Is there a place in radical feminism for women who are married to men?

[Namechangeforagamechange]

Just that really. I consider radfem views as most closely aligning with my own, but I am married with 2 children. After being subjected to the most hideous pile on in a radfem Facebook group about relationships with men, I'm left feeling a bit disillusioned.

I'm not libfem in any way, shape or form. So where do I go?

I'll admit I'm feeling a little sensitive atm, I chose to share traumatic experiences I haven't talked about for a long time and it's left me exhausted. I was accused of manipulating behaviour because I said dredging up those feelings had made me cry. I honestly cannot see how explaining that speaking about my own experiences has upset me is manipulating, but then a lot of what I said was taken out of context and twisted.

I will never feel comfortable in a 'Feminist' space where it's OK to tear down a woman when she is talking about past trauma. So where is MY place in feminism? Please, be kind.

I'll admit, I did my first flounce. Never done it before, hope to never have to do it again. But I was exhausted trying to justify my life choices, and defend myslef after being accused of being manipulative! I know, I shouldn't have bothered. I knew that with every comment I wrote. And usually I don't, but something about it really got to me. I know there are extremist views all over social media, and there are argumentative types everywhere. I should have known better.

I do not think extreme views of any ilk are healthy - and red is correct to use the word authoritarian. I would not feel comfortable in the situation you describe.

While my experience of men in relationships is almost wholly negative, I do believe that there are good men (and I hope my DS will be one of them). I also believe that patriarchy as a structure is damaging for men - and something that men have to negotiate just as much as women, albeit from a position of privilege.

I also agree with the poster who said pregnancy and children make women vulnerable, but I do not think this is a reason to erode reproductive difference or pretend it does not exist (I know PP did not say that).

Notch it down to experience and forget it.
Great post rolywatts

I tend to stick to here and Twitter (yes, I know Twitter is awful). The reason being that neither place enables the more extreme feminist views. I had left here and was using another site for a while, and was genuinely surprised by all the tensions between different factions.

What place is this ?

Aside from my husband, my experience of men has been largely negative too.
I'll only share this because I've NC, but both my children are the product of rape. I was in a coercive, abusive relationship from the age of 14 with a man who was 18. My entire sexual history from the age of 14 through to 24 was characterised by coercion and control. I didn't know that wasn't how its supposed to be, because in the beginning I was a child. And it took me a long, long time to mend. I'm still not fully OK, but I know now that healthy sexual relationships with men are possible because I am in one.

When I said that my husband cried when I finally opened up to him about it, I was told that was a red flag and he was making my pain about him. Maybe I'm naive, but I took that as empathy.

I've been a member of quite a few radfem groups in facebook, mainly usa based but with British women as well.

There is a contingent who believe as you say that women who involve themselves with men in any way are traitors or something.

Also a contingent who seem to really hate kids.

Obviously there are conversations around all this but I have seen some nasty bullying rather than discussion.

Please try to ignore. And not be upset. I can inagine what happened, not good.

I don't know if this applies in your case OP, but as I understand it radfem groups are having an influx of members at the moment. If this goes any way towards explaining what happened?

All gender critical former lib/non denom feminists are being told over and over that they are TERFs (and therefore radfem) and are kind of accepting it as a label without understanding (sorry this sounds really patronising, I honestly don't mean it in that way) what to expect in a group that discusses radfem analysis.

This leads to a lot of women being offended by the discussions that take place, because there is a disparity between radical feminists and 'TERFS' (acronym only used to show difference between two groups!) of how discussion takes place in a radfem space.

I do not have any words for what you have just said that will not sound trite. It is very brave.

Even though you have put it out there, it is not something I would feel comfortable debating at any length. I think precisely how your husband reacted is immaterial as long as you felt and feel supported with him.

I don’t know if this is really about marriage so much as that bringing individual experience to bear disrupts the clear lines of class analysis.

I will fall back on what others have said - which is do not let this make you angry or belittle you. Breathe deeply and breathe it out and move on.

*your marriage

Happily married radfem here. I shave my legs and armpits too, I even wear makeup sometimes!
We don't all conform to the extreme ideologies that some insist on.
Some of the FB groups are more friendly than others.

They sound like they're building a wall round the patriarchy rather than trying to tear it down.

From my POV the patriarchy affects children of both sexes. Boys/ men are taught to have shit emotional literacy. This can translate to depression for them but also feeds into their mistreatment of women obviously. Obs this is generalising.

It is hard, women are vulnerable in relationships when they have children.

Destroy patriarchy isn't destroying males.

*Destroying the patriarchy isn't about destroying males.

I don't think this is about an influx of new people. There have always been some radfems that take the view you mention.

