To dislike "Radical Feminism"

[InternetPerson]

I've got nothing against feminists that fight for womens rights and genuinely want the best the best for everyone and don't hate anyone, but "RadFems" tend to be full of bitterness and hatred. And I'm not just talking about kids, these are high profile, intelligent women with power and influence. Do you think it's unreasonable to dislike something where most people think men are inherantly evil and to be feared? Or do you think their hatred is fair and we should respect them for their good work in trying to make humans hate eath other even more?

Like, I said, I have nothing against Feminism, it's done a lot of great work down the years and still does, but "Rad Fem" and "Feminism" are too completly different things in my opinion. Is this a wrong conclusion?

AIBU?

It took an inspirational lecturer at university to make me realise that I was a feminist and it took MN to make me realise that I am a Radical Feminist.

I think my confusion prior to this is that fundamentally I am a nice person and I want everyone to be able to live happy, peaceful lives. I hadn't fully understood that in some cases it is impossible for everyone to be comfortable due to a massive difference in outlook on whether gender is innate or imposed. I believe it is the latter, so while I don't wish anyone harm who believes the former, I won't actively support it.

I also understand the exclusion from particular groups. If a person who is not a member of that group is present, even if silent to listen / learn, then the dialogue is altered and not as free as it would be.

Rad is more pointing out the systematic inequality that renders choice pretty meaningless.

But I think the other factor is the radical feminist's need for group action on this. It's not possible for the changes that radical feminists believe need to be made without a complete reordering of society. Not everyone will like that. However, it's far easier for liberal feminists to achieve their aims within the current structures and crucially, it's easier for any single woman to believe that her particular life is equal so she doesn't need feminism.

So women remain as individuals trying to have a similar life to men's. Some will succeed, typically the rich, white ones. And when some women can have this life, the impetus for all women to tackle the inequalities that affect all women is seriously diluted by a discussion about individual merit, hard work, victim mentality and all that other tiresome bilge that you can read any day of the week on CIF.

Spot on, abbie. And it's precisely that goal - total restructuring from the ground up - that makes it radical. And I need to go out, so please excuse brevity.

I think there have been points in history when there were deliberate conspiracies to disadvantage women, for example when women were fired from jobs en masse after the war, when various oppressive laws were passed. Those points reflect the cultural ethos of the times and reinforce them. There have been powerful women-hating men throughout history who have deliberately taken steps to further the oppression of women. The Ascent of Women programme was very good on that issue (although overall a bit too libfem for me).

Look at the programmes for any radical feminist conferences. A wide range of subjects are covered. The major one being male violence against women, in its many forms.

From what you guys are writing, it sounds like Radical Feminism is very much opposed to equal rights for Trans-gender people. Or at very least, RadFems are often in great conflict with the Rights-for-Transgender movement.

No it is not correct that radfems oppose equal rights for trans people. Most radfems support laws against discrimination against trans people in the workplace, housing etc.

Nooka wrote above (echoed by a dozen+ other statements on this thread I won't also quote):

The transgender movement embraces and endorses gender while radical feminism rejects it as oppressive. Of course there will be conflict.

DD is going thru a pushy transgender-activist phase at the moment, at least I now understand a bit more from this thread what we end up arguing about.

" it sounds like Radical Feminism is very much opposed to equal rights for Trans-gender people "

far from it. I just don't like transwomen attempting to tell me what being a woman is like, when they were men til they were adults.
Equal rights for everyone though.

Nobody is a woman until adulthood, though.

Girls become women. Girlhood is the formative stage of womanhood.

Trans rights = not a problem for radfems, as long as trans rights don't come at the expense of women's rights.

If "equal rights for trans* people" in practice means "biological women must give up their right to self identify and congregate together" then that's not really equality for all, is it? It's biological women (the class whose status feminism is all about) being told to shut up and move over.

That does remind me of how feminism is viewed by a lot of people: a movement aiming to prioritise women's rights at the expense of others' (whether those others be men or trans* or martians or whatever). But that's not an accurate assessment. Feminism focuses on women because they're at the shitty end of the gender hierarchy, but its ultimate aim isn't "women's rights above all else". It's "equal rights for women (and everyone else)." If we're still being expected to budge up and let others define us to suit their own purposes, then equality is impossible.

Sometimes transwomen seem to be an extension of the drag queen who mocked women.

