#it means RADICAL FEMINIST. which you are obviously not

[florenceisfalling]

Just curious… are there any examples you can imagine of male privilege enjoyed by pre/non-T trans men that may not be automatically perceived as male? From one of these people to the other :3. Or is this mostly about those who largely pass as male?

hi derek!! good question ..

the thing 2 remember here is that trans men having male privilege does not cancel out their transness - i do not believe that trans men are more privileged than cis women. you ever see people talking about sexism and then someone brings up "but what about disabled/gay/poor men? what about men of color?" - ignoring the fact that disabled/gay/poor women and women of color have to experience the same bigotry compounded with sexism? same kind of deal generally applies. i don't think trans men have privileges over cis women, i do think they have privileges over trans women.

for one, regardless of whether or not they pass, trans men/transmascs* are not generally subjected to the same institutional dangers trans women face. trans women experience higher rates of job rejection, severe violent crime, etc. trans women also deal with specific forms of transphobic violence like vcoding, which is when they are commonly forced into sexually abusive roles in men's prisons. the way that hypervisibility hurts trans women is especially obvious wrt men's prisons generally. look at the current transphobic executive orders - the order is described as protecting women from the expansion of what "woman" means, and even only specifies that trans women will be moved to men's prisons, not the other way around. the entire executive order is constructed on the idea that "real" women need to be protected from trans women. trans men go mostly unacknowledged in this order. while the lack of transmasc visibility has its downsides for the community, it ultimately puts trans men in a much safer position politically and socially than trans women.

pre-transition transmascs are also afforded inclusion in queer spaces that transfems aren't, which is visible in things like the terf movement. its important to look at where the idea of trans exclusionary radical feminists began - michfest, a lesbian feminist space that included trans men but excluded trans women. many terfs will proudly insist themselves that they aren't really trans-exclusionary - they're fine with cafab trans people! just not trans women. and obviously them being "fine" with transmascs is a misrepresentation- plenty of terfs infantilize trans men and act entitled to their bodies constantly -but it isn't as extreme as their choice to awkwardly separate trans women from their communities at best and fully commit to painting them as inhuman and violent predators to the point of rallying alongside conservatives for "ok groomer" shit at worst.

transmascs in queer spaces also tend to direct transphobia towards trans women. resources on transmasc modes of expression that are accessible pre-hrt, like guides to binding, are widespread. meanwhile tucking, breast forms, and other means of transfem expression are often suppressed as "nsfw". community spaces for nonbinary people are often implicitly carved out for cafabs, and nonbinary people in media are often represented solely by transmascs. many points of discourse popular in transmasc communities bring up "male and female socialization" (terf rhetoric, in fact used to exclude tgirls from michfest back in the day) rather than finding other ways to acknowledge how misogyny affects trans men. this ignores the varied experiences of transfems - many of which transitioned young and did not actually grow up in a "male" role anyway! - and implies that transfems have male privilege that they either somehow gradually lose or cannot transition out of at all. i've gone into pretty extensive detail before on how this site specifically has made being transfem a living hell, with transmascs mass-sexually harassing tgirls, #tgirl being a banned tag for a time while #tboy and #terfsafe were both fine, and online pedojacketing campaigns against transfems often spearheaded by transmascs. and im sure you're familiar with some of my own irl experiences - despite me not being transfem, the majority of people who have labeled me as such in order to harass me have been transmasc, some of them even being self identified terfs despite their own identity.

to even more directly address the passing bit: i don't enjoy being often perceived as a cis woman, and it certainly puts me in the position of having to deal with a lot of misogyny that i might experience a little less directly if i passed as a man - though passing trans men definitely deal with misogyny too, especially through things like a lack of reproductive rights. and society certainly hates what they see as "gnc women", for example the shit butch women face. but society's hatred for deviation from cisgender masculinity is bad enough that trans women don't even usually get to be seen as just "gnc men", they get entirely third-gendered about it. historically, cultures love to treat transfems as an entirely deviated social underclass- not female enough to be validated and not male enough to be seen even as broken men. there's a reason "effeminate" and "emasculated" are words that exist and hold the connotations that they do. in a world where a common and righteously-defended position is that "we must protect little cis girls from drag queens perving on them in bathrooms" or whatever, i think i'm safer in the camp considered perpetual victim than in the camp considered perpetual perpetrator.

*ofc including in the transmasc umbrella not just trans men but a variety such as she/theys with no intent on transitioning to male in the first place, like me a few years ago. this applies throughout this post

tl;dr: i don't think trans men have male privilege over cis women, especially non-passing, but i do think they have male privilege over trans women- on a statistical, social, and political basis. i think being falsely misgendered and perceived as a gnc or even conforming cis woman sucks but is still safer than being seen as the socially stigmatized third "faggot" sort of gender transfems get misgendered as.

ty for asking !

[maledepravityarchive]

"radical feminist" me when i lie

[musical-chick-13]

Genuinely I cannot take the phrase "de-centering men" seriously anymore.