It's really mostly about them and their personal issues. Some are really just misanthropes, and that's the form it takes, they dislike men, and women that have anything to do with men, and that's almost everyone which works out well for them.

I wouldn't worry too much about the labels though. Whatever anyone says, feminism and radical feminism both encompass a fair diversity of views, or there is no necessity to call yourself a feminist at all if you don't want to.

I also question the concept of women being “owned” and transferred by fathers from one family group to another. Before contraception obviously any sexual activity could potentially result in pregnancy. We all acknowledge that some men can be abusive in various ways. I have found when looking at traditions where families have suggested various marriage matches to their children, it is a way for families to pre-screen potential partners for their daughters, to know about the man and his family and therefore avoid as much as possible an abusive husband. (I am NOT referring to coerced marriage where the partners have no choice and cannot refuse a partner). Of course this system can be abused like any other, but these type of marriages have been found to have higher rates of happiness and success than those when we all go out and meet our “love” matches down the pub or wherever.

The idea that all traditions were about abusing and oppressing women and there was no wisdom involved I find difficult. Also the concept that throughout history parents have only seen their daughters as economic units and not human beings pretty offensive. It’s all theoretical and there seems to be a good chance that just as we see in modern cultures with arranged marriages, they are trying to make sure that they avoid abusive men and find a responsible man who will take good care of their daughter. Nowadays women are completely in their own when attempting to pre-screen a man they are interested in.

For you OP

It’s very hard not to get emotional about topics and things close to our hearts. Likely most discussions in a group like that are from a class analysis position, which can feel like there’s no room for the reality, which is that not every male is literally like that. There is a difference from doing a NAMALT in a conversation about an entire class, which is sooo annoying, to actually pointing out to someone who is insisting quite literally every single male is the same, that that can’t possibly be true... but good luck trying to get people to get context or subtle differences like that when you’re all worked up and missing each other’s point.

Also, I’m definitely not libfem but I am also not a radical feminist either. You don’t have to be part of a tribe. Just do you.

Namechangeforagamechange I hope you feel you’re amongst friends here. . VoiceofReason me too :-/

I don't think I really call myself a Feminist anyway, although I hold strong Feminist views. Also not sure why my phone chooses to capitalise Feminist every time, but not feminism?!

I suppose I initially felt I belonged in the group because my views were similar. But the anti-men and everyone who has anything to do with them rhetoric has really ramped up in the last few months. I've been a member of the group for well over a year, so it's not really a recent thing, and I've never been led to believe I'm radfem because I'm a T*RF (using the word to illustrate the point). It was a conclusion I came to by myself, although I was feeling a bit lost and disillusioned at the time so perhaps I wanted to feel like I belonged somewhere. I'd recently moved house and knew nobody, and I think the loneliness I was feeling made me search for some kind of real-life replacement. The fact that I can see that now is helping. I have always been one of those people who feels like I need to belong, but this has been a bit of a wake up call.

I have to say, since this board has grown so massively in the last couple of years (largely due to being one of the only places were GC views are allowed) it has become a lot more friendly and 'reasonable' for want of a better word.

I used to find it quite intimidating and academic and some of the views quite extreme (similar to what you describe). But I guess it has now opened up to so many more people, people who don't necessarily see themselves as 'feminist' first and foremost, a lot of that has been tempered.

All gender critical former lib/non denom feminists are being told over and over that they are TERFs (and therefore radfem) and are kind of accepting it as a label without understanding (sorry this sounds really patronising, I honestly don't mean it in that way) what to expect in a group that discusses radfem analysis.

This leads to a lot of women being offended by the discussions that take place, because there is a disparity between radical feminists and 'TERFS' (acronym only used to show difference between two groups!) of how discussion takes place in a radfem space.

I think this is a great point from beyond.
Class analysis is a great thing, but it can be difficult to hear sometimes when something is very personal to you, especially if you are not used to hearing a certain type of discussion.

And I think there are also "extremists". In all groups (I am a bit wary to use that word as I know some people think radical feminism means extremist type feminism and I would completely disagree with that. I just can't think of a better word). I don't call myself a radical feminist, I don't even call myself a feminist really - though I would if directly asked I think. Yet my own views naturally seem to align with that of radical feminism and there are several radical feminists who I have a deep respect for. I am happy to just be a person who has certain opinions and I don't feel a name is needed for it. I guess it's kind of like identity politics in a way, and I'm no fan of that.

Your husband cried when he heard what you'd gone through and those women criticised him for it?
Jesus fucking Christ, you're better off out of that place.

deydo it seemed to me that whatever I said was going to be dismantled and criticised.

I do get that in a group where class analysis is the main theme, personal experiences are always going to be difficult. But this post specifically asked if a healthy relationship with a man was possible, and if that isn't inviting personal experience, I don't know what is! But to then be told this isn't a place for 'not my nigel' confused me.

