— Truthfully I don't think you're asking these questions in good faith, but I'll answer. however, I do want to make a clarification that after this response I won't be engaging further with you as I'd really like to focus my time with like-minded women, and not waste it by haggling, which honestly is what this feels like; I am put in a situation where I have to placate my words and reassure adult heterosexual women of their worth in a clear bad-faith bait reading while bowing down and appealing to their egos in reassurance of their own 'feminist value', in other words, it feels like you want me to coddle you. and it's proven as you seem to be strawman'ing my words back to me while misconstruing the context in your favor.
EDIT: as I was reading and responding.. i have to ask: do you realize how absolutely unwell you come across? the sheer number of gaslighting, racism, and whataboutism fallacies is astounding.
Do you think dating/idolizing (be real, do you mean having a crush on a male character from some dumb show, be honest)/ birthing males automatically mean women are centering men? Or that it automatically renders women incapable of having female solidarity and/or prioritizing other women? yes, I do think that women who idolize men or have crushes on men are indeed prioritizing men, but no they're not incapable of prioritizing other women. Being romantically involved with men means you are prioritizing them; tv crushes and fictional men are another thing entirely and not quite as relevant as real men, however, if you idolize men; an actor who turns out to be a rapist eventually (just think of the Johnny Depp situation) don't you think you're more likely to call his victims liars? And I mean you as in general, not a personal attack. you have female friends, family members, classmates, etc. you are actively bringing males into their lives and into feminist spaces, generalizing their presence, their violence, and their misogyny, no matter how 'good' of a feminist you believe you are, nor how good your male is, you cannot control him.
— I do not believe dating males is a core essential of radical feminism. you are a feminist, and do take feminist actions by having solidarity with and supporting other women, just not a radical feminist; here's the thing however, the 6B4T movement encourages other women (who have not comprehensively committed to radical feminism) to support other women, especially those who are celibate. so if rad-adjacent women wish to show their support for female solidarity, and prioritize other women: it's best to start by advocating for celibacy (giving an option to women, as many women have been conditioned to think romance with males is a core essential to what makes them a person, including you as you asked me later on if heterosexual women are women.), then the next step would be to uplift celibate women and not alienate them via stereotypical misogyny ('you just cannot find a guy', 'if you weren't an ugly man-hating feminist, etc)
Do you think black people should prioritize refusing to date white people as the keystone of antiracist activism? you are a white woman. so I do find your play of racial comparison quite abhorrent. if you are incapable of discussing a problem without being racist and weaponizing the oppression of poc, I do not wish to speak to you as you are the racists on r*dblr I previously mentioned. anyway, to quote a friend of mine: "how many posts by woc saying 'interracial partnership is shamed as a part of racism, heterosexual partnership is encouraged as a part of misogyny' do we need before people stop making this comparison", and as I said, you are a white woman, so tell me why you feel the need to compare racism to heterosexual celibacy? and since you're the one who's asking the questions here, I'd like to ask one of my own: show me a point in time when heterosexual relationships were criminalized on the basis of being heterosexual without any outside factors of race, disability, and so on in the play.
— this comparison does not work. also, I am not aware of any radical antiracist movement that advocates for that, however, if they did then yes I'd expect the self-proclaimed people claiming to follow that ideology to also follow what the ideology preaches? you seem to selectively (& rather conveniently) forget that radical feminism is a radical movement that seeks to dismantle the root of the patriarchy, the root being men. if you wish to lay with men and call yourself a feminist then congratulations, you can. but you are no radical feminist without any radical action.
How exactly do women remaining celibate dismantle male-owned governments and industry? The military? Weapons manufacturers? As opposed to what? convincing him to dismantle the patriarchy from the kitchen? as women birth his children and do his labour? This is a sign of protest if you can remember, I recall not so long ago Liberal feminists advocated for celibacy as a sign of protest too when American women lost the right to have an abortion. women are oppressed on the basis of sexual exploitation and reproduction. do you not find it counterproductive to join a movement that preaches against giving men what they want and then fighting every single woman who questions your hypocrisy? If there are no women in positions of political power it's most definitely because they are being barred from working, getting an education, facing misogyny in male-dominated fields and dropping out, or they are being forced to spend their time being the homemaker. if you want to help dismantle male-owned governments and industries how about doing so by focusing on female solidarity? making sure female children, friends of yours, or just women, in general, prioritize their education, and their right to not be sold off and married, rather than fighting online on behalf of men? Because that is what you are doing by going 'not all men'.
