DiscussionWhat does Gender Critical mean?

submitted by PeakingPeachEaterfemale♀ | detrans🦎 | eater of peaches 🍑 from self.LGBDropTheT

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

view the rest of the comments →

[–]GoValidateYourselfuseful lesbian 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

It's not a problem, and questions are cool! I personally feel it is possible for trans-identified people to be gendercritical. In fact, Miranda Yardley and Buck Angel are aa transwoman and a transman, respectively, who acknowledge the reality of biological sex, and that sexual orientation is based on sex. I don't know if that is gendercritical so much as common sense, but we shouldn't take allies for granted, as they are being brave in speaking out. I think some people (for many different reasons) will feel more comfortable dressing/presenting as highly feminine or masculine according to society's current standards. Whether it's dysphoria, or simple nonconformity it doesn't really matter. If they acknowledge the reality of sex, the fact that it's immutable, and that it impacts women very harshly, I'd consider them a gendercritical feminist. But again, I am quite mellow.

I don't know about different levels of gendercritical, but there are different levels of radical feminism. Most are pretty chill, but some are very bitter, like the women at r/blackpillfeminism. I don't even know if they are radical feminists at all, but they are cynical as fuck, and I consider people like that to be emotional vampires, ideology irrelevant.

I am not super well-versed on the different types of feminism, but I know liberal feminism is the pretty, bow on top commodified form of feminism, that they use in marketing. It doesn't make anyone uncomfortable, and it doesn't really challenge anything. It's more about "girl power", "yaaas queen", "I'm with her", very shallow platitudes. It also is very corporate, in my opinion. All focused on upper class women breaking the glass ceiling, representation of strong women on TV (which is important, don't get me wrong), but it isn't as important as women's DV shelters, ending FGM and banning the burqa, guaranteeing abortion at all terms (even late term). The last 3 issues particularly make a lot of people extraordinarily uncomfortable, but they all represent life or death issues for vast numbers of women and girls. None of those are sexy or fun, but they are possibly the most important feminist issues today.

I can't speak really on eco and marxist feminism, b/c I don't know much about them. I think any type of feminism where people work together for women's rights (like the above 3 issues) can work together just fine, as long as they keep the bigger picture in mind, and put aside disagreements. I am fine with calling myself a gendercritical feminist.

That's okay! You don't have to call yourself or identify as anything. It's what you do, and how you treat others that matters.

[–]lovelyspearmintLesbeing a lesbian 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

I think the only reason burqas haven't had a widespread ban is because some women would then never be able to leave their houses due to the pressure of their husbands/community, despite living in a western country. Authorities wouldn't be able to make sure that these women were leaving their homes and honestly wouldn't care anyway.

[–]GoValidateYourselfuseful lesbian 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Authorities wouldn't be able to make sure that these women were leaving their homes

Social services exists for reasons like this, to check up on vulnerable community members, to check on the safety of the home. Services exist for this purpose. The problem is that social services is likely afraid of retaliation from some communities, or physical danger to the social workers. The police who know abuse is happening (not letting someone leave the house is false imprisonment btw) need to crack down on these practices. If every person is equal under the law, then the law needs to be enforced equally. No religious exceptions. I think a lot of them are afraid of being called "racist" or "Islamophobic" if they crack down on that practice, b/c the left (and libfems) would rather defend a warlike, misogynistic religion than the women it harms. What I mean is that if there was widespread social pressure to change the norms with regard to how those women were treated, the change could happen. But it won't happen if activists are largely ignoring or passively supporting it under the idea of "religious freedom". Rightwing activists care more about stupid conspiracy theories, and the leftwing activists care more about not offending anyone, and being politically correct when issues like women's rights and minority religious "rights" clash. Hence why no grassroots movement has emerged to genuinely stand for the rights of minority women from persecution from their own communities. The women themselves usually can't start this movement, b/c they get fatwas (look at Ayan Hirsi Ali, or Malala).