Why I think men (gay & heterosexual) avoid the important task of standing with women against TRAs

submitted by pacmanla from self.LGBDropTheT

sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]millicentfawcett 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

I never signed up to the original r/GC subreddit because I found it a bit hardcore despite broadly agreeing with a fair bit that was posted there. I struggle a bit with the radfem identity (sorry that word again!) and have questioned whether it really fits who I am. I suppose I use it because I'm part of a real life radfem group and nobody in the group resembles rabid man haters - we are mostly straight, married/partnered women with a smattering of lesbian couples and singles. A couple of women are bisexual. Many of us are mothers which I think is one of the main bonding factors.

I lean towards radfem politics because I believe that oppression of women does stem from our different biology to men and societies reaction to that. I tend to part ways with it at separatist/world without men stuff. I have plenty of issues with men as a class but individually there's many I'm very fond of. I also think fathers are important and I wouldn't have wanted to raise my (male) children without their father, although I recognise not everyone has that choice. A lot of radfems would consider this to be a bit of a conservative position which it perhaps is but it's how I feel based on my own life experience.

Anyway TLDR, I use radfem as shorthand for my closest beliefs because I'm definitely not libfem but it's still not a perfect fit.

I think OP if you were to mix with the many women trying to tackle this in real life as opposed to just online you'd just find a bunch of rather ordinary women.

[–]SeahorseLTHarold, they're lesbians! 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Not to be mean or anything but isn't the term radical feminism? Why is everyone expecting it to be something that doesn't cause an uproar? If it's not, it wouldn't be radical, would it? The problem I have is that a lot of people are calling themselves radfems when they are not, and I do not get why that is. Why would you want to use a label you wouldn't feel comfortable with because it's maybe too radical after all? That's the whole point. You can still be critical of this gender ideology and critical of a lot of things, but I don't think saying biology is real and needs to be defended is a radical stance. It's fairly benign and harmless.

I'm a lesbian, not a rad fem. But if these radfems want to think and talk about female separatism, they absolutely should! It's a really radical idea, so more power to them. I realize I am not as radical in my ideas, or my feminism, so I do not call myself such. And I would think that especially seeing how the LGB is being whittled down by "queer" people - often just straight people with a twist - and everybody and anybody identifying into a group because it sounds cool, that we would not make the same mistake and just realize that radical feminism is, by definition, radical and as such will not feel comfortable or even be remotely the right fit for the vast majority of women. There is no need to "apologize" for the radical aspects - "I know many radfems, but they are not these radical ones saying females could live without males!" - why do you feel the need to classify it into "good radical feminism" and "bad radical feminism" and only the takes that aren't radical at all get a good badge?

This reminds me a lot of "I'm NOT like those other girls, see? I'm cool, I don't have these silly/radical/mean thoughts".

You do not have to be radical to be a feminist. I posit you have to be female, but that's another story. And the rad fems? Well, they are an interesting bunch and some of them are really insufferable. It's their right, too.

It shouldn't become a label where people flee into just because they're also gender critical or something like that - or because they're afraid that "liberal feminism" makes people look like stupid "handmaidens". You say you have "conservative" views - I'd just call them views that aren't very radical. If you find these views best describe your life experience, that's great. There's nothing wrong with liking a (male) father around children while growing up, and you know it. Yet you keep trying to strike a balance there where there isn't a need to. I think a lot of it has to do with shame, because "conservative" = bad, and if you're one way, you're a "prude", or not political enough. Seriously though: it's your life. So live it like you want to, 'cause it's not a competition about your personal politics.

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

You seem to use the 'radical' in rad fem in the dictionary sense of extreme ideology. My understanding is that that the radical part of rad fem stems from the term root - as in the root of female oppression is our biology and nothing to do with extreme or fringe thinking. That's why I say it's the closest fit for my politics and it's the definition my rad fem group is constructed from.

I don't mind that other women want to discuss or focus on separatist ideas. It's just not my thing and I don't get much of a sense of it being a prominent part of UK based rad fem politics although it's quite a mainstream view amongst men (and other women) that it is, hence my reply to the OP. Although if the OP isn't from the UK it's maybe a useless reply and I'm probably shortsightedly being too UK centric.

I've noticed cultural differences between UK and US rad fem politics. I think maybe a lot of US based women approach it from different interpretations to mine which is why as a label it works okay for me in a real life setting but less so online where there doesn't seem to be universal agreement on what radical feminism is or should be.

I've considered whether material feminist would be a better term because until the recent spate of identity politics the left wing here was very much focused on class based politics which is more inline with my thinking and the left wing activism of my youth. I'm not very keen on the term gender critical feminist because it feels a bit too narrow a definition for me to want to use it regularly.