[yuri-for-businesswomen]

another crazy thing about having been a prostitute is to realise how little difference there has been in how many of my male sexual partners have treated me and how sex buyers treated me, especially since i was an escort where often you get paid to simulate dates. i even had sex buyers beg to see me again meanwhile men in real life often ghost or keep me at armlength especially when there are no romantic feelings involved.

this is why i dont want to have sex without feelings and care for each other anymore - it almost feels like im prostituted all over again, bad in a different way because i actually like the men i sleep with and want them to like and appreciate me too and consider my desires (dont get me wrong obviously prostitution is always worse than sleeping with men im actually attracted to and want to have sex with but it hurts in a different way to realise that ive often also been just a means to get off to them).

like for example, since sex buyers often pay for time instead of sex act (or both combined), they want to get the most out of their money and do the most to you in the set time - but as a prostitute you want to get it over with as soon as possible and it feels like torture. meanwhile so many heterosexual men who dont pay for sex try to reach orgasm as soon as possible and then its over, lmao. like the direct comparison between having been prostituted and having voluntary sex with men will make you feel absolutely crazy but it also made me realise why i thought i didnt even like sex for so long. because i was always treated like an object, not a person. men will do the bare minimum to keep you around for sex if they dont see you as wife material (and then they also do just little more than the bare minimum up until they reached their goal of marriage then usually start neglecting their wives as we know).

which brings home the point that we need a cultural and legal shift. as long as men treat sex as masturbation with another person, and women as objects or tools, there will always be demand for prostitution, and there will always be (privileged) women deluded into thinking „might as well get paid for it“ or even „at least now im being appreciated“, paradoxically. thats how bad heterosexual men treat women in bed.

this also emphasises that yes, #allmen, because even the men who dont buy sex contribute to the system of sexual exploitation with their behaviour. the reason ive heard men say most often why they dont buy sex is not care for women, but pride. they can convince women to get them off so why pay for it? same with porn, they dont stop watching because they care about women, but because their dick stopped working. and then of course you have a lot of sex buyers who dont even want to do the bare minimum mentioned above so they buy sex to go immediately to using a womans body with no „hassle“. the state of heterosex is fucking dire because i know im by far not the only one experiencing this.

and even before prostitution i could feel it but not really put my finger on it, now with this horrible experience and a radical aligned feminist view on things i realise and its really dark. and dont even try talking to men about their inadequacies in bed because they will act like youre the problem and an annoying nag for voicing desires.

[doberbutts]

I remember reading a post that men are the oppressor class so why would they bother to dismantle systemic patriarchy when they actively benefit from its existence? And as I read it, I thought, Damn, so an entire half of the population can never conceivably help us, and the people who love men in their lives are doomed. It wasn't a helpful post. It basically felt, here's some actual material analysis on feminism and said, That trying to educate and make men be part of feminism is fundamentally a flawed effort, because again, they are the oppressor class, why should they care about uplifting the oppressed?

And it made me think about this very good pamphlet I read, explaining how the white worker remained complacent for so long because at least they weren't a Black slave. And that the author theorized the reason labor movements never truly created exceptional, radical change is because of internal racism (which I find true) and failure to uplift black people. And the author listed common outlooks/approaches to this problem, and one of them was: "We should ignore the white folks entirely and hold solidarity with only other POC, and the countries in the Global South. Who needs those wishy-washy white fragile leftists who don't care about what we think or want?" (roughly paraphrased.)

And the author said, This sounds like the most leftist and radical position, but it's totally flawed because it absolves us of our responsibility to dismantle white supremacy for the sake of our fellow marginalized people, and we are basically ignoring the problem. And that blew me away because this is a position so many activists have, to just ignore the white folks and focus entirely on our own movements. I wish I knew the name of the actual pamphlet, so I could quote entire passages at you.

But I feel this is the same for men. Obviously, we should prioritize and have women-led and women-focused feminism. But saying that men are an oppressor class so they can't reliably be counted upon in feminist activism--it's such a huge oversimplification. And mainly, I'm a Muslim, and I've been treated with plenty of misogyny from Muslim men. And also plenty of misogyny from Muslim women. And I love my male friends, I want men to be part of the movement, and I dunno. Thinking about communities, movements, and the various ways we fail each other and what it means to be truly intersectional keeps me up at night.

I don't know the pamphlet you're talking about but I've read and been taught similar. There's a reason much of my anti-racism is so feminist and most of my feminism is anti-racist. Many people coming at this problem from a truly intersectional angle have seen that there is no freedom to be had without joining hands across the community. Not picking and choosing our allies based off of identity but off of behavior.

As used in a previous example, a white abled moderately wealthy man saying "wow Healthcare sucks in this country, why does this system suck so bad" should be told "hey, this system sucks so bad because it's built off of sexism, racism, classism, and ableism. You want to improve the system? Fix those things and it will be much better in the long run" and not "shut up you're a man. Healthcare is always going to be better for you". The second response doesn't fix that Healthcare is still a problem even if you are at the "top" of the privilege ladder. If we want true change, we have to dismantle the entire system at it's core and build it up without the yuck, otherwise you're gunna get to the top and realize this place sucks too.

Something something if the crabs worked together to hold each other up, they could all get out of the bucket and be free.

[lorynna]

i would consider myself a radical feminist also and i agree with the vast majority of your views. honestly i am just curious why you think aromantic/asexual people don't exist or shouldn't be labeled. i don't mean this as hate i'm honestly curious to know if it is part of most radical feminist views

if you can accept someone who is lesbian, and knows for themselves that they aren't at all attracted to men, why would you not accept someone who realizes both that they aren't attracted to men and they aren't attracted to women? (obviously very different identities and experiences i'm just wondering why some people can be trusted to know who they're not attracted to and others can't)

Hello anon, thank you for asking so kindly.

I am going to try and explain what my personal opinion on the topic is, as well as I can, and please keep in mind that I don't speak for the radical feminist community but just for my own views.

First of all, the definitions I have read of both terms (aromantic and asexual) so far aren't really specific, differ from each other at times and leave open room for interpretation. The gendies meanwhile continue to preach "everything means something different to each person" and "it is a broad spectrum" just like they do with gender, which according to them is so complicated and unfathomable that you have to ask each person identifying with it seperately, to know what their gender means to them.