Do you actually think that all, or most, lesbians are resigned to the fact (?) that they will never date, never find love, and will likely be sold or raped by their family members? I wouldn't have said it otherwise, would I? Is there a reason I'm being made to repeat myself; yes most lesbians do in fact resign themselves to the fact that they will remain celibate due to homophobia, misogyny, or both.. now would be a good time to remember Western countries aren't the majority of the world.
How can you say, on one hand, that het relationships are inherently abusive and dangerous for women, and then say that every part of creation on the planet has been saturated in straight women’s favour, that the work is made for them? How does the entire world give straight women what they want? Are straight women, not women? Are they not trafficked and raped and killed and sold off as child brides or trapped in loveless marriages based off financial vulnerabilities? Were straight women not treated as property throughout history? Is this still not the case in many places? five things here:
....after all the reasons you yourself have listed out why do you argue for partnering with males? don't you find the contradiction telling of your own cognitive dissonance?
I never said heterosexual relationships are inherently violent; men make the choice to abuse women out of their own violation, not due to some biological factor so refrain from putting words in my mouth thank you.
You're purposely ignoring the context of my post once again, where in the paragraph you are (deliberately) misconstruing, I talk about media representation. so yes, the world is saturated with media about males and women falling in love; lesbians have to go looking for scraps in order to not feel like the 'odd' one.
yes, osa women do gain privileges by partnering with males, and experience abuse from them; two statements can be true if you have the nuance to understand them. The reason osa women are often abused in such large numbers is, as you stated, due to their partnership with men, but that does not erase the fact that they're paid more by governments to marry and have children? it does not erase the fact that they have some level of financial security (depending on males taking care of them), you are not a victim of conversion therapy, lashings, mutilations, or execution simply in relation to your heterosexual relationships; yes, those are privileges. we are all oppressed but osa women do have privileges, it's best to let go of the self-victimization mentality and acknowledge that; just as how white women play a part in other women's oppression, osa women are and do in many many instances oppress other women.
'are straight women, not women?' every single thing you've listed is equally applicable to lesbians, do you think lesbians aren't trafficked or raped or killed? married off as child brides or sold off? do you think our families ask us we are lesbians before they sell us? do you think lesbians aren't women; were lesbians not treated like property? the things you are describing are misogynistic actions perpetrated by men; yes straight women are oppressed because they partner with their abusers, yet they still have the privileges I listed on point four, your oppression doesn't cancel out your privileges. the same way a poc will gain more privilege by allying themselves with the oppressors, and simultaneously put themselves in harm's way as well. why do you say these words while acting as though osa women have no control over their choices?
Do you think that precisely every single man that exists at this moment is utterly incapable of sincerely caring for any woman? yes, I do. and even if I didn't do you truly wish for a feminist movement to waste its time trying to reform males from their male socialization? more so, do you believe it's appropriate of you to ask radical feminists to do that? expend effort trying to convert the 'root' to our side and 'change' them? this conversation is starting to resemble a romance fantasy about fixing males by being 'different' than the countless other feminists who have tried throughout history.
Do you think that women in the USA are comfortable with losing their bodily autonomy and reproductive rights? Do you think child brides in Canada are comfortable? Do you think black and brown women of the Americas are comfortable with the ever-rising rates of medical misogynoir and domestic violence they face? Do you think that’s why they’re refusing to adopt celibacy and end patriarchy? Do you truly think that women in the West aren’t being raped, trafficked, abused, murdered? This, I think, is by far the vilest manipulation tactic you've tried to pull, to the point I genuinely think you are evil for it. it is also a loaded question fallacy.
The assertion that 'I don't possess any privilege due to my own experience of oppression in certain aspects' in response to the claim that 'women residing in the global west hold certain privileges over women in other regions' is arguably one of the most privileged ways you could have responded. By your logic, is it fair for a man to say: 'I lack male privilege because I identify as gay/black/poor/etc’?
I do not recall ever denying that women in the West are oppressed, however, none of it is a unique experience that exists solely in the global west. They suffer misogyny under many different axes such as racism, homophobia, and so on, yet that in no way negates the fact that western women are still privileged due to the fact they reside in first-world countries; They will not be assaulted every single day for saying they are feminists, They do not require special carts of transportation such as countries that were forced to implement them simply due to the large number of sexual assault cases, they are not poisoned for attending schools, they do not have period huts, they are not banned from running for presidency, etc — yes, there are all privileges western women have. As for bodily autonomy, many western women lost that right because of males, and also because women in their own movement support the decision (“Abortion is wrong because god said so”), meanwhile many women in developing countries never even had the right to lose it. Western women undoubtedly face challenges, however, the severity of it is most definitely different. Hence why Radical feminism in the west and the east are so vastly different from one another.
