in another thread.

Are GC feminism and radical feminism generally considered to be the same thing or two different things?

all 3 comments
sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun

[–]100_percent_truth 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

I think you can be GC without being a rad fem. But the opposite may not be true.

[–]Anna_Nym[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

That's how I understand it, too. Like I now consider myself GC because I sign onto most of what's written on the sidebar of this site. But I don't consider myself to be a rad fem.

Although since radical feminism had already fallen out of favor when I was in university, I also don't know that much about it. My impression of it was that radical feminism views heterosexual interaction as intrinsically falling along the oppressed/oppressor model, which I do not agree with. But maybe that's an oversimplification of the patriarchy model?

[–]radtionalfem 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

They're different things, but nowadays it's becoming rare for anyone who ISN'T a radical feminist to be truly gender critical. Gender critical doesn't mean "doesn't believe trans people"; it means you are critical of the sex-based system of oppression that manifests in the form of gender roles and stereotypes. It's the opposite of biological essentialism. All non-trans feminism is gender critical.

Gender critical...ism? Criticality? turns to gender abolitionism when it wants to take action.

There have ALWAYS been radical feminists who believe TWAW. They, not TRAs, are the ones who coined the term "TERF" to exclude gender critical radfems, claiming that we hijacked their movement. I haven't read anything written by one of them in at least a decade now and don't remember how they justified their position.