The first thing that comes up when I google the definition of both terms displayed below (just as an example of what I mean):

Like, what do "sexual feelings" all include and to which extent does "little romantic attraction" go?

I do think that people who fit the mainstream criterias for being asexual or aromantic exist, I am not trying to say that it is naturally impossible to experience no sexual or aromantic attraction to anyone. I do think it is really really rare for this to authentically occur though, and that a lot of people identifying with these labels have experienced some kind of trauma or are doing it because it has become a trend.

The thing I most dislike about these labels are not only their inconsistency in definitions but also how much they are starting to get pushed online = trend. In my personal experience I have seen not only online but also offline how younger kids and teens start to pick up on these labels without knowing what they truly mean, because they are "cool" and just like gender it is starting to become a similar trend. Seeing who publicly identifies as those labels, it is again mostly the demographic of teenagers who are going puberty and the several different, crucial developmental phases that come with that.

Since you are asking if this is a common radfem belief, I cannot say. There surely is a variety of opinions, however I have seen some good takes from which I remember being said that a person doesn't need the label of "asexuality" or "aromanticism" as an excuse to not participate in dating culture or to not engage in sexual relations. It should just be common sense to not ask strangers about their dating lives and not ask "why" if they say they are not dating or having sex as if it was something unusual.

Also answering to your last question of "why I don't trust those people to know who they are attracted or not attracted to" is not what I am trying to do insinuate by questioning/criticizing the labels they use to describe said attraction. It is not about me trying to say "I don't believe you, you are lying" it is "why do you need those labels". I just don't think it adds anything valuable to society and it's getting more mainstream each day. Now even with teenagers using those labels when they haven't had the time to figure out themselves as a person yet. It just looses its meaning.

I've seen women going through long periods without having partners (radfems participating in male seperatism for example) being asked "oh, so you're asexual, right?" or "oh, so you're unable to form a romantic connection?" because people start assuming, forgetting that there are so so many reasons why people might not have partners or might not want to.

Again, people who truly are not experiencing any sexual desire or romantic desire are really rare but through so many people mindlessly adopting the label it looses it's meaning because it gets more broad in definition and everyone continues to define it for themselves. "Yeah, I am asexual but sometimes I have sex. Like once a month but that's barely enough so I must be asexual." Like... you might just have a low libido and that's totally okay! Why do you feel the need to label yourself as asexual? Is it easier because of your partner's expectations, maybe? Is a simple no not enough for them?

"I'm 15 and I haven't had a crush on anyone so far. I actually think boys/girls are ew and I can't imagine kissing anyone, like ew saliva. Also the girls/boys in my class are so annoying!!" And no, I've heard statements like this several times before. I mean, give yourself some time you're only 15.

Why do we always have to slap a label on top of everything and why can't we just go through life saying "yeah at the moment I really don't feel like having a partner, I don't want to date or have sex. Maybe that will change someday, maybe not and either way it's okay, I'm open for change. " but we have to say "oh yes, I'm an asexual aromantic without doubt and that won't change, that's my identity" and then when that changes we get an identity crisis realising that oh, maybe that wasn't me? Who am I now?

It all boils down to me not being able to take those labels seriously anymore, which is why I reacted so sarcastically in the post you're probably referring to, where I talked sarcastically about those terms.

"labels are different for anyone"

like no.. to define means to limit, to define means to exclude people who don't meet those criterias and that's okay, that's what makes labels and words meaningful = contributing to a conversation of mutual understanding instead of having to first discuss what each person means by using one and the same word.

Like I can't go outside in a clothing store saying "oh I want a red dress" and when she shows me a red dress I then say "oh that's not red for me, that's yellow by my own definition." How do you expect everyone to effectively communicate by leaving the option open for everyone to seperately define one single term??

But as we know, the gendies aren't fans of definitions.

[spacerockfloater]

I can’t believe that I have to say this, but I need to remind y’all that radical feminism locating the root cause of women's oppression in patriarchal gender relations DOES mean that:

a) a huge amount of cis straight men dominate and oppress women, other genders and literally any kind of human being that is not exactly like them.

b) a radical reordering of society is necessary.

But radical feminism surely DOESN’T fucking mean that:

a) we should hate men.

b) we should hate trans people.

It’s an absolute disgrace that such a revolutionary ideology is automatically associated with bigotry nowadays.

Misanthropy in the form of misandry and transphobia is vile and will absolutely not get us where we want to be. Do not use a movement meant to liberate women and all the people who are oppressed by patriarchy to mask your sick hatred and make it more palatable.

The fact that some fake ass “feminists” sat down all these decades ago and had the audacity to suggest that a major threat to womanhood is the trans community, which makes up about 1% of the world’s population, is outrageous. No such thing as TERFism exists. I mean, it obviously does unfortunately, but the ideology itself is fucking bullshit because you can’t advocate for the rights of oppressed cis women while simultaneously shitting on the rights of trans men and women who are oppressed by literally fucking everyone. The idea that we, as cis women, are somehow more oppressed than trans people is outrageous. Y’all are just transphobes and disguised conservatives.

Also, radical feminism and marxism feminism coexist. Women and other genders are oppressed because most/a lot cis straight men harbour intense hatred for anyone that doesn’t resemble them to a T and they are also oppressed because the cis straight men in power benefit from their oppression. Conflicts between both class and gender have led to patriarchy. It’s not a competition about which theory has it right. It’s about understanding what’s wrong with the world and how we can fix it.