Again, you are a white woman; who are you to speak on the experiences of WOC anywhere? Especially when you bring them up to tokenize them for your arguments?
Why are you applying the standards that I am holding self-proclaimed Radical feminists to all women of all backgrounds? It’s not applicable because they do not subscribe to this ideology, so to insinuate I think they’re being oppressed simply because they’re “dumb” is a loaded question fallacy, and frankly depraved of you.
Random women, the majority of the women around the world actually, do not have access to the resources and knowledge you do to make informed decisions, nor do they have the freedom to actually decide such things, especially when in comparison to someone like you. Nor do these women subscribe to the radfem ideology and call themselves Radical feminists so why do you suggest I gauge all women with these standards?
You must be a troll if to discredit me you had to resort to insinuating that my stating ‘feminism in the west is weaker because of privileges living in imperialist nations in the global west granted women’ equates in any way to me genuinely believing that ‘women are choosing to be raped/trafficked, etc or they are simply lying’ ..this strawman is beyond egregious. Do you believe the things you’re asking of me? Because If i am honest, you are putting a lot of words in my mouth.
This entire response appears to be a deliberate diversion from the original points I raised, to derail it and evade initial criticism towards self-proclaimed radical feminists. The main focus of my original post was criticism towards self-identifying radical feminists that claim to agree, and be part of, a movement from foreign countries (thus using eastern woc feminists as an argument to win against transgender racists), which frequently promote female separatism as a core aspect, while simultaneously refraining from engaging in the most fundamental forms of radical action.
You are exploiting my concern for women as a way to discredit, disrupt and divert me from addressing the hypocritical actions of self-proclaimed radical feminists who fail to uphold the fundamentals of an ideology they claim to believe. Instead of acknowledging that engaging in relationships with men contradicts radical feminism at its core, you use such disingenuous ‘arguments’, hoping I'll stop raising valid points, or speak on this topic in general. Is your primary focus here not in preserving the 'radfem' label for het partnered women as we speak? even if it means suppressing the voices of other women and feminists, rather than genuinely striving for complete female liberation from men – a goal that would not be so contradictory nor controversial if you and others like you simply identified as 'feminists,' 'rad-aligned,' or 'rad-informed' feminists, which would also address the concern about ‘radical feminism not being discussed’ that many have pointed out.
Do you think that women have sex drives? Do you think that the desire for romantic intimacy with a partner one is sexually attracted to is something that straight women experience? please search for validation somewhere else. going forth I'll be skipping over a lot of your ...let's call it 'silly', questions.
How is regarding sexual intimacy essential for a well-rounded life misogynistic? How is it homophobic? How are women acknowledging the strength of their own romantic and sexual desires and pursuing them “incel-like behavior”? it's the context and insinuation; saying that asking women who claim to subscribe to an ideology that advocates for separatism is 'cruel' to ask of osa women, is simply rooted in the notion that you believe being with men is a fundamental aspect of your part as a woman; hence homophobia. The first part, misogyny, here persists when osa rf women imply they cannot live, function, or have fulfilling meaningful lives without sex with men in the context of self-proclaimed radical feminists and separatists. the incel-like behavior again, refers to the belief that sex is a need; absolutely none of this is me ever implying this standard should be set with all women. if you are not ready to take radical action, do not call yourself a radfem. go back to my preface, please.
How do straight women performing celibacy directly and exclusively contribute to the liberation of women and girls from male rule? let me ask you instead: is female oppression completely disconnected from men's desire for sexual access to women? Is women's labour and exploitation not what men seek ultimately? do you truly believe you will liberate anyone by putting individualistic choices over political (in a movement that you claim to be part of your own violation, with no one out to expressly 'hunt' down your male partner or you)? do you think willingly giving men what they please will in any way achieve female liberation? Straight women performing separatism contribute to female liberation by restricting men's access to women, by not birthing future rapists or victims of misogyny, etc.
What specific spaces are lesbians and woc being chased out by het-partnered radfems? ...........Radical feminist spaces.
What specific privileges do women gain from “bedding” men? I thought you said that bedding men were self-harm for women? Are you saying that self-harming actions are ultimately beneficial . . . or? I do believe I already answered this, point number 4 in paragraph 1. and it is indeed very duplicitous of you to ignore the fact that het partnered women face the most male violence; the largest percentage of victims of femicide are killed by their partners, to genuinely try and imply men are 'safe' to be with is a dishonest deflection.
