#and i think you need to be gc to be a radfem

[radfem-polls]

what do you think about TIRFs (trans inclusive radical feminists)?

if they support actual radfem ideals then they are radfems (TERF or TIRF doesnt matter because trans discourse is a trivial part of radical feminism)

it depends on how they are trans inclusive

making distinctions between TERF or TIRF is pointless, a radfem is a radfem

no, supporting the trans ideology cannot be accepted as radical feminism

im bald

Thank you for your submission!

I hope you don't mind that I may slightly tweak the options to be more clear/specific.

Key:

TIRF - Trans Inclusive Radical Feminist

TERF - Trans Exclusive Radical Feminist

GC - Gender critical

fi TIRF - female inclusive TIRF (inclusive of trans identified females; may refer to them as trans men, female nonbinary, transmasculine etc; may use desired pronouns)

mi TIRF - male inclusive TIRF (inclusive of trans identified males; may refer to them as trans women, male nonbinary, transfeminine etc; may use desired pronouns; usually also inclusive of trans identified females)

[fabfem12]

While we are on the Imane Khlief, here are four lessons I have learnt:

I will stop using the terms AFAB and AMAB unless it has to do with male/female people with DSDs because I have noticed that we have co-opted these terms in the gender discourse, and we have totally forgotten that these terms are sex-specific. AFAB is a term used to describe MALE people whose sex was wrongly observed at birth. It is not a FEMALE exclusive term, female people are not AFAB. We are not Intersex/have DSDs; we, like other TRA, should stop co-opting DSD-specific language. It is really mudding the waters.

Either the Olympics is male and female or male and female (female and male DSDs). This essentially means that the female category is mixed sex forever; if it is the latter you want, you need to state that clearly. This is not to say that all male people with DSDs should not be treated with some level of accommodation; it is just saying that in this ONE facet of life, you cannot eat your cake and have it. It is sad, but being in the Olympics or a professional athlete is a privilege, not a human right. And all the women screaming that these male people with DSDs have female socialisation, if there is one thing 'women' (the social role, I mean) are good at doing is compromising. This, I think, is a fair compromise.

All our anger should be directed at the IOC and demanding them to bring back DNA tests to keep women's sports XX (female), not at radfems or at Imane or Lu-Ting. All of this 'he said' (IBA) and 'she said' (IOC) nonsense could have been avoided if institutions were not hell-bent on gaslighting women into thinking we don't exist as a sex class. Please read the post by @quinntheestallion on crazy-making. It explains this phenomenon very well. Women are responding to this angrily because, for the last decade, institutions have been making it their objective to gaslight women that we don't exist as a sex class. Also, if you see women's reactions and start getting angry at GC or Radfems for being upset or for 'not being nuanced enough or neutral' or whatever you want to say from your high horse, then you are siding with these abusive institutions that are psychologically abusing women. It's really hard to be 'rational' (not angry or erratic) when confronting an abuser.

All in all, whatever comes out of this situation, best believe that when the IOC brings back sex testing to ensure fairness for women in sports, it was not because of nuance or by having a detached/neutral position. It will be because of the ruckus caused by JKR and other GC and radfem women. Radfems, please be reminded that: “Nobody in the world, nobody in history, has ever gotten their freedom by appealing to the moral sense of the people oppressing them.” So all these 'bad', 'mean' women who don't understand the 'nuances' of socialisation or whatever (even though when you are playing sports you aren't playing with someone's socialisation) are the ones that will secure your daughters and granddaughters and even great-granddaughter, the right to single-sex sports.

[lilacsupernova]

*Note: Tumblr might say reblogs have been turned off for this post. They haven't!*

(Also: I have a deeper, updated dive coming soon!)

Some commentary on the Imane Khelif & Lin Yu Ting boxing situation

I read these two as male. Nothing has indicated they are trans-identifying but the image of Imane Khelif as a child might indicate him being raised as a girl due to having a DSD. This is irrelevant to whether he should compete as a woman though. Both athletes have XY chromosomes – which if untrue they could do a simple cheek swab to prove they're women (as if they wouldn't already know from not having periods etc.). This would only need to be done once, and is less invasive than regular doping tests all athletes do! If XY chromosomes are found (as they already have been), they should do as Erik Schinegger did in 1968 and refuse to compete in the women's category anymore.

Claims this is a big conspiracy where the IBA are lying due to corruption are illogical. The claim they only disqualified Khelif and Yu Ting so they couldn't beat Russian boxers is false. While it sounds like they are corrupt due to Russian influence, and they ordered the DNA tests, the tests themselves were performed independently and showed they had XY chromosomes. Based on this info, and their women-have-XX-chromosomes policy the IBA banned them from competing in the women's category. Think about it, how bold (and stupid) would it be to falsely claim these two aren't female, given how easily that claim could be disproved?

Plus, if we're going to throw around corruption claims, how about the IOC? Who we know are happy to allow men to compete in the women's category based on their baffling and nonsensical rules (including no presumption of advantage based on sex)? Who ended sex-verification screening in 2000? Something Independent Council on Women’s Sports (ICONS) co-founder Marshi Smith has condemned, saying it allows the Yu Ting/Khelif issue to even be a thing. The IOC who decided they could compete as women based on passport sex markers? (Which we know can be legal fictions). Who previously allowed Caster Semenya - a man with a DSD, XY chromosomes and undescended testes - to compete as a woman? Who allowed Semenya, Francine Niyonsaba and Margaret Nyairera Wambui to take all three medals at the Rio 2016 women's 800m? I see far more evidence for how corruption is affecting the IOC's view in this matter than the IBA's.