My sincerest apologies if I used any incorrect terms regarding gender in this post. Please do correct me if that’s the case.

I will not be participating in any kind of arguments about this. There’s nothing controversial about saying that hating people depending on their gender is bad (which is the basis of feminism btw) and if you think any type of hatred can be excused or justified, you’re not welcome in my blog. If you want to be hateful towards people, take it elsewhere or you will simply get blocked.

[butno1heardafvcknthing]

in school we had to watch a campaign ad for both kalama and trump, which both were so obviously biased. but honestly, as a radical feminist, hearing the trump ad talk about “tHe RaDiCaL lEfT” as if any of these politicians that are middle at furthest is just funny.

yeah, because apparently not wanting gay people dead and not saying abortion is murder means you’re inherently a radical feminist? so much of our society is so uncomfortable with (at best; when not against) leftism that being in the middle makes you a radical feminist in the campaigns ads for not believing people should be dead.

note: even tho this is a very new blog, if i get some “pro life” pro birth idiot here saying how abortion is murder, i will throw something out a window. (i know. how violent i am.)

[yurious-george]

i think boiling down the current discourse to "if you think men become fascist because the feminists were Too Mean to them, you are agreeing with supremacist ideology" kind of overlooks some things... because obviously the previous statement is correct! but radicalization of that nature often results from a mindset that safety can only be secured by crushing someone else underfoot, which is most frequent in cults and abusive relationships. this is why we WERE critiquing terfs' violent hatred of men, because that sort of vitrol vectors misogynist radicalization for both cis men and women. right?

or did we just start caring because trans women are the people terfs most overtly crush underfoot. and not actually because you want everyone to be well. :/

[manie-sans-delire-x]

Are you a terf? I'm genuinely asking because I'd like to know. And why not or why are you?

I didn't even know what "terf" or "tra" or any of this nonsense was 3 yrs ago. I miss that.

But yeah sure why not. Or not, if you don't think I am. I think a lot of "tra/gendies" type people would say I was, but a lot of "terf/radfem" types would say I'm a very problematic and undedicated one at best, which is true. I think the ideology and worldview is correct and accurate of reality, but I'm not subscribed to their promoted practices, although I do support them.

Keep yapping

As in like, I still choose to shave my legs, wear makeup, date/have sex with men. I want a nose job. I sometimes enjoy being catcalled. I sometimes sell nudes and I'm an ex(?) prostitute. I like kinky BDSM sex. But I can separate my individual personhood and choices from the overall, objective reality of the world and what I think is healthy for women in general.

If taking the term terf literally- I am a feminist for sure, I don't think I'm radical at all, I actually think it's all basic old school feminism and just common sense and blatant reality. I don't exclude trans people, I hope everyone supports feminism and womens rights, regardless if theyre trans or not. Thats irrelevant. Thats just one trait of who someone is, and the recent internet trend is to treat them and themselves like thats their entire identity and personhood. Team Trans against everyone else. Obviously its an important part, but its not supposed to determine the rest of someones views and beliefs. Being trans isnt a political party.

--------------------------------------------------------------------

I've always been a leftist, voted democrat (identify independent/no party), never has a single problem with the left party til about 3 yrs ago. I've supported gay rights since I first learned what gay even was at like 10 yrs old, I once got in trouble for supporting gay/trans in elementary school in a fairly rural town, I voted for and celebrated when gay marriage was legalized- (I had just turned 18 in time to vote in my first election, I was so excited to be part of history and help achieve something genuinely good!)

I don't give a shit what clothes people wear, or what name they go by. Even what pronouns they would like me to use for them, if it truly matters so much to them. I just dont care that much. I'll be polite and respect them as a person enough to refer to them as they wish. I will always vote for trans people and gay, lesbian, bi, whatever, to have equal access to health care, education, voting rights, safety in prison, etc and have equal rights to everyone else.

Ive had/have friends who are trans, intersex, gay, lesbian, bi. I'm a straight woman but Ive had sex with women a few times. I would be open to dating a transman, if they "felt like" a male to me. And I know I know "but I have black friends" but you know what, it does point to someone not being a bigot. It does way more than it doesnt. Because be fr most real bigoted, hateful people wouldnt have "xyz" friends or even talk to them. So if terf automatically means bigot, I dont think thats fair or accurate of myself at all, and quite laughable when youve seen genuine, hateful people who want to deny equal legal rights or literally lynch people just for a trait they have. Very sheltered and dramatic use of the word. Insulting really.

-------------------------------------------------------------

I started having a problem with the trans/gender/pronouns movement when they started the science denial. And then next came the forced invasion of private spaces (all womens spaces only of course), the silencing and policing and harassment if you dont fall in line, and the erasure of womens history and identity. Even the word woman?? Are you kidding me? That is insane. How can they preach about the importance of identity yet rip away the very word for a female human?? Half the human population? Its evil is what it is. Its wrong. Incredible misogyny and anti-feminism.

And god, the constant hate and policing and self righteousness in general. Slurs, insults, sexual threats are also commonly thrown left and right. Most have a very condescending holier than thou attitude, always so aggressive. Very unlikeable as a group.

Never trust an idealogy or group that bans you from learning about the opposition. That discourages conversation, doesnt allow disagreement or any differing opinions. That has some mantra that must never be questioned. Its the same bullshit as any church or cult. Its all the same in the end- its group-think, its social control.

This entire gender belief system comes down to nothing but magical thinking, circular logic based off feelings, hypocrisy and contradictions, ever-changing idealogy, and forced use of their terminology, even in other cultures and languages.

