Can we talk about liberal feminism?

[BertrandRussell]

Can I say what liberal feminism means to me, then can others tell me whether I am understanding it properly?
My understanding is that liberal feminists believe

1. There are no-or very few structural or societal barriers in the way of women's progress. There were, but since the passing of equality legistation they have been almost-if not completely removed
2. That any choice a woman makes is by definition a feminist choice.
3. That women hold the keys of their own empowerment in their own hands- they have nothing to fear but fear itself, to coin a phrase- and realising this is the touchstone to progress.

Is that broadly it? Or am I madly wide of the mark......

"I CAN'T SEE HER REVULVA!

The magic of childhood!

'Real' women Ratrolypoly? Could you expand on what that means please (having never thought about a lot of what is being said I'm learning a lot - thanks everyone).

There was a case at a university where the supposed solution based on a tranformative justice framework to a male student having raped a female student was for him to turn up on her doorstep unannounced with a cake.

She was not happy to see him, and did not want the cake. Many rape victims do not particularly want to engage further with their rapist and would rather never see the bastard again, and I do not like the pressure I've seen from people advocating that framework for them to continue engaging as part of the process.

Don't they call that anti-carceral feminism and a collaboration with state apparatus? And it all ends up like that Comrade Delta SWP debacle.

I don't mean it as an exclusionary term Bowed, merely to encompass any and all perspectives of women in society as it currently stands. So right now, literally, the actual however many millions of women there are across the globe (but more specifically in the UK I suppose, regarding the "waking up" I refer to) - those women - inclusive of the full spectrum of outlooks and beliefs.

Isn't it interesting that the anti-carceral stuff ends up focusing so heavily on not sending rapists to jail as opposed to, say, drug dealers, or people who committed armed robbery? There was an essay specifically about how a commitment to the principle would mean letting rapists out of jail that had that unmistakable man pissing on women's legs and daring us to point out that it's not just raining feel to it.

Bowed if you're new to this, most of us will occasionally use "real" woman to mean woman, i.e. biological female with female reproductive system (which may, or may not, function as she would like it to - that's not the point). It is safe to say on the basis of past threads that whatever rat means by "real" she does not mean it in this way.

Isn't it interesting that the anti-carceral stuff ends up focusing so heavily on not sending rapists to jail as opposed to, say, drug dealers, or people who committed armed robbery?

Not a coinkidink!

Yes indeed, Angry - the essays I've seen on "carceral feminism" (along with the ones about white middle class feminsm, terfs, swerfs, etc) have a distinct flavour of "how dare you want men to face the consequences of their actions?" to them.

Coupled with the fact that given the number of men actually convicted of and imprisoned for rape (the first by no means guaranteeing the second) compared to the number of rapes actually committed, to suggest that feminists are somehow driving an institutional power structure which results in vast swathes of the male population being imprisoned is a tad... implausible.

If we let all the convicted rapists out of prison we'd still have...rather a lot of prisoners, actually.

She was not happy to see him, and did not want the cake.

Poor woman. A cake ffs.

I can see, if you were the parent of a son, you would hope that one "misunderstanding" in their teens - a dreadful, unforgivable lapse in judgement, but a mistake nonethless - wouldn't ruin every aspect of their lives forever. However, that is not the victim's problem. They had no choice about their part in a scenario that could ruin their lives forever, too.

It is up to the rapist to come to terms with what he did, be a better person, never do a thing like that again, see out his jail term (haha, we know how likely that is!) - not be pandered to, made to feel brave for facing facts or excused in any way.

And it is up to parents (I so often see "mothers" used here ) to instill a respect for others, a concept of bodily autonomy etc, but it is up to men (individually and as a class) to fill gaps in their knowledge and distance themselves from rape culture at every level.

I really don't get why you are being like this kittens. Because you know I specifically said that holding men accountable was something we could all agree on. I said because I know it to be true.

Evidence the claim please. That is not an unreasonable request, given that you are accusing me of being so egregiously offensive.

And I suspect that for the people who get so angry about the “handmaiden” word , it is a case of the truth hurting.

I have seen the same argument used against women who take offence at the word Slut. Many feminists including radical fems have a problem with gendered insults. It hardly means that they are all sluts and handmaidens.

Following up the initial weird comment about what you think radfems believe with the one about "holding men accountable" through a transformative justice that many of us feel doesn't hold them accountable at all didn't actually help soften the initial statement, Lunar.

I posted the quote, you can scroll back and read it if you've forgotten what you wrote, other people pulled out the exact same quote that I did so I'm not sure why you're fixated on my doing so.

Moving on now!

Hairy, apologies there is something I could have been a little clearer on, which is that I do not think for one minute we as a society are anywhere close to the point where transformative justice is possible, let alone where men are collectively prepared to take responsibility. My point was more to underline that the onus is on men collectively to take responsibility.

Because I do a lot of reading and discussion around prison abolition, I used that term without defining it [as something that could exist potentially.

Absolutely agree with you about re-offending. In any discussion about how we as a society deal with sexual violence of any form, we have to acknowledge that.

@ Sweetheart

The thing is that evidence doesn't support the "he made a mistake" idea. The Lisak study that someone referenced upthread illustrated very clearly that rapists are highly calculated in their actions and there's no mistake involved. I can see why a parent would want to believe that their child could never do such a thing, but rapists aren't all orphans so sadly they're someone's children.

It takes us right back to the old "unpopular popular perception" some have of feminism;

Slut = a word coined by men to keep women in their place = bad

Handmaiden = a word coined by women to keep women in their place = yeah, that's alright actually, sometimes it's totally warranted and if you don't like it do what I say stop propping up the patriarchy

I'm sure there must be other whole threads about this, surely.

I have seen the same argument used against women who take offence at the word Slut.

I think the equivalents of "handmaiden" are "TERF" and "SWERF" not "slut".

I wouldn't use any of them at another woman.

That's good to hear Lang, do you call out other posters when they do?

I don't like TERF or SWERF as slurs either but I have only ever seen them used in their "appropriated" context

Slut is a gendered slur in part because the exact same behavior in a man would be seen as either morally neutral or an achievement. I'm not sure there is a male counterpart to the term handmaiden that's seen differently when a man does the same thing.

It's not a great analogy, is what I'm saying.

Of course we are moving on - you're the one that made the baseless accusation, so I happy for you to be the one who decides when the conversation is over.

That's good to hear Lang, do you call out other posters when they do?

I block people who keep doing it on social media.

Here, in a forum context, I probably wouldn't bother because it would end up derailing discussions in one-on-one bunfights.

There is no "appropriated" (whatever that means) context to use tribal slurs designed to other people not in your personal tribe.

That's fair Lang

All I mean by "appropriated" is when people adopt a slur and use it to describe themselves; they appropriate the term for their own use.

I wouldn't find it acceptable for someone to call someone else a TERF as a slur, but I have only ever seen it used on here by posters about themselves, or about each other but in collusion - never as a derogatory term.

Still not sure why you're fixating on me in particular out of the various people who took issue with your comment Lunar, but maybe try to be a bit less creepy about it.

Lunar I also read your comment the same way as Angry

Even with the additional statement about both groups wanting men to have to face justice etc, I can't see another way of reading "radfems have wholly bought into the idea that men are utterly incapable of making any choices once his body reacts in certain ways" which isn't that you think radfems don't hold men accountable.

If you didn't mean it to come across then it looks like a miscommunication and it's best to move on, maybe with slightly more careful consideration of the way we phrase things.