DiscussionDo you agree with gender critical feminism?

submitted by ukrdude10 from self.LGBDropTheT

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

view the rest of the comments →

[–]BEB 16 insightful - 1 fun16 insightful - 0 fun17 insightful - 1 fun -  (7 children)

I think you're thinking of radical feminists.

Most GC feminists, or rather GC people, because gender critical has become a Big mixed-sex Tent, are just normal, non-dogmatic, people, now from across the political spectrum.

GCers believe that biological sex is dimorphic and immutable (hardly a controversial position about five minutes ago) but that people should be free to behave/dress/ appear as they wish, regardless of gender stereotypes.

GC people also acknowledge that women and men have different life experiences based on their biological sex and based on how societies treat them because of their biological sex.

Also that, because of men's propensity to stick their penises into vaginas whether invited or not, and females are the sex that can be forced to reproduce, women need protection in certain circumstances, including in spaces where they are naked or otherwise vulnerable. Common sense, really.

And many GC women aren't scared of trans-identified males per se: we are scared of any male, because there is a very significant chance that we've been raped or sexually assaulted, even in countries where women appear to have close to equal rights.

So we just don't want men, ANY man, around when we or our children, are vulnerable. Again, common sense.

Read JK Rowling's statement on her site - IMO she explains GC feminism correctly, and I don't even know if she considers herself a GC feminist.

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

Completely agree with you here. I don't mind if a man was to wear a dress or wear makeup or behave in a feminine way, so long as he acknowledges that none of that makes him a woman or any less of a man. Same goes for women who are masculine or wear men's clothing.

[–]PatsyStoneMaverique 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

We're looking at the same thing through different lenses.

[–]BEB 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

At least half of the "liberal" GC feminists I know are heterosexual women, many in happy relationships with men and most with children. The rest are lesbians, but most don't seem to be man-haters, per se.

And there's a huge contingent of GC feminists who are conservatives; they don't tend to call themselves "feminists" but they're out there on the front lines, using their law degrees, etc., fighting the good fight against gender ideology.

For example, very conservative, Abigail Shrier, has probably done more for GC feminism than any other American women of the last ten years (not because others didn't try).

Most of the GC feminists on s/GenderGritical seem to be not particularly liberal. I would say s/GenderCritical actually leans centrist/slightly conservative politically.

The GC feminists on Ovarit.com seem to be more liberal, but again, the majority seem to be un-radical, heterosexual women, many with children.

The GC movement also now has a hell of a lot of men, including gay men, and now "Progressive" Super Straight men, so there's that.

Bottom line is that I don't see why a gay man who believes that society should allow him to be a healthy, happy gay man and not try to make him into a facsimile of a woman wouldn't support GC thought.

[–]PatsyStoneMaverique 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

Things must have moved on from the last time I checked in with r/gendercritical a couple of years ago. Radical feminists were very much running the show and were the heart of all of the ideas being discussed and promoted there.

If believing you can't change your sex, but also believing gender non-conforming behavior shouldn't be punished qualifies as gender critical feminism then I suppose I'm a feminist now. There used to be a lot of baggage that went with that.

[–]BEB 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

I think that the GC movement has changed a lot even in the time that I've been reading about it, which is about five years.

I would say that in the US, gender critical is now a movement of homosexuals, both male and female, and homosexual-friendly heterosexuals, from across the political spectrum, many of whom do not consider themselves feminists. I feel that its basic intent is to:

  • stop the transing of children, many of whom are gay

  • protect the sex-based rights of women and gay men

  • protect the sex-segregated spaces of women and often children

  • protect women's sports

  • protect free speech

  • protect parents' rights to choose the best medical care for their children

  • protect the science of biology

In the US, there are still rad fems involved - for instance, WoLF (the Women's Liberation Front) is still doing a lot of the heavy lifting in terms of court cases. But even WoLF doesn't seem that hard-edged now. I could have sworn that you used to have to be a Marxist to join WoLF but I don't know if that's the case anymore.

But many of the posters on this sub and on s/GenderCritical I would say lean centrist or conservative, given their comments in the run up to the US election last year.

Ovarit seems to be more liberal and you might still get a rad fem vibe from the posters there. But the gender critical movement is being flooded by normies - as evidenced by the explosion of Super Straight.

So I think, while rad fems deserve a tremendous amount of credit and thanks for sounding the alarm and for taking an incredible amount of vitriol from trans activists, including death threats and job loss, they are no longer the only ones moving gender critical thought into the public mind.

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

Where did all the radfems go?

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

Good question.

I think in the UK there are still some fierce sisters - there's a contingent of them who seem to consider themselves very Left, who constantly take US feminists to task for "allying" with the Right.

These UK feminists' notion of "allying" seems to mean US feminists teaming with conservatives only on issues of concern, such as the transitioning of minors, and saving women's sports & spaces.

Oddly enough, some of those UK uber-Lefty, Marxist-type feminists use preferred pronouns and are willing to compromise more on gender identity policies than the US feminists who the UK feminists claim are "allying" with the Right. Go figure.

I remember r/GenderCritical being way more rad fem than s/GenderCritical is now. s/GenderCritical is a very tolerant space in which posters often express conservative political viewpoints. TBH, I prefer s/GenderCritical to r/GenderCritical because I felt the latter was sometimes too dogmatic.

I think that the moderators on Ovarit are more rad fem and more hard-assed, but even on Ovarit there seems to be posters who are not very Left, or Left at all.

So yeah, I'm sure that there are rad fems out there still hard-lining, but I think that the battle against the gender ideologists to retain just basic human and civil rights for women has kind of made many rad fems focus on the immediate danger and if/when that is over, maybe they'll get back to Marx and striking the roots of patriarchy.