The most extreme TRAs I've seen were all white, and they do this although they claim to oppose white colonialism. And they try to discredit radfems by saying theyre all white feminists? Which I think is highly untrue because well, the huge 4B movement in Korea is also accused of being "radfem/terf". And from my experience, the most radfem women are brown or black or asian because they get it. White western women still have it the best in the world. Colored women are still suffering from extreme misogyny and they see it first hand everyday. Korean women say never to marry Korean men, my Japanese mother told me never to marry a Japanese man, my Japanese grandmother hides money from her husband "just in case", I know my Indian friends mom told her the same thing. They know. They get it.

You cannot use the word in its own definition. You cant say a woman is someone who feels like a woman. That is an empty definition and circular logic. And if you say its someone who feels "feminine", aka nurturing and submissive and likes pink, well thats just regressive, sexist, and conservative af.

15 years ago, the progressive take that "the youths" were pushing was that a guy could wear a pink dress (and still be a guy), that your sex didnt limit or define you, that gender roles were to be abolished. Its sad but interesting to see it come back around to repackaged gender roles.

I also grew up in the time where white Christian republican moms hated Harry Potter and banned their kids from reading them because it was "witchcraft", demonic, and un-Christian. I used to sneak my books to a boy in class with a mom like that. Now the white liberals want to burn these kids books lmfao! Thats just truly funny.

-----------------------------------------------------------

Reddit story

I realized how bad it was getting when my long term Reddit account (lots of karma, tons of positive interactions and highly upvoted posts) got permanently deleted, and I was banned off all of Reddit forever. What could I have possible have done?? Said the forbidden words: "Woman means female human." I got tons of upvotes and many similar comments expressed similar sentiments, also with lots of upvotes, before many of them got perma banned as well. None of these were hateful or negative btw, most didnt even mention trans until some tra types started getting mad. They were just talking about word and science erasure. Its actually so funny- one commenter said "What? That doesn't happen" in response to someone joking that the post is gunna be taken down soon since anything to do with sexual science is "transphobic" now. I went back later and saw- his account got perma banned too, just for interacting with that comment. Guess he learned that day. The post, which was very popular, also got taken down. The post was a video of a science museum, showcasing pelvic human bones. It had two pelvises, showing the differences between female and male, and how female pelvic bones could shift to make room for birthing infants. Deleting that video, silencing all those comments? Thats as science denial as it gets. Thats anti-education and anti-science. Are they gunna shut down the museum next? Burn the textbooks? Claim witchcraft? This is ABSURD.

------------------------------------------------------------

Bottom line/What I actually care about

-"Woman" is the word for an adult female human in the English language.

-"Female" is defined by the sex that produces large gametes ("eggs"), has an internal reproductive system (consisting of ovaries, Fallopian tubes, the womb, and the vagina), and in mammals- the only sex with the ability to menstruate, conceive a pregnancy, give birth to live young, and produce milk from breast glands.

-Evolution is real. Humans are an animal species with a sex binary and sexual dimorphism with innate developmental and physical differences between the sexes.

-Women are denied equal legal rights and systematically oppressed in patriarchal cultures and religions because of the sex they're born as, not their gender identity. Fucking duh.

-Female only spaces are important and needed. (Trans ppl should be allowed to have trans only spaces as well). (Im never going to support the invasion or erasure of female only spaces, especially for populations already at heightened risk. Female safety is more important than male feelings- and its never a female trying to get into the males prison or spa or sports is it? Its morally wrong to prioritize the desires of a few over the needs of the many. Its wrong to prioritize emotions over physical safety.)

-The importance of sex division in sports, places of nudity (bathrooms, locker rooms, spas), domestic violence shelters, rape and trauma support groups, and assigned rooms in inpatient care or cells in prison.

-Children cannot consent and should not be allowed to make any decision that would permanently alter their natural body or derail their natural development. The vast majority of trans children are not "true trans", but just gay/lesbian/bi, often with homophobic or attention seeking family vlogger type parents. Many are also autistic, or have been sexually abused. They need therapy and acceptance, not surgery or medical intervention- only as a very last resort after years of thought and therapy. Obviously there may be a rare exception and each case is different. Adults should be free to make their own choices.

-Prostitution is highly tied to and inseparable from sex trafficking. Sex work should not be glorified or encouraged and is highly dangerous and harmful. Pimps and johns are sexual predators who should be severely criminally punished.

-The porn industry promotes unhealthy sexuality, is harmful to society, and is an industry over-run with horrific abuse, violence, and trauma.

-----------------------------------------------------------

My personal "radicalization" story/last straw story is this:

So like I said I wasnt even aware of this brewing cesspool of an issue until about 3 yrs ago. When I first started hearing the terms "terf/radfem" I figured they were just transphobes and casually agreed they sucked. But after so much constant hatred towards them, I got curious and decided to see how bad they were and started reading a few well written posts about their beliefs and such, and I was so incredibly confused because they were right? Almost everything they said was just true and it was shocking how much abuse was hurled at them. I thought I misunderstood, I didnt get it. I thought I must be missing something.

I had a long term internet friend and tumblr mutual. We used to be in a discord groupchat and little "personality disorder tumblr community" together. I think we had slight crushes on each other, occasionally playfully flirted, and I even (maybe kinda delusionally) thought we might even date one day. I knew he was getting more into the gender stuff than I was, but I was ok with that, I didnt mind that we had different opinions. I just ignored his posts that I disagreed with, but apparently he didnt feel the same and would sometimes argue about my reblogged posts, eventually told me he couldnt stay friends with me. The last straw was when he said women were oppressed because of gender, not sex. I had never even heard such a fucking stupid and blatantly untrue, so easily disproven concept before. I laughed. My mind was BLOWN I couldnt believe someone could possibly be serious and say that. Let alone someone I thought was intelligent. And was an ally to women. But he was serious and I was so done. How he could say such a thing as a black man, I will never know. I will never forgive him for that.