I will also remind everyone (including radfems) that all because a corrupt/'bad'/bad person said something, it does not necessarily mean what they're saying is false! We know the words of radfems/GC people/anyone can be disregarded and derided because they've been branded a 'TERF', but that does not indicate the veracity of their words! The strength of their claims / arguments do. (I wish I could find that meme about a priest saying the sky is blue or something like that). I'm not telling you to believe what I'm saying because I'm saying it; do your own research, think critically, and make up your own minds based on the evidence.

The boxers in question:

Lin Yu Ting is guaranteed a bronze medal at minimum in the Women's 57kg due to making the semifinals (both boxers who lose the semis get bronze, the winners compete in the final for gold). His semi is 7 August at 9.30pm (all times Paris time) against Turkey's Esra Yildiz Kahraman, and the final will be 10 August at 9.30pm (worth watching anyway to support the women!).

Imane Khelif is also guaranteed a bronze minimum in the 66kg Women's category. He plays Janjaem Suwannapheng from Thailand on 6 August at 10.34pm. If he reaches the final, it's 9 August at 10.51pm.

What other boxers have said:

Svetlana Staneva of Bulgaria protested by refusing to shake Lu Ting's hand and making an X symbol after she was defeated by him 5-0.

Angela Carini burst into tears and refused to shake Khelif's hands after choosing to forfeit the match due the fearing for her safety due the strength of his punches. She later issued an apology, which frankly I suspect she was pressured into in order to be allowed to continue to box.

Brianda Tamara from Mexico also alluded to the strength of Khelif's blows, saying "when I fought with her I felt very out of my depth. Her blows hurt me a lot, I don’t think I had ever felt like that in my 13 years as a boxer, nor in my sparring with men. Thank God that day I got out of the ring safely, and it’s good that they finally realized."

Caitlin Parker, the Australian boxing captain says "I don't agree with [Khelif and Yu Ting] being allowed to compete in sport, especially combat sports. It can be incredibly dangerous. It's not like I haven't sparred men before. But you know it can be dangerous for combat sports and it should be seriously looked into. Yes, biologically … genetically they are going to have more advantages. I really hope the organisations get their act together so that boxing can continue to be at the Olympics. It's the oldest Olympic sport. Women's boxing was only introduced in 2012 and I want to see it for the next 100, 200 years to come." (She competes in the 75kg semifinal on 8 August at 10.02pm).

Santiago Nieva, an Australian boxing coach, and Marissa Williamson, who could have met Khelif in the 66kg category disagree. Only the male coach is quoted, however.

Hergie Bacyadan, a female Filipina boxer who identifies as a trans male (but hasn't taken testosterone) on the other hand agrees with Parker, saying through a translator "in sparring it's OK, but if they have XY chromosomes in competition, they should abide by the rules."

Former women's world champion Mária Kovács has wryly remarked that in modern women's boxing "there is a 20 percent chance that one of the athletes will suffer a testicular injury." She also discouraged Hungary's Anna Luca Hámori from competing against Khelif. Hámori posted an AI picture on Instagram of a female boxer fighting a devil and referred to Khelif as a man, for which the Algerian Olympic Committee submitted a complaint to the IOC, and forced her to delete it and apologise to Khelif. She was then defeated by Khelif 5-0 in the quarterfinal, hugging him afterwards. (Similar situation to Carini?)

What others have said:

An open letter calling for the IOC the reverse its decision to allow Yu Ting and Khelif to compete, and to reinstate sex screening has been signed by the likes of: Sharron Davies, Riley Gaines, Martina Navratrilova, Fair Play for Women, Save Women's Sport Australasia, Women's Declaration International, and more.

Dr Emma Hilton, a developmental biologist, has done research which found "a male boxer's punch is 160% more powerful than a woman's". (Unfortunately the article doesn't cite which study, and I don't have access to her articles to determine which one it is). She considers "this decision to include two men (Khelif and Yu-ting) in women's boxing to be extremely worrying, both for the safety and well-being of the female boxers against whom these two men will be competing."

Lastly, the UN's special rapporteur on violence against women and girls Reem Alsalem has said Carini "rightly followed her instincts and prioritised her physical safety, but she and other female athletes should not have been exposed to this physical and psychological violence based on their sex."

Other commentary:

Here is some commentary from IreneBritUSA, Karen Davis of You're Kidding, Right?, Aja the Empress, Marshi Smith (co-founder of ICONS), Jennifer Sieland, Anna Slatz, Dr Colin Wright (an evolutionary biologist), Meghan Murphy and Mary Lou Singleton (upcoming), and Doriane Lambelet Coleman. Note several WoC are speaking out!

[just-antithings]

I need many people to realize a strong contribution to the purity discourse in media we see among young people is due to radfems & gender criticals poisoning the water supply on sites like this one (tumblr) or other social media since 2014

Seeing teens and young 20-somethings using "porn addicted", "porn-brained", "degenerate", all unironically, those are words you find in alt-right & anti-LGBTQ+ message boards.

It wasn't JUST GCs alone, but many people have been around to see them influence a generation of kids with arguments you see today like

“X in fiction causes abuse"

“x is fetishization"

"Unless you've personally gone through trauma you shouldn't write about it"

“If you HAVE gone through trauma, you can't sexually explore it"

"If you like abuse in fiction you're an abuser in real life”

Hearing kids call random (usually queer!) shippers in fandom "groomers" and "pedophiles" for ships that have been established in fandom for decades, or because of a "power imbalance" between adult characters isn't a coincidence. Hmm, I wonder what other groups use those words?