<a class="break-all" href="http://www.google.co.uk/imgres?imgurl=www.nndb.com/people/198/000113856/jan-morris.jpg&imgrefurl=www.nndb.com/people/198/000113856/&h=231&w=210&tbnid=HHN3A15Va5FftM:&tbnh=184&tbnw=167&usg=__oInDMfWarHa1bzHlxNJcz_17Igs=&docid=qUGst2coEA9z0M&itg=1" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">www.google.co.uk/imgres?imgurl=www.nndb.com/people/198/000113856/jan-morris.jpg&imgrefurl=www.nndb.com/people/198/000113856/&h=231&w=210&tbnid=HHN3A15Va5FftM:&tbnh=184&tbnw=167&usg=__oInDMfWarHa1bzHlxNJcz_17Igs=&docid=qUGst2coEA9z0M&itg=1

I realise I've come very late to this thread. I am a feminist and certainly more radical than liberal in the sense that I an gender-critical.
I am absolutely in favour of equal rights for trans people. They should have all the same legal rights and the same respect as anyone else. I would never dream of calling a trans woman "he". I think that they should have the right to access woman-only spaces in most cases.
I don't believe that gender is innate though and whilst I would never initiate a conversation about gender identity with a trans person I think a debate could get quite heated if the topic came up with a trans-activist. I absolutely reject the idea that there is an innate female gender identity. IMO the innate differences between boys and girls are their sex organs... Everything else is just socialisation. Many trans people think that you can "feel like" a woman. As someone born biologically female I don't "feel like" a woman and if suddenly being a woman depends on what gender you feel like on the inside then suddenly I'm not a woman anymore. I think some radical feminists become so aggressive over the trans issue because they feel defensive... As if the definition of woman is being redefined in a way that excludes them. Likewise some trans women feel that radical feminists' idea of gender identity as entirely down to socialisation rather than innate gender excludes them from the definition of woman. The debate can get heated, it is possible for it to be respectful on both sides, but it will only be solved by agreeing to disagree. The two sides won't reach a compromise position and join together because their central beliefs about gender are fundamentally opposed.

Equal rights for everyone, regardless of sex. That is the very foundation of feminism. It is disingenuous to suggest that feminism or radical feminism is against equal rights for transwomen. That is simply not true.

The problem with trans agenda is that it wants to redefine womanhood, and in doing so, muddle and erase not only our identity and what makes us women (our shared biology and life experience) but also prevent us from doing something about the problems and injustices women face everywhere in the world.

According to the prevalent trans doctrine of the day, we can't call FGM, child marriages, even death during childbirth "women's issues" since they are as much women as we are and these things don't happen to them. So we are excluding them from womanhood by bringing light to such issues that oppress women around the world and causing them terrible hurt. Vagina isn't a female organ and penis isn't a male organ, because people with either can be a woman because they think they are. As such, biology doesn't matter and all dictionaries defining "woman" as "adult human female" are wrong.

If you don't buy into all of the above 1984-style Doublespeak, you are transphobic, not much different than a Nazi-era racist because you are directly responsible for the deaths of transwomen.

I am not even a radical feminist. My views are far more aligned with liberal feminism - e.g. I see nothing wrong with prostitution as long as the woman is a willing participant rather than a victim.

Before waking up to this whole trans issue on MN threads such as this, I probably wouldn't even have called myself much of a feminist. It has properly incensed me that a very small minority of males are trying to compromise and dominate women's safe spaces, organisations, and institutions, redefining what it is to be a woman although they have little idea about our shared experiences and struggles.

What is more, we are expected to shut up and put up. MN is one of the few places on the internet where these issues can be raised and discussed. On most forums, you will get deleted and banned for siding with the dictionary definition of "woman", which is "adult human female".

I am not a rad fem but I am not OK with any of the above.

Lweji, didnt you go one further on this thread to actually liken "Radfems" to something with nazi in it . My point exactly that this is the way you will be portrayed and not on. Im a woman therefore a feminist. I dont need radical/nazi sounding groups to make matters worse.

Im a woman therefore a feminist

No, you can be a woman and be anti-female in your thoughts, beliefs and actions.

Being "female" is nothing to do with being a feminist.

Lweji, didnt you go one further on this thread to actually liken "Radfems" to something with nazi in it

No, I made a joke mainly at the expense of the DM that using radical wasn't enough to use next to feminist to scare people. Feminazi was the most recent moniker.

I am a woman therefore "I" am a feminist.

I was stating what I am.

I do not need radical anything.