About a year before that, I learned that this mutual had been accused of rape by his ex gf. I'd heard stories about how crazy and abusive she was before, and naturally I believed my friend, so that was the impression I had of her. She was also "jealous" of me and would occasionally harass and insult me on anon I think? Memories a bit blurred. So I just believed that she was an unstable, obsessive ex. Which may or may not be true. Either way, one time she reached out to me and told me that he had raped her in the past- I think she said she was 14 and he was 19 when they had sex, the consent was dubious, he groomed her, something along those lines.

I told her that I couldnt just believe her- a complete stranger who had acted psycho to me in the past- over my long term friend with no evidence. I think she had filed a police report against him and showed me pics of that or something? But it could easily be edited or from somewhere else, and he also had pics of her allegedly breaking stuff, and I thought they were both just being toxic and messy. Like I said, it was a group for people with personality disorders. I also told her that I also didnt believe her because she had gone back to him/kept dating him after the alleged rape. I regret it now. I wish I could apologize to her. At the time I didnt understand, I couldnt fathom that. Why would someone ever go back to someone who raped them? Three yrs later, I understand now, as someone who has now done that themselves.

In this last fight, this mutual also made some nonsensical comparison between me and my rapist. I trusted him. I thought he understood. He was the first one I told after I was raped for the first time. He helped me talk it out and understand it. He was the one who got me to see that it was rape when I was severely confused, in denial and blaming myself. So I thought he couldnt have done it. He was a "man who got it".

I believed and trusted him when he was faced with a rape allegation. But he couldnt stay friends with me because I said women are oppressed because of their sex.

So yeah. I'll never forgive him. Fuck you to the moon and back.

------------------------------------------------------------------

So many words- terfs, swerfs, radfem- all to shut down the voices of one population- feminist women. No such words for anyone else. The woke version of frat bros calling you a feminazi bitch.

I'm never going to support the silencing of feminists, or the denial of science. I would be executed in the 1300s and some would like to execute me now. Modern era witch hunt.

Thank you for reading this long ass post if anyone takes the time!! And thank you for the ask!

(Since I ended up writing a whole rant, let me leave this video because I think it demonstrates how unhinged this has all become. This is SO wrong. Wtf are yall doing.

Mom protecting daughter attacked by TRA mob. A literal mob.

Video: https://youtu.be/5DFv8OaYXQI?si=TmzA7-r6QvfDNUH_ )

[starstuffandalotofcoffee]

hey, can we avoid absolute statements about "terf" being "meaningless"? obviously it gets misused and distorted, like many other terms. but in reality there are many feminist-identified cis people who explicitly or implicitly see trans people's existence as anti-feminist and unworthy of feminist goals. the right has successfully exploited this view to pull people into their generally transphobic agenda, but the phenomenon also exists on the left, even among those who otherwise call themselves trans allies. if we want the left to defend trans people, be a political home for trans people, we all have more reason than ever to notice and resist this type of thinking. please let's keep a little perspective.

I mean this very seriously: I do not know who you are at all, and I have not made any original posts. This is a conversation you should be having with OP.

With that said, this post, which I assume is the one you're talking about, is literally saying "call people transphobes if they are transphobic." Period. End of Sentence. It does not say "this is exclusively a right-wing phenomenon." It does not say "you should not call out transphobia in feminist spaces." The issue is that many people have successfully conflated being a transphobic radical feminist with being a feminist at all, or alternately conflate being a general run of the mill shithead rightwing transphobe with being a radical feminist. It is horrifyingly common for people online to call outright "we must get up the birthrate/women are property" types "terfs" instead of "misogynist homophobic transphobes".

like...OP, for example, has been a big proponent of 4B. and you know what, I have complicated feelings about that because I'm someone in my mid-30s who really didn't think I wanted children until quite recently, and am single and am having a lot of difficult personal considerations that this election has complicated even further. but I do support women who are choosing 4B. and that includes trans women. And it is people from the left who are attacking 4B as transphobic (vs. people on the right who are just attacking it bc they are misogynists who think women should submit to men) even though it is about avoiding sex and children and marriage with men. If you think that trans women are women then you should automatically think that trans women can be 4B and can be partners of people who are 4B. If you see the word "woman" and don't automatically assume it means "trans women" that is on you, and in fact I think it will be more effective to fight these transphobic self-identified feminists by, instead of acting in bad faith and assuming that whenever any feminist says "men" they mean "cis men and trans women" and therefore by extension assuming all feminists are inherently transphobic unless they shout from the rooftops "NO, WHEN I SAY WOMEN I ALSO MEAN TRANS WOMEN", using the word "women" and assuming anyone who isn't a violent bigot knows that trans women are part of that group.

(obviously if you are trans I understand that you might need to do a calculus based on context clues, in the same way that any oppressed minority needs to confirm that spaces do in fact include them. It is not different than how I as a Jewish woman need to sus out if non-denominational/secular/interfaith means "not anti-semitic"; this post is not about that.)

