When (and why) did what used to be known as Feminism become labelled Radical Feminism?

[RulersMakeBadLovers]

A very incisive feminist pointed this out to me the other day.

S'all very interesting (MN should have a chin-stroking emoticon)

How could I want to live in a society that didn't care about half of its members?

Daly said ' "I don't think about men. I really don't care about them.'

I am going to say something contentious here, so I may as well just say it. I like men. So no I don't want to live in a women only space.

I hate the power dynamics within the society and the world in which we live. I hate the fact that women in Africa watch their children die and the fact that young men in the uk are leaving school with no hope of a decent future. The two concerns to me are of equal importance and they are interrelated.

' it's very odd to hear about male violence and dominance being replaced by somethign apparently worse'

Not worse, different.

'If past behaviour is the best predictor of future behaviour then women as a class are not violent nor politically dominating'

Women for the most part have not been free to make choices like that, having been oppressed. Past behaviour has been shaped by the circumstances and opportunities available to them. It is hard to predict what a society run by women would look like, or the choices that it would make as there are so many variables.

Or maybe young women just don't matter that much I purposfully said young men, rather than young women.

They are interrelated because both are caused by the injustices of political and economic policy.

I don't want a society run by women. I want a world where everyone is equal and treated with respect, has the same life chances, the same access to drinking water, food, warmth, shelter, the same safety and security not to live in fear of violence or starvation or death. I would like to see women treated as fully human but for that to happen men would have to be too. I have read some Daly in relation to the family when I was studying social work, very glad we we didn't have to read all of it

And in your heart, you are absolutely sure that any society formed once the patriarchy has been dismantled won't create

'a political system that tyrannises over certain groups, punishing them for their existence and making their lives impossible, all the while exploiting them and stealing from them'

That is the point that I'm not so certain about.

I want a world where there's no violence. No bloody wars, no mass killing of people, no use of violence to control other people, no fear of other human beings.

I am not ignoring young women, as well you already know that I am making the point that "patriarchy" or capitalism and our current form of democracy is not good for men either. The sooner we can raise their consciousness of these issues the sooner we can break down the power that is limiting all creativity and at the moment all arguments against the status quo.

I agree with you about male supremacy dittany but if in our final analysis we conclude that it is only driven by basic biological differences what hope have we got of overcoming it. The only way of neutering male power would be to literally neuter men.

women lash out and hit more often than men, this is a fact. men do more damage of course, i wouldnt argue that, but yes women do it to when it comes to violence dittany, of course they do. one ex of mine was a violent fruitcake, i was glad to get rid of her before i got a blackeye or bruised balls so dont talk about male violence as though women are all soo sweet and nice.

oppression and tyranny are based on male violence. If you want to show me how those can be replicated without the use of male violence

because that can not be replicated. It is male violence. That can be agreed surely. However, if we allow men to seethe on the boundaries of society without any actual change to their way of thinking, we would be in a situation of perpetual revolution, actually not unlike now.

I think Ethel's point is very clear:

"I'm a radical lesbian feminist. Men are fairly irrelevant to me. I don't see why that's the same as a whole society not caring about them."

I don't see anyone saying that women are going to be in charge of men or someway 'running society' in any scenario. I think if I understand correctly that the aim is to get rid of male dominance over women, and replace it with a society in which you don't have one group dominating another, and NOT replace it with female dominance over men.

Violence and the threat of violence is the ultimate tool of the oppressor. No matter if it is domestic violence (male and female) or world violence. Fear of violence keeps the oppressed oppressed.

People are afraid to speak up and resist because of the fear of violence.

I would hope to see a society in which people would co-operate together in groups based on where they live and/or their re/productive work that would include no doubt some single sex groups of all women or all men and some mixed sex groups, then those groups co-operating at a wider geographical level using direct democracy, spokespeople, etc etc.

And state violence, enimmead - remembering that states keep a monopoly on so-called 'legitimate' violence.