Feminism...

The whole premise of this thread is wrong, because what you're describing is lesbian separatism, not radical feminism. As a person who considers herself a radical feminist, I object to the notion that I can be compared to human trash like Sheila Jeffreys.

But go with whatever you want. "Yes" and "yes."

~ Adrienne

 

1) yes, 100%.

2) No. I don't feel I know enough about it to be Radical. If I were educated in womens studies, maybe so......

 

Absolutely a feminist. Absolutely non-radical.

Men are already in enough pain...I'd prefer they weren't...it would make life easier for everyone.

 

1. Yes

2. Yes. Valar Morghulis. J/K I don't really think "radical feminism" means what you think it means and tbh, as soon as I see someone talking about feminist being "man-haters" or whatever, I assume they aren't really serious about learning about feminism. I don't really identify with any particular brand of feminism and I certainly don't hate all men.

 

Not a feminist. I've seen the wage gap disproved many times and I've never really understood the issue that feminists take with some social issues. This whole "objectification" stuff just seems so flawed and overreacted to me. Adults like to sexualize other adults. I just think that's part of human sexuality.

Now, granted, this may be because I haven't seen inequality for myself to see if there really is any need for feminism in the western world. In some countries where women actually are treated like second class citizens, I would be a feminist, but feminism in the western world seeks to change a social structure without any real plans on how to do so. If a wage gap can barely even be consistently proved, how can you change it? If society holds the female body to a higher standard and loves showing its beauty, how can you change that?

Of all my female friends, only one is a feminist. Her views tend to be pretty inconsistent and hard to back up with actual evidence, so it's hard to take such views seriously.

 

I'm personally not radical.

...Though I might reference the vampire Akasha in Anne Rice's Queen of the Damned. She says that by killing 90% of the world's men, just once, it will bring in a new era of peace. It wouldn't have to be continued. Just do it once and the whole world will change instantly and radically for the better.

Don't hate. I'm not saying we should do it, or that she's right, but would there be female genital mutilation, sex trafficking, and wars in general in that scenario?

Just a pop culture reference I thought might be relevant to the discussion.

 

The main thing I'd like to chip on to this discussion is this: The word "radical" is very much misunderstood. "Radical" means "Arising from or going to a root or source". In other words, you look beyond the superficial and really get down to the root of the problem, requiring adequate, deep thinking.

I'm not a homosexual woman. I identify as a bi-/pansexual woman, leaning straight. But here are my thoughts.

1. Am I a feminist? Hell yeah! It's one of the cuddliest progressive movements in recent history - voting rights for women, better pay, a future outside of just tending to the house and its chores - it's great. There was a time when equality was basically seen as something that is simply good, like kindness. Now with all the fear of spooky socialists and so on, that has been forgotten to a large extent. But I stay true to the old ways! Equality ftw!

2. Am I a radical feminist? Hell yeah! I am NOT a liberal feminist who thinks "Oh, the world will be soooo much better when Hillary wins the elections because she has a vagina". No. I am interested in the inherent societal conditions that breed sexism, and sustain and exacerbate the predominance of the patriarchy. I'm interested in not just lashing out against superficial things, like a ridiculous article I saw yesterday, "Men with beards more likely to be sexist, study shows". Like wtf, are you for real? That's not getting to the root of the problem at all.
Now, don't get me wrong. Just because a lot of feminists who fall under the category of "radical" and is labelled such, shouldn't actually be so in my opinion because it contradicts the meaning of the word "radical", doesn't mean that it's not correct to lump these feminists together. I mean, you use the word "radical"; but you probably don't know what it means, and you might mean "crazy" or "over-the-top" rather than anything else. And then it's fine, even though I would prefer it if the word "radical" wasn't used in this sense, since I don't view getting to the root of problems as a bad thing. TERFs, for example, need to be simply ignored, or alternatively, brutally defeated. They have no legitimate place on the feminist arena.

 

Yeah... that's what I said, isn't it? That she has leverage (in one way; in another way she has a huge disadvantage), because she's a woman, is wrong. If that's what you think of when you hear the word radical, so be it. At least know that that's not what everybody means by it, it's no definition of it.

 

1. I'm not a feminist because 3rd wave feminism is useless, spreads misinformation (wage gap; 1 in 5 rape stat), is normally racist/homophobic/transphobic and sexist towards women and men. It promotes paranoia and denies blame by repeatedly reciting different variations of the "no true scotsman" fallacy. I'm not anti-feminist, but I don't want to associate myself with all of that.

2. Of course not

 

Bah, feminists can't even agree on the definition of feminism and many many of its branches. A rose by any other name...

 

All of these years and you still manage to take the words right out of my mouth. I have never read a textbook or piece of literature in which a modern Sociologist referred to equated radical feminism to the hate of men. The sociological definitions of radicalism and extremism are even different in themselves.

For example:

The ideological difference between a radical and a non-radical is not a difference in what they believe rather in how deeply they believe. It is the difference between a Christian, devote Christian, and religious extremist. All conservatives or liberals don't necessarily believe that we should create a liberal or conservative state and all live by those values as a whole. A radical is someone who does.

Whether or not one is radical has nothing to do with the specific believe they hold. You might believe that sacrificing the environment is immoral. If you believe that so deeply that you aspire to push for reform to outlaw the abuse of environmental resources, then you are a radical environmentalist. Any belief that you strongly believe extends beyond personal philosophy, should be reflected in society, and inspire reform is a radical belief. However, it is the way that you go about encouraging reform and evolution is society that determines whether one is an extremist.

Therefore, when it comes to the my position on feminism and gender equality, my views are radical. Radical not because I believe in some irrational, unique, or exaggerated form of feminism or that I am against those who individually fall into establish gender norms, rather I am radically against the established norm of gender and hierarchy in society and radically for social reform and the banishment of traditional values.

That is the difference.

 

I agree with this, I'm a feminist and I believe in equality of the sexes, a feminist is a person who believes women should be treated equal to men, it isn't called feminism to place women above men, it is about equality. If the person believes all men are evil and women are superior, they are not a feminist they are a misandrist.

 

Totally agree 100%. People seem to think that Radical Feminism is about hating males, it's about equality.

 

I do believe in equality, but I don't consider myself a feminist. Some feminists annoy me, actually. They want equality, but they think that they can punch a man in the face and expect him to walk away. (I'm not saying all feminists act this way, just some.) I've noticed a bunch of feminists live with double standards and hate men. They blame men for their problems.

Now, one feminist I love is Alice Paul. She was a wonderful woman.

 

I like postcolonial feminism. The ideas presented by them correspond with my own. The faces of western feminism include the likes of Joan Rivers, Mary Daly, and aren't people who were oppressed, nor are the people who advocate those ideas oppressed. They just want to see the stolen loot given to more unoppressed women. I'm not interested in that.