Has anyone else just discovered that they are a RadFem?

Fascinating thread.

I’ve never really thought about defining what kind of feminist I am. I suppose most of us don’t really fit neatly into one box in terms of the views we have on different issues.

But the one objection I have is that our opinion on the trans debate should dictate what type of feminist we are. Obviously it’s a key debate atm. But if we define ourselves according to the trans debate, arguably that could imply that we are defining ourselves in relation to men (if that’s what you believe trans women are).

If I’m a radfem it’s because of my position on various key issues and not just the trans debate.

Can someone tell me what kind of feminist I am?!
-believe that trans is ultimately societial gender stereotypes being medically enforced. Women and men should feel free to express and dress whatever they want and love whoever they want but are still male if they have a male body and female is they have a female body.

• Am against prostitution and porn (except the written kind)

• think it’s suspicious how all well paid jobs are in traditionally male exploits and poorly paid jobs are traditionally female. Think it’s a disgrace that mums who would like to spend more time with their babies are forced into going back to work or lose their jobs, that career gaps are often career suicide and

What does that make me?

Fascinating thread. One of the things about feminism that I absolutely love, and love saying, is that it is about women and for women.

I intend to catch up on the thread later, but I'm sure I will find it fascinating!

I think of myself as a patriarchy-dismantling liberal feminist... liberal in that the way I think I can best contribute to that dismantling is through working within the current system to push legislative changes that promote women to a place of parity, and recentre the effects of those structures to redress the balance in favour of women and others disadvantaged by the patriarchy; so I'm an intersectional feminist too.

That's not to say I don't perform class analyses - I don't think that's the preserve of radical feminists - I just think the solution is not to tear down the existing structures, mostly because I think there isn't a cat in hell's chance of that happening, so it's labouring for a hopeless cause!

Regarding "about women, for women", to me I want the net effect of my efforts to be to the advantage of women. But when I look at the overall picture there are many ways that the patriarchy is more easily influenced by men - I mean of course it is - they built the bloody thing. So part of my feminism is to undertake to oblige men to fix their own problems, problems that affect them too (because men also suffer under the patriarchy), and that if they can't or won't do that I will bloody well make them; and if I can't make them I will help them. I know that's anathema to some feminists, but to me if women win I'm going there.

So if a radical restructuring won't happen, and the men currently have the lion's share of the power, I have to take a holistic approach to dismantling the patriarchy; because it's here, but I want it to crumble for the good of the women it fails to serve.

Yes RedToothBrush, the same kind of MO of the TRAs has pervaded all areas of politics. It's the individualistic, extremist, dogmatic positions of everyone from Trump to Corbyn.

No-one wants to have a conversation, they just want a soap box.

I wouldn't describe myself as rad fem tbh.

Just anti-bullshit.

I'm just so tired of political bull shit. Its everywhere.

Fascinating thread. One of the things about feminism that I absolutely love, and love saying, is that it is about women and for women.

There's just no comeback. I've had conversations with men I've encountered that start in with the 'but what about...?'

It's very satisfying to say nope...just women. Only women. For women. The end.

There is a purity to it that appeals to me.

I acquired late onset feminism. After a lifetime of recognising the dots, but just failing to connect them. The framework into which they slotted was tantalisingly out of my reach.

Then I discovered feminism and they positively hurtled into place, instantly, one after the other.

I think many women have the same experience. Which is why they suddenly feel as though they have been blind all this time. Misogyny hides in plain sight.

Then of course the female penises, cotton ceilings, AGP, and violent threats turned me into a radfem overnight.

The knowledge that this kind of, what I thought was underground, movement and opinion was thriving, and not just in the trans-ideology, made it perfectly obvious that the entire system is, if not rotten, then in dire need of an overhaul.

A phenomenon that I've noticed more and more is that almost any women who object to the trans-ideology then become instant feminists.

As a pp said, it's almost as though TRAs have managed, overnight, to comprehensively demonstrate to women why they need feminism, far more effectively than feminists have been able to do in decades.

I wonder if this will be recognised in future history lessons.

Re infertility/IVF It was work by Janice Raymond (women as wombs) that got my attention: janiceraymond.com/women-as-wombs/
It's possible she's at an extreme end though - I need to read much more about this.

And it does seem a bit daft to embrace everything that liberal feminism does in the way of "sex positivity" just because you can't see a way of destroying the patriarchy. Neither can I, realistically. That make me a pragmatic radical feminist.

Dione
I think you probably are a bit rad fem because at least you admit there is patriarchy in the first place.

Lots of liberal feminists don't actually think a patriarchy exists but women just need "more encouraging".

"But radical feminism seems to say being involved IVF etc at all is unfeminist" I haven't heard this either-and I can't think why that would be. Have you got a reference?

But radical feminism seems to say being involved IVF etc at all is unfeminist

I haven't come across this pov, is this true?

I understand the view that surrogacy is very bad, but assisted reproduction and ivf etc is fine in rad fem circles unless I missed something.

Not MC, privileged or cossetted, I am a WC, middle aged liberal feminist. I can't get on board with dismantling the patriarchy as I have not yet heard a meaningful way of doing it. I will continue being a pragmatic, libfem.