It's not solely kids alone, it is a combination of:

Online radicalization and disinformation

No spaces for kids

No internet safety/literacy

Steeping censorship in activist language,

lack of education (If you don't know red flags you can't avoid them)

COVID did NOT help

This is why ignoring it will never help, because while thankfully some people grow out of it, it usually happens to people who had some support system or breakthrough in cognitive dissonance. There are plenty of people who are becoming adults and who keep infantilizing themselves

“My brain isn't done until I'm 25, you're all predators" and they're talking to a 30 y/o

That argument is literally being used by UK government officials to block access to gender-affirming healthcare. Infantilizing adults only serves the purpose of stripping agency and rights

They're not being safe. They're not gaining skills. They're participating in a fear-fueled climate of faulty medical misinformation, keeping themselves in a perpetual childish-victim state no matter how old they get and nothing about this is healthy

How do you think a person goes through this world when they've been wholly convinced that you can tell someone is safe because they like "safe" or “wholesome" things, & people who make them uncomfortable via hobbies or interests (not IRL actions) are probably actual criminals?

[menalez]

Hi! Do you think you could explain how gender critical people can support body autonomy in cases like abortion but not transition? I know you believe that medical transition doesn't change someone's gender. But under the ideals of body autonomy, would you support a woman taking T if she still called herself a woman instead of a calling herself a trans man?

And in general, I know radfems are anti-plastic surgery, but wouldn't that too fall under one's body autonomy?

I'm just trying to figure out radfem and gc ideas but I'm running into some inconsistencies.

honestly i was a bit baffled by this ask and couldn't help but feel like its bait bc ... how is cosmetic surgery that is harming your body, incredibly expensive, and done as a result of self-hatred the same as not wanting to carry a baby & go thru the risks of pregnancy for 9 months? to me these are such blatantly, fundamentally different things. but let me assume this isn't bait and you're asking in good faith and address your points.

I know you believe that medical transition doesn't change someone's gender.

this shows a complete lack of understanding on what beliefs i even hold. i don't think medical transition "doesn't change someone's gender" i know it doesn't change a person's *SEX*. this difference is very crucial. gender = gender roles, gendered expectations, etc. it is a social construct. it has nothing to do with anything medical nor biological, its a social contruct that varies across time and cultures.

But under the ideals of body autonomy, would you support a woman taking T if she still called herself a woman instead of a calling herself a trans man?

why would i support the act of taking synthetic hormones which are actively harming your health just as long as you Identify a certain way? it doesn't matter to me what you call yourself. i'm critical of medical transition because it is costly, harmful, and rooted in questionable beliefs. i'm critical of how readily it is promoted. i am critical of how profitable it is to pharmaceutical and medical industries. i am critical of how little research is being put into ensuring the safety of it as well as research into other methods of dealing with sex dysphoria. whether you call yourself a man or a woman is the least of my concerns.

you use the term bodily autonomy, but you seem to be under the belief that bodily autonomy = a person gets to do whatever they want with their body and their choices are always above any criticism or analysis and it does not matter how much their choices are harming them or others. by that logic, if you don't support an anorexic woman starving herself or getting a liposuction, you are against her bodily autonomy because you are not allowing her full agency over her body. by that logic, if a woman tells you she wants to get a BBL or have implants put in, you need to validate and encourage that choice because to question harming your body is to oppose bodily autonomy. but that is not what bodily autonomy is. here is a definition:

Body autonomy is defined as the ability of one person to demonstrate power and agency over choices concerning their own bodies. These choices must be made without fear, threat, violence or coercion from others.

Body autonomy allows individuals the freedom to make their own choices about their bodies. This is significant to a person’s health and wellbeing.

now, if there is a group of people being told that they need to transition ASAP and being told constantly that without transition they will kill themselves, is that or is that not going to instill fear? because if i was told that i need to take an action as early as possible, lest my life be miserable and doomed, then im going to want to urgently take such an action out of fear. if parents are being told "do you prefer to have a dead daughter or a living son?" or w/e, is that not coercion and threats?

moreover, we know taking synthetic hormones for cosmetic purposes can be extremely harmful for one's health. women with high levels of testosterone naturally suffer from a lot of health consequences as a result, nevermind people who alter their body's hormones. this is fundamentally different from a woman choosing to get an abortion because a pregnancy is costly, risky, has health consequences, and will impact her entire life for at least the next 18 years of her life.

that said, i'm not blaming people who do pursue cosmetic procedures or artificial hormones and i'm not against them. i am against the industries promoting this and making it difficult to even have a conversation on this, even pushing against research that does not benefit their financial interests. i am against the promotion of cosmetic surgery as necessary, healthy, and somehow healthcare. i think that there NEEDS to be more research into medical transition, the impacts it has on health, its usefulness and helpfulness, and alternative treatments. the lack of such research and the lack of constructive conversation on this topic is where my concerns lie. not with identity politics like what someone calls themselves while harming their bodies.

so ultimately, i'm not understanding what you think is an inconsistency here. questioning profitable industries and cosmetic surgery which are modern inventions rooted in amplifying people's, namely women's, insecurities for the sake of profit is not at all the same as an abortion and it's worrying to me that you don't see the difference. providing blind affirmation to every choice an individual makes is not bodily autonomy, its individualism and liberalism to another degree. bodily autonomy is allowing individuals the right to make informed, healthy, decisions for themselves. a woman deciding she does not want to go through 9 months of pregnancy and 18 years of child-rearing is not the same as a woman deciding she hates her body and thus MUST get a boob job (which ultimately harms this person's health rather than helping), or someone deciding they hate their sex and thus MUST get surgeries to pass for a different sex (which also ultimately negatively impacts the person's health, even if it provides some psychological relief which potentially could've been gained via a different approach like therapy).