There are people who identify as radical feminists who are trans-exclusive. I personally think TERF is not a useful term anymore BECAUSE if you are not for ALL bodily autonomy for ALL women you are not a feminist. Being trans-exclusive should, in my opinion, take away your feminism card. We should treat them as transphobic infiltrators in feminist spaces, and not as feminists of any kind, radical or otherwise, and we should call them transphobes. That is what I mean, and that's what I think OP means. It is not a denial that there are self-identified feminists who are virulently transphobic (and specifically transmisogynist). It is saying "we need to stop calling these assholes feminists and start using the word 'transphobe' across the board, regardless of the other political beliefs they may have or claim to have." When it's not uncommon for people to call both Putin a TERF AND actual trans people who (correctly) point out that "uterus-havers" is a really alienating way to talk about people who can potentially get pregnant TERFs, yeah, I think it's worth retiring the term. This isn't a denial of the reality; it's saying that the specific word isn't used to reflect that reality in a meaningful way.

[feminismisstillahatemovement]

I’m a bit confused by your username

Feminism is a movement that’s defined by the desire for all people to be seen as equal, including men, women, and others. There’s extreme cases, like radfems and “kill all men” etc, but at its core feminism is a movement that’s supposed to embody positivity and equality, not hate

Do you really consider it a hate movement or do you only consider the extreme cases that way?

You're mistaken in a very fundamental way: radical feminism is not an "extreme case"; it's rather the bedrock of all feminist assumptions about the world that simply become more diluted and palatable to a larger number of people the closer to the mainstream they get.

Radical feminism is not fringe feminism but core feminism: All of the beliefs that the moderate foot soldiers of that movement obediently march along to and mindlessly assert to be true, such as "The Patriarchy", "rape culture", "gender is a social construct", "The Glass Ceiling", even the belief in a pay gap, 60 years after it was made illegal across all western nations to pay a woman less than a man for the same work... all of these originate with radical feminist thinkers and writers back in the 1970s onwards and are still chiefly propagated by radical feminists today.

The "why can't we all just get along" feminists don't teach gender studies classes. The "why can't we all just get along" feminists didn't write the textbooks taught in those gender studies classes. They don't organize the marches or start online forums devoted to feminism, etc. The more fanatically taken over by the false assumptions about reality that a person is, the more radical that person becomes and the more deeply involved and influential in the feminist movement that person becomes.

None of modern feminist thought originates with the moderates. There's a case to be made that the movement was for a time a much more moderate, vague and well-meaning ideal, post-suffragettes and pre-radfems, but that was before it was infiltrated and taken over by Marxist radicals around the turn of the 1970s. From then till now, all feminist theory can be most clearly understood as Marxist explanations about reality but with the word "class" replaced with "gender" and the words "the bourgeoisie" replaced with "men".

So, instead of saying all human history can be best explained as a class war, all human history can thereafter be best explained as a gender war. Both of these positions are obviously and self-evidently false, or, at the very, very, very least, so flawed and incomplete as an explanation of human society to be dangerously misleading and terribly destructive: the majority of the day-to-day reality of all the tens of thousands of years of human history can be much more realistically depicted as billions of men and women working together to care for and protect each other and the children they produced, which ultimately resulted in each of us.

Feminism, particularly of the past 50 years, is founded upon a narrative of the world that divides all women and men up into ‘innocent victims’ and ‘privileged oppressors’, and as such has done more to foster hate and drive a wedge between the sexes than any other political movement in history. Instead of seeing men and women as brothers and sisters, mothers and fathers, sons and daughters, friends and lovers, feminism sees only a gender war that it alone started and it alone propagates, with no realistic end ever in sight. 

Even fairly moderate feminists today think and speak of men almost exactly the way Nazis thought and spoke of Jews, and that’s why I say feminism is a hate movement.

[hard--headed--woman]

About women needing to create a separatist movement: I'm going to cut you right there and spare you a lot of time and frustration 😅 It's been many years since it has been a thing in China and South Korea and it's pretty much a yearly debate among radfems on tumblr. By "debate", I mean het and a lot of bi women calling lesbians incels who want them to be miserable (by prioritizing friendships!) because we're jealous harpies. It's the same every time, don't bother. I think lesbians should just focus on creating our movement because women who want to date men will never listen to us anyway.

Let my young and innocent heart have hope 🥲

More seriously, I have noticed that in my short time on tumblr (less than a year). "Radical" feminist on this website get really mad when we say that women should stop dating men, which is very dumb to me because it's literally the basis of radical feminism. How can you claim to be a radfem if you disagree with this and think it's stupid/too much (and if you date men at all)? It's frustrating and annoying because feminism NEEDS that. We need female separatism and we need more and more women who stop dating men and have sex with them.

But of course it's apparently too much and what's the best thing het many bi women love to do on here when they disagree with something ? Blame lesbians, obviously ! Suddenly we oppress them and hate them for being OSA and are as bad as incels, suddenly we think only lesbianism is a valid sexuality and think they don't deserve feminism... I have seen this debate once, when it was trending on radblr some months ago (i just arrived there back then) but I still hope that most radfems aren't as lesbophobic and agree with the no dating men thing. Am I naive?

I know there are a lot of febfems out there which is already great. But I doubt a big separatist movement will happen anytime soon. I just think we do need it.

[hellsite-yano]

“Porn addiction exists. And is also NOT a moral judgement on one's value as a person.”

Well, it shouldn’t be, but I think the actual problem here is that 90-some percent of the time people run into someone talking (or preaching, usually) about porn addiction online, it is, because the person raving about it is either a self-obsessed wannabe crusader that hates porn for being “degenerate/sinful” almost as much as they hate addicts and soy beans, or a radical feminist who views Men as the root of all evil, and pornography as an apex manifestation thereof. 