Where is this place that we can go where men can never reach us again, keeping in mind that they are 50% of the world’s population? Those spaces must be expanded and created via separatism; as things stand now there are very few womyn's land already in play. there would be more if actual radical feminists were allowed to gather and collectively progress the movement without the intervention of het partnered self-proclaimed rf's claiming it is misogyny to advocate for separatism.
Do you think that interpersonal bullying doesn’t exist? Do you think that individual women are incapable of harassing other individual women? Are you saying that a woman with a disability, for instance, could never be abusive toward a fully-abled woman? To the extent that the abled woman separated herself from the community she once shared with the woman with a disability? strawman, and irrelevant to the discussion entirely.
How are osa women part of the male oppressor class? Do you think there are any woc who are also . . . osa? Het-partnered? Do you think there are any lesbians and woc who are liberal feminists? Do you think women in conservative households and nunneries have healthy relationships with their sexuality and full rights to their bodily autonomy? ........... whataboutism fallacies. and none of those women claim to be radical feminists, now, do they? if they did I would hold them to the exact same standard.
Why would lesbians have to interact with men in female-only spaces just bc het-partnered women also have use of them? (Just an aside; most of my lesbian friends irl have at least a few very close male friends and a fair amount of them have male housemates.) Do you recall when het partnered women started bringing men into gay bars? what about how female-only spaces are being treated as het therapy centers rather than focusing on female liberation (this applies to r*dblr especially)? if in a radical feminist space, women hesitate to renounce their oppressors, it means they are prioritizing men over other women. Heterosexual women do have privileges over lesbians and are capable of aiding in their oppression as it is clear by the current state of radblr; feminist women prioritize men and being lesphobic, racist, and so on in an attempt to 'not-all-men', despite the fact that majority of the women advocating for celibacy are victims of male violence themselves (OSA & SSA; how do you think they feel when the women who claim to have solidarity with them defend men?). and I am unsure what your point was with the personal anecdote; I hardly doubt those women are separatists, and if they claim to be so then they're not very good at it.
What sort of structural power, exactly, do straight women have over lesbian women? you don’t face social stigma or discrimination due to your sexual orientation thus granting you more social acceptance and privilege. Access to marriage rights, adoption, inheritance, Media representation as well as representation in legal authoritative positions, not being fired from your job due to your sexuality, receiving support from your families, Economic advantages, and resources that might be difficult for a lesbian to access, heteronormative expectations that force lesbians to adhere to them to avoid discrimination, or judgment and not being seen as ‘abnormal’ (as heterosexual women are considered the normal here), being able to show your affection publicly, speak of your love publicly without being accused of making others uncomfortable or outright facing assault, conversion therapy or death. having the power to condemn lesbians in favor of male validation, aiding in lesbian sexuality becoming a porn category for men due to a hyper-sexualized male-gaze fantasy acted out by osa women, thus aiding in the sexual assault of lesbians, honey potting, etc.
How were radfem lesbians abused by osa radfems, specifically for their contributions to feminism? the fact that our sexuality is a political label at this very moment that osa radfems believe it's okay to co-opt simply in relation to them not partnering with men speaks for itself.
Are you saying that lesbian radfems have received nothing but abuse from radblr and other radfem spaces from osa radfems? purposefully misconstrued wording, but yes.
Do you think that osa women contribute less to female liberation than lesbian women, de facto? If so, what evidence do you have? How do you contribute to female liberation when you bring men into female spaces, defend men, prioritize men, do their labour, birth their children, purposefully disrupt and derail radical feminist movement simply due to your lack of commitment, yet inability to give up the 'radfem' label you cling to so desperately? it is very much a 'one step forward, 2 steps backward' situation.
Do you think all Tumblr radfems are white, straight, Western, and privileged? What evidence do you have of this? Most are; english speaking website, a large usamerican population, and osa.
Did you know that girls are in danger of becoming child brides in pretty much every country on the planet? Yes, I believe you will find me mentioning that when I stated "because they aren't child brides (or at least pretend that it's not an issue in their countries)"
Do you think there might be any reason why radfem women prioritize fighting against medical experimentation on children, women, and LGB people, and the destruction of female spaces and the very concept of womanhood, over celibacy from men? why do all radfems need to devote their time to male-centric discussions though? To the point that the only ‘leading’ reaction to radical feminism is regarding its transgenderism, and the thing that garners the most attention also happens to be anti-transes who have no interest in furthering the cause yet they simply call themselves radical feminists. the movement is overshadowed almost entirely by this that hardly anyone (‘normies’) are aware of other core tenets of radical feminism, as well as the fact that any actually meaningful discussion is sidelined as “discourse” between those who are capable of committing and those who are simply here for one singular goal. I also think due to the fact that a majority of radfems are osa they will be defensive about their own participation in the patriarchy and simply deflect by focusing almost completely on transgenders and men; I also find it hypocritical that so many radfems post articles of tragedies about male transes depravity of how they lived unsuspecting of others before committing a depraved act — that is always acknowledged as 'typical male behavior' yet they do not wish to think that the male in their homes could also be someone equally equipped at concealing his depravity.
