RadFem4Dummies: Feminism vs. Gender Edition

Those who support women’s liberation do not believe that human feelings, affinities, abilities and intellectual capacity unrelated to sexual reproduction (dolls for girls, trucks for boys) are neurologically caused by sexual reproduction. Instead, we believe such cultural sex-roles are violently enforced in order to ritualize and perpetuate male social domination of females so that those who are unable to produce offspring (males) can violently control those who do produce offspring (females).
Genderists (social conservatives, religious fundamentalists) believe the opposite: that sex-roles of male domination and female submission are biologically innate (“biological essentialism” “gender essentialism”).
Trans-Genderists are a sect of genderists who believe cultural sex-roles (male domination, female submission) are so central to the human endeavor that non-compliance is a birth defect to be treated by medically and surgically disguising the biology of human reproduction (sexual dimorphism) in cases of “incongruence”. Further distinguishing trans-genderists from genderists is that transgenderists claim non-believers infringe on their human rights simply by non-believing.
This is why transgenderists lobby against women’s liberation and try to outlaw all feminist activism, gatherings, organizations, writings, music festivals, book groups, homosexuality, women’s health services, title IX sports programs, sex-segregated prisons and locker rooms and restrooms and hospital bed assignments, agencies serving female victims of male sexual violence, support groups, websites, conferences, caucuses, media representation, freedom of speech.
This is why transgenderists call feminism “hate speech”.
radfem 4 dummies

21 thoughts on “RadFem4Dummies: Feminism vs. Gender Edition

  1. Nice summation and good analysis. I am thinking increasingly that trans is a kind of cult. No criticism allowed or they throw you out. And what we are being thrown out of is any formal recognition of ourselves as comprising a group of humans who are genetically constituted to run the female end of sexual reproduction, and all that entails socially and politically. Erasing indeed.
    And who is in charge of this cult? Why, the porn mavens, the queer theorists, the promoters of child abuse. They are playing these often mentally ill people to derail women’s liberation. It would get in the way of their money and urges if we got any real traction over time. Instead, the Poor Trans are presented as the Real Victims, and we get to have all these utterly bizarre discussions with them that wind up in our being perceived as a hate group at worst, and taking up a lot of time at best.
    If you’ve got a better explanation, I’m all eyes.

  2. To elucidate further: women’s liberation is about setting protective boundaries and insisting they be enforced (among other things). Gender Queer theorism is, far as I can tell, about rationalizing away the need for such boundaries via using the argument that these boundaries are oppressive towards the transgressors. Ergo: child rape.
    This appears to be also yet another case of language theft. I remember homosexual activists adopting “queer” as a way of reclaiming the word. But that too was about proclaiming and protecting rights, not working up complex arguments to support broad positions of boundary transgression.

  3. Mary Daly identified a source of trouble in men’s innate (biological) violence. Is her position in dispute here?

    1. I think most mothers can tell you when it kicks in. Little boys are sweet loving children until oh about six. Really, just love you to bits.
      Six, maybe seven. Is that when the testosterone tap comes on?

    2. I was chuckling at work today imagining that FCM might call this post “Radfem BY Dummies” LOL. Now that she is gone I have to imagine her critique since she has retired from kicking asses.

      1. I beg your pardon. As much as I value her work, and still sometimes read, and know many rad fems who do too, I will point out that there are hundreds of years of radfemism here, maybe more, and only two of those were hers.

    3. As I understand it, Daly (and FCM) interpret the overwhelming tide of male violence and necromancy against women, children, animals, other males, and life itself, across all history and culture, as evidence of an innate sex-based trait. This is certainly a compelling theory, supported by overwhelming swath of male destruction occupying the entire history of humanity.
      Relevant (indisputable) data:
      1.-Men are incapable of creating life. Instead, (2.)
      2.-Men serve as hosts and carriers of female (life-giving) DNA but possess none of their own.
      3.-Men have no way of establishing lineage (and capitalizing on the tribal “human resources” of offspring) without enslaving those with clear lineage (women).
      4.-Men alone are innately biologically “weaponized” with the equipment of rape.
      5.-Testosterone causes increased aggression.
      I’m not sure these factors can be called “gender” (male domination) but they certainly create the (innate, biological) conditions which enable it.
      So no, I don’t think the above post stands in opposition to Daly’s or FCM’s work.

  4. Bravo! Concise and common sensical. I love Radfem for Dummies!
    The T in our local feminist community is now whining that he’s not getting to come to a planning meeting for the Now-Private summer 37th annual women-only solstice campout. And, he’s now told he may not come to the private pre-planning meeting lunch either. The last lesbian sympathizer has been educated on T tactics and has abandoned her enabling rationale.
    The private women’s group is also documenting the incidence of exposure of his ladypeen to the children at the campout in 2012 and consideration of filing criminal complaint for exposure. The more that this 2012 fiasco was de-briefed the more incidence of his peen slipping out of the nylon bikini panties and his fancy robe being open and young girls in the audience flashed…..UGH UGH UGH

    1. LOL he was told he wasn’t going to the camp out but still tried to go to the planning meeting? Anything to try and maintain control I guess. Disgusting that he manged to expose himself– is he really surprised that he’s not going to be allowed back?

  5. I recall seeing this as a comment in an earlier post, i’m glad you made it into its own post as i thought it was quite good

Comments are closed.