I used to think I was a liberal feminist, but just a rather bad/hypocritical one. For example I thought I believed that prostitution/porn were OK provided that the woman chose this lifestyle but could not understand how/why a woman would choose this freely so assumed that I was a prude and blaming women that I could not identify with. I used to think that there are now systems in place so that women can be as successful as men in business if they choose to so women must just not be as single minded/ambitious or just were more likely than men to choose to prioritise children (including myself, so obviously I was a bad feminist by not fully modelling to my daughter what women can achieve). I used to think I was broad minded and welcoming to anyone regardless or sexuality ir gender but felt bad about the discomfort I felt about the idea of men with penises in changing rooms with teenage girls.

Since reading this board I have realised that I am actually a radfem and that maybe my initial assumption that I was what society told me was more socially acceptable, but just not very good at it, was part of the conditioning I've been subject to.

This forum has hugely changed the way I view sex and gender, it's like the scales fell from my eyes and I can't unsee it now. Damn you all

That said I'm not sure I could be a radfem because I'm on the fence about assisted reproductive technologies. I know firsthand that the systems around ART reinforce the patriarchy and my experiences on the receiving end have actually made me more radical in my opinions. But radical feminism seems to say being involved IVF etc at all is unfeminist - I can see an argument for this but if my alternative is to be childless I struggle with that hugely. Is it unfeminist for other women to want to have children? But then I'd struggle to be a wishy washy libfem too!

thank you DJLippy that makes alot of sense.

Having recently had my eyes opened to what is going on, and, through reading, realised my views are in line with those of radical feminists, I'm now looking for more information and to find groups where I can talk to people I can learn from. Is anyone able to point me in the right direction?

Groups that try to cover too much ground generally aren't very effective. Feminism is about women, and "woman" as a group is already half the world's population. That's more than enough to be getting on with.

i understand supporting womens rights but i also would still want to support the rights of all humans and that inevitably includes men

Feminism is about women. Including men is like saying All Lives Matter in reaction to the Black Lives Matter movement. You can't fight for the rights of a particular group if you can't exclude people from that group. Excluding men from feminism doesn't mean that you don't like men, you just don't think that they should be involved in the power structures of a female liberation movement. It would be like a white person taking a role as a BAME officer. What could I possibly know about being black as a white person - it wouldn't be appropriate. I think many feminists here support men in other ways - through the Labour Party for instance or in other causes but this movement is for women.

I only very recently realised I am a radical feminist, although it’s more that I didn’t know what the label was than that my thinking has changed much.

Lived most of my life as a liberal feminist, again without the label, until maternity discrimination and bringing a baby girl into this world brought into focus the deeply ingrained misogyny we are surrounded by. Bumping noses with a few handmaidens also helped.

I also owe a huge thanks to many posters on these boards who have written so elequently about feminism. You’ve made feminist discussion and critical thinking accessible.

Juells, 'gender studies' was the trojan horse slipped in to replace 'women's studies'. Suddenly, instead of you know, focusing on WOMEN, it was a rainbow collection of all humans, which morphed into 'cis women' being the devil incarnate or something. Welcome back, 1650, let me add some sticks to the good old fashioned witchburning.

Yes, and I would like to thank my favourite trainee, Adrian, for that.

much love to all.

Radical feminism has at its core the belief that the structure of society needs to be changed for women to be completely liberated (shorthand Smash the Patriarchy ) - liberal feminism believes that enough change can be made within the current system. Interestingly, in the long term a radical feminist approach would give more choice and a better life for many men, in particular disadvantaged men. However, liberal feminism is better for men in the short term, in particular privileged men, who can continue to say that, for example, they would spend more time with their children if it wasn't for work, the family court or their evil ex wife....

I'm ashamed to say that until recently I didn't understand what gender was. Because I have a type of dyslexia I don't read much, so whenever I saw references to 'gender studies' I thought it meant people studying 'what makes women different to men?' - absolutely the wrong end of the stick 😨

It's much easier to understand things when the explanations/opinions are introduced gradually in discussions, as happens here. I would never be able to research anything myself, my brain wanders off into the distance when I try to read academic studies, and it's difficult to admit to... not only being ignorant, but not being able to do anything about it because of lack of brain power 😜

Opheliah thank you, you’ve explained it really well.

as i understand it, radfems would rather that make up, dresses, soft speaking etc is not associated with a gender, as those things dont make you a woman. are these men still judged the same as trans men? or are they “accepted”? are non-binaries accepted? or looked at the same as trans men

You keep asking what is accepted, who is supported, who is judged, etc.
You need to understand (most) radical feminists do not believe in gender at all, they invest in women.

Gender is appearance. It's your personality. It's society's expectation. It's socially constructed to keep people of each sex constrained into patterns of behaviour and appearance. It's a performance. An illusion.

Non-binaries as you call them are basically everyone on the planet who rejects syereotypes, which is what feminists have been aiming for for generations. You don't need to give it a special label in a manifestation of the gender illusion.

No one is "judged" or excluded or included or unsupported or supported on the basis of their belief in gender. Radical feminists look at females, analyses females, asks what is going on with females, and basically couldn't care less about what anyone wears, what anyone feels, what anyone says until men start saying they are women. Then there's a big problem.
Women are women. Your sex is your sex. Feminism focuses on women.