How are radfems grooming young girls into sleeping with men? currently, radical feminism is dominated heavily by teens and underage girls, do you think by simply acknowledging men rape/kill/abuse women, is enough? especially when your own actions contradict your words and popularize the notion of 'good men', how many young girls do you think will go out searching for these 'good men' after being inspired by you; that 'being a radical feminist and being with a man is not contradictory behavior in the slightest'. how many young girls do you think will read these posts het partnered women make about 'spotting red flags' in relationships and endangering themselves because they simply believe they are 'different' and more capable of vetting these men? do you not think these women will be preyed upon by men? And how many of these abusive situations are they willing to let go of before settling down for the least abusive male? alternatively, how are you, as a het-partnered 'radical feminist' helping these girls? Is saving them after they've been abused your goal? when it can be prevented by encouraging separatism? many young women already adopt gender identities or the asexuality label to escape misogyny, hypersexualization, etc; simply because they are unaware of a better option, that they do not require males despite how the current media is oversaturated with heterosexual propaganda of teen romcoms. Do you not think coming to an online place that 'dissects' men's behavior inturn creates the belief of superiority that they somehow know 'better' than other un-peaked women? (this applies to both young girls and adult radfems). Radfems are the first to acknowledge porn harms women and that people's personal choices regarding kinks do not exist in a vacuum, yet they are also the first to collectively forget that fact in regard to everything else.
How do you know what radfems on Tumblr are actually doing in real life to contribute to activism? they speak it; how do you come online, claim you're a radical feminist and then fundamentally ignore its core ideology?
Aren’t you also a radfem on Tumblr? yes, and I practice everything I preach and do not seek to derail an entire movement for my ego's sake.
Do you think that radfems are extending their compassion towards pedophile genociders over lesbian radfems? I know you mean this in the worst way possible as shown by you taking a hyperbole seriously, however, I do recall Simone De Beauvoir sympathizers, so the grooming part is correct.
Do you think that supporting imperialism and being racist are on the same level as “birthing children and bedding males”? Do you think that women who birth children qualify as the worst people alive? Really? It's not on 'the same level' however it's not above criticism either, similar to how I can advocate for separatism and speak for anti-otaku culture; I shouldn't have to police my language and create an entire paragraph to make the same points you struggle to address without nitpicking every letter. The second part is once again disingenuous reading. but self-proclaimed radfems who birth kids are hypocritical, especially when they encourage other women, feminists, to do so as well; you are very well birthing a future perpetrator of misogyny or a victim of it; all feminist women in history have tried to 'reform' males, it won't be different with you either, yet ultimately this is subjective and my personal opinion. I've heard 'the next generation will be better' argument and I have wondered why you are giving the responsibility of 'fixing' things to random innocent children when they are wholly unaware of a problem, and are nowhere near being able to comprehend the true gravity of the situation, unlike the radfems who devote themselves to fighting the root of female oppression.
You don’t think any racist, lesbophobic, classist, ableist, prejudiced “radfems” get chased off radblr on the daily? Do you think it’s only lesbian and woc radfems who are merely trying to encourage women towards separatism, getting banished from radblr? Do you have a list of these women? Do you think there are no white osa radfems? Do you think that white straight women have never done anything for female liberation? I know very well that you have the answers to this yourself (& an answer you expect of me already) so I am confident in your ability to make an educated guess so I am not burdened with answering repetitive, bait, and disingenuous questions.
Finally, I think you are a very privileged woman; the things you've said, brought up, misconstrued, have been dishonest, and attempted to gaslight me about in the end reveal your own comfort: you are so blind to the problems a majority of women face that isn't centered around you — specifically regarding lesbians and woc, that you had to demand burden of proof from me, despite it being something you should provide if you are disagreeing with someone rather than simply putting words in their mouth while echoing a strawman version of their own question back at them. what was your overall point in this if not to try and talk circles around me with the illusion of disagreement without anything of true meaning being offered? are you a troll perhaps? why did you feel the need to demand I answer a million bad-faith questions with complete grace and eloquence? meanwhile, your own 'argument' against celibacy is 'because I want to sleep with men, and continue calling myself a radical feminist'. all of this without even addressing the incessant microaggression, racism, and the sheer number of fallacies present.