[harrypotterfuryroad]

Aright, this is extremely odd tbh. But for some reason this question grew on me recently, mostly after being brought to my attention the "peculiar" conection this 'subculture' has with trans/genderism and the modern "queer" movement online and even offline

And if you don't mind since you're a somewhat popular gc blog I wanted to make this question here.

To any radfems/"Terfs"/Gender Critical women that might see this: What's your opinion and takes on Furries?/ The furry fandom/Furryism(?

i think the fact that the "on all levels except physical i am a wolf" guy is now a tim says just about all we need on the subject but everyone else please chime in

[vouam]

Heyy! I hope it’s okay to send recommendations for anyone looking for GC/RadFem creators! -I only have one but that’s besides the point lmao-

My recent favorite has been Runawaysiren940. She updates fairly enough and covers many disturbing but necessary topics. Like her most recent video especially hits home, given the stuff that occurs here on Tumblr.

https://youtu.be/OvZLSYbZUOA?si=gqRJdBW9CT8OLs6C

Major TWs for what’s in the title is in the video, including screenshots of the vile texts from that part of Tumblr. She doesn’t censor words either, which is great because hearing it aloud makes it impossible to just not peak or at least reconsider the idea of consent in violent ‘‘sex.’

I hope this doesn’t come off as too-spammy, I swear I’m not her or know her personally, all I know is that it can be rare to find RadFem creators and that I think she deserves more recognition.

Have a good day Vouam!

Thank you for this recommendation!! I’m always looking for new radfem creators :)

I just checked out her channel and I like it a lot from what I’ve seen so far. A lot of these topics are really important and need to be talked about more!

U have a good day too anon 💖

[mitziholder]

I was watching another gc lesbian asking about how butch and femme are different than performing gender, and all the comments were like "you need to go and experience lesbian culture and hear about people's experiences and why butch and femme are important", stuff like that. To me it sounds very similar to how TRAs fight tooth and nail to defend prescribed gender roles because it's "literally their identity" and taking away their autonomy and community how they socialize based on these roles. Long standing and commonly accepted socialization roles aren't immune to criticism imo. I look forward to more dialogue about this though this is just an observation I had

yeah, it is just one part of a general trend I’ve noticed in gc/rad-adjacent spaces, which is the relatively superficial change that a lot of self-identified gc feminists undergo in Becoming GC (or “Peaking”)

you take something stupid (ignorant and uncritical appreciation of Queer and Trans History) and, with very little consideration of the underlying processes which led to that thing, you switch it out for something equally stupid (ignorant and uncritical appreciation of Feminist and Gay History)

what you have then is a group of people who are still ravenously, violently protective of the things they perceive as sacred/unimpeachable representations of their culture... only it’s radfem/gay culture instead of stonewall.

>To me it sounds very similar to how TRAs fight tooth and nail to defend prescribed gender roles because it's "literally their identity" and taking away their autonomy and community how they socialize based on these roles

obviously anyone behaving like that does not have a very strong sense of self. so, if you threaten to “take away” their cultural Script, they don’t know what to do, because merging one’s identity with a cause or culture breeds a painful amount of personal investment in how it works and how it is perceived. this results in coping via:

a) attacking anyone who criticizes it (even in the most sympathetic manner)

b) digging heels in and resolving to ignore that it is not and never has been perfect

if they do eventually wrap their heads around the fact that their idols were human beings with a mix of good and bad ideas, it has the potential to drive them completely insane... thus the so-called terf-to-trad pipeline, symptomatic of the immaturity/malleability common in people who latch on to social movements in an effort to avoid thinking for themselves.

[orkbutch]

“Shar (real name Sharon)” for the bad nun au is so fucking genius im screaming. Also, SH’s cult being full of radfems is very interesting considering that in-game she’s (or was) super supportive of one of her peers who’s a trans woman (Nocturne) so I like to think the same happened in the AU

Oh yeah, these are also like 70's radfems so their politics are antecedents to modern GC, but distinctly different! More Andrea Dworkin but also homophobic. The Sharrans in Bad Nun are basically a tiny death cult started in a catholic girls school by one charismatic alumnus. Also Shadowheart was like 13 when she was groomed into it. By 16 she was already like, "Oh, this isn't GOOD huh."

At first I considered having the Sharran equivalent be Catholicism the whole way through, but honestly, it just didn't feel true to Shadowheart's trauma in the game! Catholicism is terribly destructive, but it doesn't have the vital Thing that Shadowheart's cult experience had that informed a lot of her trauma: a small, secretive community that was able to be extremely controlling, and a focus on her being "special". As a cult survivor, I think this latter element is really important to distinguishing between general religious trauma and cult trauma.

Cults make you feel special, important - so important and special that other people outside the cult could never understand you, including your family. (Side note, SH's final scene with her parents destroyed me because I think it captured an emotional experience specific to cult survivors that I have very rarely seen captured in fiction! It was brutal!) Simultaneously they are trying to destroy every unique and important thing about who you are. That takes focused manipulation and social control that you don't get so potently from most Catholic communities, because they involve families that are still together and well rooted in their larger, non-Catholic social context. Also only a weird fucked cult leader is gonna change your name to Shadowheart.

That said, her time in the cloister as a nun is an extension of that trauma - its the period where she's still processing her trauma by reproducing what she's learned, not at Shar's whim but because this is all she knows with how to cope. At 27, after 10 years in the cloister, a few years accepting her queerness and a new group of supportive people, she finally begins to move beyond just coping.