I'm sad that I felt I had to leave the group, because there was genuinely a lot of discussion on there that I found insightful. But ultimately, it wasn't the right place for me. I feel like that about Facebook as a whole most of the time, but annoyingly it's also massively helpful when you live in a rural village and you want to let the local farmer know his cows have escaped again, or when there's a power cut and you need to coordinate who's making the tea on their gas hob

I think many of the original radical feminists were heterosexual. Andrea Dworkin for one. And Shulamith Firestone. And Gail Dines who is well respected as a campaigner against pornograhpy is / was in a relationship with a man and has a son. www.culturereframed.org/

Radical feminism was about recognised the power imbalance between the male and female sexes, and in the past women would say for instance, they were a radical feminist socialist (WPUK?), or a lesbian radical feminist or a radical feminist separatist. Radical feminism was about practicing your feminism ie being able to find what you had in commone with other women.

More recently radical feminism or RadFems have much more in common with what was called Revolutionary Feminism which was much more separatist in its analysis, and more importantly felt the need to let any other sort of feminist know they were wrong!

I think the facebook experience is much more about group dynamics, which can all too often go wrong. And unfortunately keyboard feminism where you can sit and endlessly theorise but never have to put into practice your feminism allows some women to think their ultra purist ideas have as much validity as someones lived experience.

Sometimes groups just go wrong. It can happen IRL groups but the difference is saying directly to another woman's face is far more likely to be tempered by seeing and acknowledging her. In a social media bubble you aren't actually faced with the reality that you are abusing another woman.

RadFem groups on facebook seem to stir up strong emotions and dare I suggest a sort of competitive feminism which can come over as not very sisterly. ie feeling really badly done by that so many women are ready to support WPUK's more liberal feminism, when you feel you originated (own) the analysis about trans activism.

Are the type of discussion you had Namechange not ones you can have on mumsnet?

I know someone has started a thread to try and widen the range of feminist issues.

Maybe you could start one!

OP You deserved a better teenhood than that.

They were saying that if you're attracted to men, you should only have casual sex. How the fuck is that safer for a woman than being in a consensual relationship?

50% of rapes are by a current or former partner and 80% by someone you know. So only ever shagging strangers is safer than serial monogamy. Counter-intuitive, but true. A third of men think it's not rape if they don't stop if asked once sex has begun. I think back to all the times sex with long-term partners has hurt and I haven't said stop, and been made ill by it, and I realise that it was because I didn't want to have them prove to me that they didn't regard "stop" as a valid option, because then I'd face the heartbreak of LTB. In a one night stand, I don't care about losing him and so I have said and will say "stop, you're hurting me" and will use force to resist if he doesn't. By contrast, women seldom punch or kick those they love.

Sex with men puts my health at risk, and arguably it does for most women. Who takes contraception that quadruples her risk of stroke? She does. Who gets post-coital cystitis? She does. Morning after pill? Abortion? All her problem, whilst some men won't even wear a condom without complaining.

If you consider everything I've just said, it's no surprise that some women take the separatist option, in fact I'm rapidly heading that way myself. The problem is that separatism isn't the magic bullet to end patriarchy. Separatism is a partial escape from patriarchy for individual women (much as transitioning to become a transman is) and won't work for woman as a class. First, if we all refused to have sex with men and have kids, men would force us to, either at a grassroots level through abduction and rape (as seen in India where there is a shortage of women) or by getting the govt to do it for them (as seen in Romania with Decree 770, which is what govts do if they perceive a shortfall in births). Second, most women don't want to be separatist, many want kids (remind me where I'm posting again?) and kids in moderation are needed to perpetuate the species.

I would argue that radical feminism needs to centre the needs of mothers, because they can't just go the separatist route, they have kids in tow. The separatists are already in a position of relative safety, we've reduced our rape risk by half and minimised our chances of DV by having no male partner. The women who have kids and live with men need us to fight their corner. Raising children shouldn't be life-threatening, yet many male abusers turn violent for the first time during their victim's pregnancy. We need to look at the roots (this is where "radical" comes from, "radix" meaning "root", we look at root causes not symptoms) of male violence and destroy it. Separatism treats the symptoms of patriarchy for some women but it doesn't get to the root of it for all of us.

In my opinion, honestly, no. I believe marriage is the height of patriarchy. I’m bisexual but I resent the fact I’m attracted to men. I wish I was a 100% lesbian because while some individual males are alright, men as a class are responsible for pretty much everything that’s wrong with the world. The concept of tradition and social expectation is largely arrangements that subjugate women. Until parenting is viewed as 100% equal task (and I don’t even want children) and society is structured not just to benefit men, I don’t believe it’s possible to have a truly equal relationship with a man.