And these types both like to pretend that even seeing erotic mention of a breast, vagina, or penis is a morality-destroying cognitohazard. (You know, the way people demonize most addictions.) So it gets hit as a scapegoat with the one-two shot of “porn is moral taint” AND “addicts are moral failures” from the obviously moralizing asshats, which leads to backlash which goes too far in rejecting them and lands at “Porn addiction isn’t real, and only [obnoxious nutcases who I hate and also disagree with politically] believe it is.”

Plus, the social stigma around porn derails most reasonable discussion in the first place, because mentioning it means putting a neon sign atop a wanking wickerman for fuckwits to come scream at you because you disagreed with them over whether or not it’s the worst thing in existence.

which leads to backlash which goes too far in rejecting them and lands at “Porn addiction isn’t real, and only [obnoxious nutcases who I hate and also disagree with politically] believe it is.”

I've noticed this type of argument comes up a lot in vaguely leftist spaces whenever they feel like they're on the back foot in the late-stage of a particular discourse. Instead of engaging with the subject further in an attempt to reach mutual understanding they'll just throw their hands up and claim the problem isn't real. Race isn't real, sex/gender isn't real, borders aren't real, porn addiction isn't real, etc. It's the academic equivalent of throwing a tantrum and swiping the board game off the table.

[honeyriot]

You're a woman hater! You're pro rape if you think women aren't allowed to have boundaries from men, especially lesbians who are not sexually attracted to male bodies, whether they're in a skirt or not. You have the audacity to suggest the only people standing up for women are Nazis???? So you love rush Limbaugh and male supremacy and hate women. Got it. Loud and clear, bigot

Yeah, pretty much. Who comes to the #letwomenspeak rallies? Who fawns at Tucker Carlson and Fox News? You have no idea you are even indulging it because you have turned feminism into a single issue: trans. As if that were the crux and final coffin in feminism and then sneak around and condone or tolerate LITERAL FASCISTS like Elon Musk, Donald Trump, Mr. "What is a Woman" Matt Walsh, organizations like Libs of Tik Tok, Reduxx, Gays Against Groomers, who are racist, nationalist organizations funded by right wing investors. We never question that nature of the prison system or how sports have historically been a means of demonstrating male superiority and a means of perpetuating capitalist competition and we need an entire revamping of bathroom privacy but no let's burn the gays and the trans (because these fascists want you dead as much as they want trans people. to them a feminist is a witch the same as a trans person. they only accept you because you glorify them. you don't want to look at nationalism and capitalism as the machinations of men. You have never come in contact with any trans person you are just a paranoid person who fell for the propaganda from fascists. It was considered crossdressing for a woman to wear pants. Gender essentialism ties in nicely with eugenics and ethnonationalism. Why are so many prominent terfs complete nazis?

Anna Slatz cofounder of Reduxx, a vastly huge and respected GC TERF company, is a absolute fascist collaborating with white nationalist Lauren Southern, who preaches Great Replacement theory is under investigation for receiving Russian funds to spread white supremacist propaganda. Who's that on the left?

That's what reactionaries do in Terf communities. You will all write it off and call me the evil one for pointing it out. To you, feminism is a big joke. You don't study feminist theory and history, you spend more time on trans issues because they seem like a bigger deal and leave the rest of the issues on the back burner because they are tougher and would require real change.

You will never talk about it. It will never be addressed although you will be promoting neonazis and by you tacit refusal to investigate this very real reality, you become an accomplice to it. Many "feminists" spend more time attacking trans people than talking about any real feminist issue, of which there are many that need much more attention than these people are giving at the same time as them NEVER being around trans people.

In fact you probably do not see fascism as a very real thing. Your political science may not be very scientific or historical. If you are so mad, prove me wrong rather than saying I hate women and condone rape when that is obviously not true. I get called the same when I call out racist anti immigration speech. Nationalism and racism are diseases to community.

Do we have to answer the "trans question"? We all know there is a final solution to all the undesirables of society: communists, feminists, gay/lesbian and gender nonconforming/trans. But the questionan is that the systems need to be imagined from the ground up. We cannot build the future on yesterday's institutions.

So yes, it is possibly flattening reality to just randomly call a "trans excluding radical feminist" a nazi. But you have got to know you are flattening reality as well with a skewed understanding of history and political movements (including feminism). I will be posting a link to a bunch of feminist pdfs in a few days so check back!

If that's an ad hominem I hope it forces you to study harder and be a better feminist and, ya know, maybe pick up on doing actual feminist activism instead mischaracterizing the fight for women's liberation.

if you shrug this off as crazy ramblings and cease to understand the political aligning with fascism that trans (and gay and lesbian and gender nonconforming) hate groups have, you will unkowingly perpetuate the very structures and conditions that we are fighting against.

[pjharvey-moved]

obviously i think it’s annoying when ppl hear entry level capitalism-friendly/man-friendly feminism and basically stop their feminist journey there, and reject anything more radical, but i think it can be a good starting point… i mean i started openly calling myself a feminist as a tween when i found out emma watson described herself as one, and her heforshe speech was the most watered down man friendly feminist speech you can imagine but it was what made me look into feminism further. AND she still got rape threats and men threatening to leak her nudes over that!!! it’s kind of a no hope for women situation in a lot of ways with how men react to even the most like inoffensive vaguely feminist things and even to things that are not feminist and just pander to men less than they are used to being pandered to, but for women, esp if you come from idk a ridiculously sheltered environment (which i did, my mother even more so) that can be kind of valuable as a starting point