Oh man NOCTURNE UGH I LOVE HER I NEED TO DRAW THEM TOGETHER SO BAD .... But in Bad Nun Nocturne starts as a penpal she made while in boarding school though a school letter exchange program! She had a few penpals but Nocturne is the only one she kept up with because they ended up commisterating in their letters about being queer and confused about it. By the time Shadowheart was 5+ years a nun and had started sneaking out into the queer night life, Nocturne had changed her name, moved to London and was living her sexy trans life. Shes an ex-catholic kid herself and a hot goth, which Shad immediately loved, so they're super tight and occasional fuck buddies. Nocturne kept all their letters and helps her remember shit because The Trauma has left Shad with huge memory gaps. (Side note in Bad Nun Shadowheart usually goes by Shad because its a little gnc and makes her feel her femme dykism real good. Jenevelle is basically like... the name of her inner child, who she has a non existent (but hopefully in repair!) relationship with.)

[bisolationist]

Ooookay I finally found out why I've gotten like 50 fucking messages telling me to kms since new years, and

A) Hey please don't send messages to people on my behalf, especially to wedge it into a completely unrelated argument, and double especially not to support some guy saying "misandry" is just as bad as misogyny. I think it should be pretty clear from my years around here that I do not believe or support that. If there's anything that makes me fucking angry it's my experiences with a female rapist being used as a gotcha against feminists. I'm not a fucking MRA or anti-feminist puppet and my experiences are not yours to use for your weird agendas. Also all sending weird messages about me does is encourage more deranged people to come out of the woodwork and harass me. I don't care if people talk shit about me that's their problem. At most maybe you can let ME know and see if I wanna say anything, but honestly even that gets tiresome because there's blooms where I'm apparently radblr's #1 Worst Man That Ever Lived for things I didn't even say.

B) That said, I have absolutely no idea why that person talking shit about me suddenly made it about pregnancy. *I* was the one from my very first reply to say that it's important to acknowledge physiological differences between men and women, and that things like pregnancy are HUGE factors in how traumatic an assault can be. So IDK why people are putting in words in my mouth about supposedly saying the opposite of what I've actually said? The discussion was about how OP was categorizing rape in a binary of "truly horrific, degrading, and traumatic" vs "bad but not Bad Bad, certainly NOT horrific and it's fucked up that people think it's horrific" and people jumped on to agree and add things like "rape is something that doesn't ruin a boy's life" or "I think most like it actually we need to acknowledge this <3" and increasingly vile shit like that. That goes way beyond acknowledging physiology and misogyny and steps directly into mocking rape victims and minimizing the impact of sexual assault. If me saying "actually all rape is horrific, degrading, and traumatic" and this makes you fucking livid, that's more about why YOU think raping certain people is "not that bad".

C) Super cool how people in comments in her shit are making excuses about how I'm a "Brain dead moid" and all the shit radfems have been saying to me isn't real harassment or is justified lol. I want any of these people talking shit about me to explain to me off anon why comments like this or this are so based. And that's not even the worst of it by far, there's people openly saying I'm probably the rapist, that they wish my rapist had killed me, that I'm an antifeminist for speaking about my experiences at all, and all sorts of shit. There were weeks where I had to mass delete my inbox every morning because it's just full of people telling me how I'm morally repugnant for not agreeing my rape was No Big Deal (TM). Also, all of this is frankly humiliating. You think I want to talk or think about this all the fucking time? That I want my friends on here to start thinking about me as that guy that was raped? I absolutely hate this more than I can possibly explain for that reason a lone. I also know that I'm one of the few people in a position to speak up about this and I don't think I have to let it slide as no big deal either, but it SUCKS for me.

D) On the whole I agree on a lot of radical feminist's view and am eager to stand up for them and women in general in the capacity that I can, but I'm not a fucking radfem puppet either, sorry. I don't have to pretend it isn't obvious most of the harassment is coming from radfems, and that there isn't a completely deranged rf faction that are ardent rape apologists (both against boys/men but also against girls/women - I spend 85% of my time in GC spaces speaking out against people calling bi women pornographic language when discussing them!). I don't think they're rape apologists *because* they're radfems, but rather rape apologism is something ingrained into just about every culture and people often twist ideologies to make their biases sound moral and upright. Every single ideology has this problem. Still doesn't excuse the fact that the rape apologists within radblr are coddled and defended even by people that claim not to agree with them because people view this as a sports match or something.

[radish-lesbian]

The notion in some GC circles that you can immediately tell if someone is trans just by appearance or not is… flawed and I dislike it. Certainly, some trans people are painfully obvious to everyone.

However, some trans people pass insanely well and to pretend like you would ever ID them correctly seems silly and disingenuous. On the flip side, some females (like those with hormone imbalances or detrans women) are often clocked as male. It weakens other valid arguments that radfems and GCs have.

This may be a controversial take, but I kind of think if you pass as male or female to 80+% of humans, I don’t have an issue with you using things like your preferred bathroom. There’s always going to be some variance in sex presentation, and as long as you’re there to shit and get out I don’t care. Punish individual offenders in bathrooms if they start creeping on people there.

More of my issue with female-passing trans women lies within advantages that they’ve received growing up as male and their poor socialization, e.g. getting tech scholarships and relying on female social networks without being a good listener or knowing basic empathy. I think that a social line needs to be drawn more clearly between trans women, even those who pass, and natal females.

A lot of trans women I know who pass well are still insanely misogynistic, but because they’re allowed to openly call themselves “one of the girls” in daily life and can eviscerate you for disagreeing with them, they’re protected from ever having to change their sexist views.

This is also an issue that you actually more accurately can determine natal sex in, since bathroom encounters are short and nonverbal; in daily life and repeated relationships or formal procedures, you can learn more about someone’s life (oh, you look masculine because you transitioned at 18 and are now detransitioning, etc).

