Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

What counts as radical in the context of politics, not just feminism?

85 replies

DeviTheGaelet · 11/01/2017 14:39

This morning I heard Jeremy Corbyn's plan to introduce legislation to ensure bosses pay was capped at x20 the lowest paid in the company described as "radical".
A few days ago on a thread about what do radical feminists want to achieve I said i thought that use it or lose it paternity leave legislation would be a radical change to improve equality of the semester. But got told this isn't radical because it's using legislation to enforce a change.
Now I'm confused about what radical change actually is? Did the reporter use radical as a word for "a big change" rather than as a change targeting the root of pay inequality?
Can radical change be enacted through existing legal frameworks? Or by definition does this mean it isn't radical?
I'm confused Confused
I would really appreciate it if we didn't derail into "rad fems are mean" please!

OP posts:
venusinscorpio · 13/01/2017 19:51

You're not making any sort of point, you're wilfully misreading what people are saying. It's tedious and irritating in the extreme and I think you're being goady.

qwerty232 · 13/01/2017 20:09

Patriarchy does not permit those equalities Ophelia.

Going to get accused of mansplaining feminism here, but I answered because I was asked.

I would say, from what I understand, that patriarchy does not allow those equalities by dehumanising women in two principal respects. Firstly, it defines them as the fairer sex. The fairer sex are programmed by God or nature to be compassionate, peaceable, nurturing and passive. As well as primarily existing to produce and care for children, the fairer sex embody a sacred progenitive energy (The Sacred Feminine; The Earth Mother). But they're not just mothers, they're also objects of romantic infatuation, placed on pedestals and sought as prizes by men who are partly bestial. All men are born with a violent libidinal energy that is only countervailed by their desire for the spiritual purity represented by the sacred Madonna. As for the Madonna, she has no libidinal energy, violent or otherwise; she has no rationality so cannot do great deeds; she has no capacity for evil, so cannot do evil ones. She is nothing but voiceless passivity, purity and virtue. The man hates this virtue because he can never attain it, tormented as he is by his evil lusts - lusts which he directs at the Madonna's counterpart: the whore.

While the Madonna, is pure passive virtue, the whore is passive vice. She is pure viscera, dirt, death. An object onto which male sexual hatred can be projected.

All of this is obviously wrong. Women are not born meek, passive and nurturing; and neither are they whores. They are human beings, and vary hugely from individual to individual. And neither are men born with all these destructive sexual neuroses. All these things are engineered - through social and economic processes.

Neither men nor women are in any innate sense different or better than one another. Indeed, as distinctions of value, male and female have as much meaning as blue-eyed and brown-eyed.

qwerty232 · 13/01/2017 20:11

Would you say people who are over 5'5 are awesome? I mean, some of them definitely are...but why would you say that?

DeviTheGaelet · 13/01/2017 20:53

I'm going to get deleted - but please fuck off. I said in the OP I didnt want a derail and your early posts were interesting. But now you are like an overexcited child at a party demanding attention. Go away - the adults are talking

OP posts:
qwerty232 · 13/01/2017 21:34

Ok, I'm obviously really aggravating people. I'll leave you to it.

Beachcomber · 13/01/2017 21:37

Not really helping here with what radicalism is but rather about what it is for or about.

This is with regards to radical feminism. IMO one important thing radicalism does is say the unsayable.

By that I mean that radicals will shine on a light on taboos, they will point out the elephant in the room and be uncompromising in saying things that make people really uncomfortable.

HelenDenver · 13/01/2017 22:25

True re discomfort, beach.

girlwiththeflaxenhair · 13/01/2017 22:26

Has there been any political change in the last 50 years that is genuinely radical?

I would say that privatisation was a fairly radical change.

Beachcomber · 14/01/2017 11:47

One of my favourite pieces of radical feminist writing is Right Wing Women by Dworkin.

I remember the first time I read it by blown away by its brilliance but also its radicalism. I think I understood what radical feminism was for the first time. I couldn't believe that she was saying such things (and had managed to get them published).

Oppression is untruthful. It involves telling people lies about themselves and firm discouragement from examining those untruths. The oppressive perspective is the only perspective.

Radicalism calls bullshit on the lies and does so by inhabiting a different perspective. IMO.

And that is what makes it radical - the insistence of using its own perspective in a pursuit of thinking freely about things.

And when you do that you talk plainly and uncompromisingly about really bad and shocking things in order to name them for what they really are. And you make connections because you are looking at a whole picture from a place of disobedience and resistance to a social order.

Beachcomber · 14/01/2017 11:49

Being blown away by...

Sorry for typo

New posts on this thread. Refresh page