DiscussionExtreme Homophobia on Ovarit (the norm)

submitted by stunaep from self.LGBDropTheT

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

view the rest of the comments →

[–]reluctant_commenter 11 insightful - 1 fun11 insightful - 0 fun12 insightful - 1 fun -  (8 children)

I'm disgusted but not surprised.

The most popular comment on the second link:

And radfems are against marriage anyway, as a patriarchal institution, for people of any sexual orientation. Gay people could have worked with radfems to abolish marriage and make civil unions the norm for all. But that's not what the gay lobby fought for. They made their goals straight people's goals, just like some women make their goals men's goals. We default the class of people with structural power instead of impacting the status quo and fighting for meaningful change, fighting for "equality" instead of "liberation".

What privileged straight people. LGB people deserve the same rights as any other human beings. If a straight radfem doesn't want to exercise her right to get legally married to someone she loves, that's her choice. I should be able to have the option, as a homosexual woman, to exercise that same choice. If you want to have a conversation about whether I should get married AFTER I have the option to, cool. But it is manipulative as hell that some straight radfem leaders wanted to use our disadvantaged position as a group lacking rights as leverage to strong-arm us into advocating for their ideological aims.

Straight radfems, ask yourselves this: Do you want LGB people to help you abolish marriage because they genuinely agree that marriage is bad? Or do you just want us to do your heavy lifting for you, regardless of the reality that some of us hold different beliefs than you? If the latter... I encourage you to do some reflecting. You're no better than the TRAs if you just want to use LGB people as your ideology's meatshield.

[–]xanditAGAB (Assigned Gay at Birth) 10 insightful - 9 fun10 insightful - 8 fun11 insightful - 9 fun -  (0 children)

And radfems are against marriage anyway, as a patriarchal institution, for people of any sexual orientation.

I never got this argument, if two guys are married to each other, do they take turns being the one oppressed by the patriarchy? Or two lesbians? Is the one with the shortest hair the patriarch? This was also the reason alot of the "Queer" Identified lgb gave to be against gay marriage, it must have bled over from the radfems.

Gay people could have worked with radfems to abolish marriage and make civil unions the norm for all.

Does this erase the patriarchy? Your still making a thing like marriage but calling it a union.

[–]julesburm1891 9 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 0 fun10 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Gay people could have worked with radfems to abolish marriage and make civil unions the norm for all.

I’ve also heard this argument posited by conservatives with it being framed as “well I just think the government needs to get out of marriage.” Frankly, I’m confused by the argument on either side. You’re legally binding two people and their finances together regardless of what you call it. This really just sounds like an argument for people who can’t stand the thought of gays getting married or think they’re too cool for school.

[–][deleted] 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Wrong link friend :) Here's the (ugly) permalink: https://ovarit.com/o/Radfemmery/83074/i-hope-we-all-acknowledge-this-here-3/7a3a880f-b2b5-4ad5-8483-15288861d688#comment-7a3a880f-b2b5-4ad5-8483-15288861d688

I agree with you about the subtle homophobia in this. It starts out phrased and couched in LGB terminology, but it's very much using RF talking points to be homophobic. This user doesn't care what LGB needs are, and is not our ally.

Gay people had no reason to work with RadFems because, among other things, we weren't fighting AGAINST marriage. We were fighting FOR THE ABILITY TO MARRY, what everyone else has the freedom and legal recognition to do.

the framing of surrogacy as a gay rights issue

Surrogacy is 100% a RadFem issue to abolish. No one else cares. If a woman wants to get pregnant, that is her choice. If a woman gets pregnant and wants to have that child for a couple who cannot conceive, her choice. If she gets paid for it, her choice. If she does it out of the goodness of her heart, or because she wanted the child and later realized that was wrong and adopts it out, or because she was subjected to terrible rapey circumstances and is being paid for her silence ... her choice. She has the womb, she makes the decision.

This is a prime example of why RadFems can be our sisters, but we are not the same, and why LGBDropTheT is not a RadFem/GC sub. We have some commonalities, but our needs and goals are different.

[–]SilverWolf 4 insightful - 5 fun4 insightful - 4 fun5 insightful - 5 fun -  (0 children)

If a woman wants to get pregnant, that is her choice. If a woman gets pregnant and wants to have that child for a couple who cannot conceive, her choice. If she gets paid for it, her choice. If she does it out of the goodness of her heart, or because she wanted the child and later realized that was wrong and adopts it out, or because she was subjected to terrible rapey circumstances and is being paid for her silence ... her choice.

Ironically, these people seem to be very anti-choice. No choice to get married, no choice to be a surrogate. Wouldn't surprise me if they didn't want women to have the choice to get an abortion, seems like abortions would be required by them because "being a mother gives in to the patriarchy" or some bullshit like that

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

Oh, I was just linking to the overall thread, but thank you! :)

I agree with you about the subtle homophobia in this.

I'm relieved to hear that lol. I worry a lot that in our eagerness to escape one group of oppressors, TRAs, we're running headlong into the arms of another. I know our sub is focused on a bigger threat than radical feminism currently poses to LGB people, but homophobia is homophobia, and it needs to be called out. And I agree with your assessment of radfems' different objectives regarding gay marriage and surrogacy.

I see a lot of LGB detransitioners dive into GC/radfem groups after they detransition... and it makes me really worried. Those detransitioners are people who have already been preyed upon by one cult-like ideology... I worry that they lack the self-esteem and boundary-setting capabilities, such that if they encounter radfem homophobia, they'll just accept it as normal and lose even more self-esteem. I say this, having almost been one of those people myself... that near-miss type of experience has put me on edge about any similar type of ideology. And radical feminism has some pretty significant similarities to transgender ideology. That's sort of where I'm coming from, if that makes sense.

[–]MarkJeffersonTight defenses and we draw the line 4 insightful - 3 fun4 insightful - 2 fun5 insightful - 3 fun -  (1 child)

They made their goals straight people's goals

This comment sounds like some genderist's interpretation of heteronormality. Basically: You should only have the lifestyle I want to have. No, don't get married. Don't start a family. Those are straight people goals. Eventually it'll be- No, don't create a business. Don't own a house. Those are straight people goals. Embrace your servitude queerness by being a lifelong activist for our ideological aims. You don't need marriage rights, money and property. They're just patriarchal institutions of oppression. You'd be a traitor to us and not a true gay if you don't donate everything you own to our causes and have to live on the street like some drifter. But at least you would've embraced your destiny as a token minority by rejecting those terrible hetero-themed life goals.

[–]reluctant_commenter 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

But at least you would've embraced your destiny as a token minority by rejecting those terrible hetero-themed life goals.

Lol omg you're so right, hahaha. You know, I swear, I knew LGBTQ-identified people (not same sex attracted people) in college who legit had this mentality.

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

(Also, I've posted before about radical feminists' homophobia here and here.)