Anyways, yeah, you can’t necessarily tell someone’s sex by just looking at them. This isn’t to say that I think creepy autogynephilic men should be allowed in female sex spaces, but as long as someone is being quiet and polite in the bathroom I’m really not that interested in dying on that hill.

[tra-archive]

I know you’ve already blocked sincerelyyellingback but someone asked her if she was an antivaxxer today (presumably wanting proof for the anon message you got earlier today) and she replied “hell yeah” - so not only is she ignorant, she’s proud of her ignorance. And also now she has a “both sides are the same coin” post pinned to her blog due to the criticism she’s receiving for voting trump. I’m so sick of people in this community outing themselves as the dumbest, most bigoted people alive smh.

I decided to check that out to verify. I had to use my simblr😩

1)

I never claimed she wasn’t a feminist. I asked how she could call herself a radical feminist while knowingly voting for a man who has several anti-woman positions, anti-abortion being a huge one. Do you really think Trump won’t get into office and take that choice away? If you think it’s bad now, just wait.

Also I’m sorry but you can’t claim both sides are the exact same. Both are full of misogynists, yes, but one side wants women, gay people, and POC to lose all their rights. “Repeal the 19th” is a huge thing among conservatives right now. Florida has been attempting to stop gay/bi teachers such as myself from being allowed to even mention our same-sex partners or even say the word gay to our students. Abortion bans are going to kill women and children.

Dems need to fix a lot of their priorities and there are more than enough sexist liberal men, but you can’t claim both sides are the same when one actively wants you back in the kitchen as your husband’s slave.

2)

I’m begging GCs to realize that conservatives don’t care about single-sex spaces because they care about women. Conservatives don’t even criticize trans ideology for the same reasons we do, they hate trans people because they’re homophobic and hate the idea of a feminine man or masculine woman- notice how they only care about “men in dresses” and not the inherent sexism of gender ideology. They don’t care about women getting our own safe spaces. Trump is the same one who said “grab them by the pussy,” he doesn’t care about women being and feeling safe.

Also as much as I’m against what’s going on in the Middle East and just want peace, things really won’t change with a Trump presidency. I don’t think either one of the two old fucks really cares about the innocent people being killed, if we’re being honest. Radfems are known for being anti-war so idk why she thinks we’re out here cheering on Biden for his part in the Israel/Palestine conflict.

3)

She’s trolling here, still weird though. Also a lot of people think only being against the covid vaccine is different than being “anti-vax,” but it’s the same thing. Not saying that’s what she believes but it’s what I’ve seen many say.

4)

I haven’t trashed you. You shared an opinion on a public social media platform and I shared my thoughts on that. I was not hateful towards you- I expressed my frustration with your choice to vote for Trump, but nowhere did I insult you or call for anyone to hate on you. It’s your choice to vote for who you want and it’s also my choice to talk about it.

Trust me, I know how to trash people- ask any of the TRAs who have sent me threats- and that is not what I did here. 😂

I’m so fucking tired bc it seems like every week someone on radblr shares an opinion that’s bigoted or privileged (revived-frogs being pro-forced birth, redberry being racist, etc) and then gets mad when the rest of us call it out.

Don’t post things publicly if you can’t handle it. Maybe it’s because I’m a rudefem but I won’t hesitate to call out opinions I think are hateful, and that goes for radfems too.

[butch-reidentified]

One of my best friends is a gender critical, intensely radfem-aligned, mtf transsexual. I've talked about this friend several times before on here, but I think it's time I devote a stand-alone post. As with most of my posts, it will be long in signature JC fashion, but I think the topic warrants it: my friend is a wonderful person first and foremost, but is a truly fascinating and unique example of transsexuality as well.

First, a note: I've said this before, but for anyone new to my discussions of my gc mtf friend, she has never and would never expect or ask me to use she pronouns, but it's just how my brain perceives her despite rationally knowing she's male. I have no interest in forcing myself to use sex-accurate pronouns when it doesn't come naturally, because I don't believe it really matters in this context. It matters when it comes to things like news media reporting violent crime by transwomen as committed by women, but interpersonally or in a tumblr post, I don't feel a need to firmly stick to sex-accurate pronouns when my brain naturally goes to cross-sex ones for someone.

Here's a slightly amended quote from one of my early posts about her:

These are the same type of people who drove the transwomen I love from their own spaces by shaming them for having actual sex dysphoria and not "embracing the girl dick" or whatever. Literally what happened to my best friend, and she doesn't deserve that. She's so deeply passionate about women's liberation, believes firmly in female only spaces and sports, in honoring all of women's boundaries, in the definition of homosexuality, regularly argues with our other friends that eliminating all males would objectively result in a better world (with sources lol), calls herself a transwoman only - specifically as one word, for which she has a particular definition predicated on being male - not a woman, and most interestingly, comes across as very much female socialized. And not in a remotely intentional or performative way: it negatively impacts her the same way it does me or any actual woman I know. It's wild.

This is something I'd be interested in proper research on, because according to all her lifelong friends and neighbors, she's always been this way (and has been on an anti-porn crusade since the THIRD fuckin grade). She never internalized male socialization, like at all, and somehow seems to have internalized at least the majority of female socialization. Interacting with her feels exactly like interacting with any woman, no matter the context. I've known her for 6 years or so now and that's been consistently very true. I would NEVER have guessed she wasn't raised female. She completely "passes" but doesn't wear makeup or remove body hair, wears normal clothes like just pants and a shirt, etc. She seems like such a regular woman in every way, but she's not a woman (and she won't call herself one or demand you use she pronouns... I just do because nothing else feels right tbh). Several times, friends have straight up not believed she's transsexual at first.

When I talk about her seeming female-socialized in ways that are negatively impactful, I mean things like struggling to feel like you can say no, being prone to imposter syndrome, feeling like everyone else's needs come before your own, not feeling allowed to take up space, devoting endless emotional labor to those around you even when it's 3am on a work night before a crucial 9am meeting, giving of yourself well beyond what you should... those types of things (which are only a few examples of course) are her to a T, and are things she is working to unlearn for her own wellbeing alongside other women in our friend group.

She experiences sex dysphoria the same way I've described in myself - as a seemingly neurological, very physical sensation (in the same way pain or itchiness are physical sensations), somewhat akin to Phantom Limb. I've described her "social transition" before as "an incidental byproduct of medical transition," which I still think is accurate. She transitioned medically as a last resort measure to treat physical/neurological sex dysphoria, and ended up being perceived as female. It eventually just made logistical sense to assimilate socially. She couldn't care less how others perceive her "gender" or what pronouns they use or any of that, and shares the radfem view on the definition of gender and on gender ideology.

She's in the camp of "transactivism behaves like a cult and is explicitly a men's rights movement." I remember once a couple friends asked her why she was so passionate and outraged about female erasure and lesbian erasure, and she said very simply that "the trans cult has already erased, redefined, rewritten actual transsexual people," so she understands to a small degree the feeling of it, and sees them doing the same to women and homosexuals and can't tolerate it.

Her childhood friends (nearly all female) have said they have pretty much always innately interacted with her like they would with a female friend, and never understood why. I've never had to explain anything about the female experience to her, nor known of anyone else doing so. More often, my other friends and I find ourselves explaining to her that other males absolutely don't know the things she does (regarding both the biological and social aspects) or have the awareness she does, all these things she observed as a little kid, many of which upset her deeply on behalf of her female peers.

She did go through CSA, domestic violence, a trafficking attempt, and other major traumas throughout her childhood and into young adulthood, but the people who've known her her entire life say she was already the way she is in terms of all this stuff before that.

The adults she talks about looking up to as a kid, the ones she latched onto as mentors and who shaped her, are all badass, gnc, and/or feminist women. Her number one role model as a kid was her female karate instructor who had won major competitions all over the country and was very gnc both physically and personality-wise. The memories involving these mentors that she talks about most and remembers most vividly are almost all regarding misogyny and the injustices and cruelty women and girls face.

One other interesting fact is that she's XXY and had gynecomastia and slightly more feminine than normal features such as fat distribution before transition, and her body feminized more from HRT (she only had genital surgery due to extreme intractable dysphoria; she is opposed to any other surgeries like FFS or BA since they're entirely cosmetic to her) than any transwoman I've ever met or even seen pictures of. Most TW I've known barely fit a training bra - she's a D cup. It's so odd to me that she has the seemingly-neurological sex dysphoria AND the weird femsoc thing AND her body responded much more dramatically to estradiol than any other transwoman. I'm at a loss. It drives my little scientist brain crazy.

I have my theories, but ultimately I really don't know how to explain her. I've known a whole lot of trans people, and a whole lot of transwomen in particular, and while I have certainly met a few that don't come across like Gamestop Maam/average AGP vibes, they typically seem more like gay men rather than female-socialized. Even with those who do show some femsoc-like traits, it's not remotely to the degree I see in my friend, and oftentimes it's something they clearly trained themselves into to blend in.

I know there are other gender critical transsexuals out there, but idk if there is anyone else like her. I want to know, tbh, I am really super curious about it and about how/why she is the way she is (as is she lol).

I wanted to share this more concisely since I've mentioned her in multiple reblogs and posts and answers to asks over the years, but haven't really made a post specifically about her. Feel free to ask questions! She's given me full permission to discuss her experiences and whatnot here.

[rosalesbeausderholle]

What makes you think conservative lawmakers give a shit what radical feminists think? They’re not consulting us or following our lead, they have their own agenda. it’s not the fault of a small + highly unpopular group of feminists that conservatives are… continuing to be conservative. You’re reinforcing the first rule of misogyny: “women are responsible for what men do”

I'm not saying you're solely responsible, I'm saying you're helping fuel the moral panic about it, and propping up people fuelling these moral panics.

Like, you know all those t-shirts that say "woman: adult human female" you know who made them? Posie Parker who was an actual Trump sympathizer. A big Spanish radfem organization that claims to fight against "the erasure of women" repeats QAnon "this is the fault of George Soros" antisemitic conspiracies. Radfems were on Fox News. WOLF members took money from right wing conservative organizations (and did not say a peep through their official channels when Roe was struck down). LGB Alliance also worked with conservatives. Radfems in Italy fought against the Zan law just because it would give some more protections to trans people, completely not caring about all the protections it would also give to LGBT people, in a country that's severely lacking in LGBT compared to the rest of Europe. Same thing happened last year in Japan.

For years now, there's been conservatives in online radfem/GC circles just hanging there and agreeing and repeating those points and participating.

And there was no criticism of this from the great majority of mainstream radfems and "gender critical" people (because radfems are too transphobic to care and gender criticals and these conservatives are the same people), but at some point when it's getting this big and this blatant you need to look within yourself and stop with that: "radfems are too small a group for conservatives to care what we say" because i know that helps you sleep at night, but they're still using some of your arguments to "protect women, stop erasing women" and you as a meat shield all while feeding your movement conservative points and fear mongering tactics which you are too happy to repeat because the funding and the attention is good.

And you will start to see all of this once you start trying to push against this and you're met with a brick wall of "this never happens!" you criticize liberal feminists and the trans rights movement for group think and cult like strategies but you do the same.

Like do me a favor and look over at the whole RF/GC scene on Twitter (aka the more mainstream version bc no one is on Tumblr) and just examine with a critical eye who all these people are, who they're retweeting, what they're saying and why. You'll find conservative ties after conservative ties after conservative ties.

[yugotrash]

can you elaborate why you think the "tehm" label makes no sense?

i'm a younger gen z gay who wants to make a tehm blog because i've spent the past few months lurking in gender critical spaces & have first-hand experience with the ugly sides of gender ideology. and i also empathize with the radfems.

definitely agree that all the prominent tehms on this side are disgusting, because:

1.) they're all millennials.

2.) they're all white anglo westerners.

3.) they're all porn/masturbation/grindr addicts.

4.) i get slight femphobic vibes from them. idk if it's intuition or something, but something tells me they are those toxic masc4mascs who like to shit on random gnc gays and rub their preferences in our faces. just a gut feeling.

5.) they are misogynistic as fuck.

6.) they are very selfish, insufferable and don't care about anybody but themselves. zero integrity, morals or beliefs. pathetic.

which is precisely why i want to make a blog and use the tehm label. to redefine what it means to be a tehm. they are the old generation, i am the new generation. i want to prove that we aren't all like them.

ok good morning let's do this.

first of all, "tehm", originally conceived by the gendies, makes even less sense than "terf". we're not excluding anyone, homosexuality isn't a political position.

i don't think this is a generational thing that makes the tehmmies unsavoury (to say the least), i was born in 1998 and i truly don't think the generations nursed on internet access are gonna save this for us. in general i think it's very misguided to ascribe politics to generational groups but w/e

they are not. i could easily name 4-5 members/orbiters of the tehm crowd that don't fit this description

this is true. focus on this.

i think i understand where you're coming from, but don't focus on this too much. i truly don't know or care to position myself within a masc-fem spectrum bc i don't think i (or a majority of gays) fit neatly there. plus, feminine men, while they don't deserve all the horrible shit they get, are not inherently more progressive. so many of them fall for the gender-id trap and become militant queer activists, past a point where you can attribute all responsibility to mascs who pushed them to it.

yes. focus on this

i think you'll find this is true of men in general, and has a particular intense variant in gay men.

assuming i'm at least a little bit older than you, with at least a year or two more experience in offline and online GC/LGB circles, i'd really caution you against doing something like "reclaiming the tehm label". these internet micro-identities do not serve you, they fundamentally don't matter to anyone beyond a few dozen chronically online freaks, you don't need this in your life. you don't need a blog for this cause. focus on proving you're not like them by the way you treat the women in your life and how you conduct your personal relationships with both other homosexuals and the world at large. i know it's easier and more fun to dick around on tumblr but then at least be aware of how insignificant that is if you're going down that route. if my blog got termed tomorrow the net impact on society would be zero, and this will apply to yours as well. hope some of that helps.

[lostandfem]

Hey I dont think jumping from a cult to another one will be helpful to you. You should check deeper into a more broad generalisation of life experiences instead of making your whole life about your gender again. Radical feminism isn't helpful because it doesn't take women accountable for the shit they do to other women too. Blaming males all day long won't work or do shit because we have to solve our own issues between females to live better lives. Sure men can be awful. But so are women. Radfems are also full of shit and attack peoples physical flaws at the second they have the occasion to. They don't really understand that women come in different shapes and ethnicities. Shit like "oh look at her body hair/facial hair" for exemple will come on the table all the time. Or while trying to make fun of transwomen they'll insult women that are less GC too because they don't give a shit anymore. So be careful with "communities"... Those women aren't full on accepting. That's my two cents. Good luck with everything, life's hard and so is finding respectable people... Or real lesbian women and sane bisexual women. But never give up. You'll find your way.

yknow, i appreciate youre trying to be helpful, but i trust myself here, and i dont really appreciate the patronizing attitude. im not some helpless, lost puppy

its interesting youre talking about making gender my whole life again tho. its not something id expect someone to acknowledge. most people dont want to acknowledge that thats what its like in the trans community. but this isnt making gender my whole life again. acknowledging misogyny and sexism isnt obsessing about an identity. these are judgement calls about peoples lived experiences as well as my own. and yeah, absolutely both men and women can be awful as individuals, but thats an entirely different issue from recognizing how women are treated as a sex because of their reproductive capabilities. that capability is a resource people want to take control of (if you support abortion rights then thats the cause youre addressing for an example of how thats a real issue that needs to be discussed). if you recognize that, you recognize that theres an imbalance between what sex holds power. were not “blaming males”, were recognizing who holds the power in the situations we are disadvantaged in. you have to find a source to a problem *somewhere*. women doing bad things to other women doesnt mean that power imbalance doesnt exist. and looking inward to address an outward disadvantage doesnt make any sense. if we examine ourselves enough, will the pay gap close, for example? is it womens fault theres a pay gap to begin with?

also idk where youre getting your information about what radfems think about other women, but do you think theyd even tolerate me here if they only wanted a certain type of body? my tits are gone and im hairy from testosterone. if they were anti-body diversity, why am i accepted anyway? why are they accepting any detrans woman? ive seen these women come in every shape and ethnicity, and praise women of every size and ethnicity (from thirsting to beautiful photography).

if you want to look into it, check out @ laetitiaky on instagram. shes a black woman who describes sex-based oppression from her own experiences, essentially (also makes p cool art). if you want to see examples of radfems of colour the blogs @oneblackbraid and @rad-by-nature are two off the top of my head (hopefully im not mistaken rip). im sure if you scroll enough youll find them talking about radical feminism in relation to racial issues.

anyway thanks for the advice, but i didnt ask to be helped. i hope you find your way, too