all 27 comments

[–]HouseplantWomen who disagree with QT are a different sex 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Radical feminism and gender critical feminism exist outside of the American political dichotomy and so it’s weird to associate the two so much.

There is no American right wing in Australia.

I’d say it’s pretty weird to say that if a radfem speaks on the one platform that will allow her to speak, a republican one, she’s now right wing but whenever a TRA is outed as a pedo or rapist they are immediately disconnected from the platform and are to be spoken about as an individual with individually bad ideas.

Why is a woman speaking next to a shitty man grounds for her to be a bad woman but a bad man representing your interests is an individual not representative of the group?

[–]HeimdeklediROAR[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Note: Yes I know it’s been a long time

The American political dichotomy doesn’t even really exist in America, but I’m being general with my use of terms. Do you not think that Australia has political groups who share many of the same values as american ones? Perhaps in some way influenced by conservative religious groups found in both countries?

I didn’t say she was a bad woman, I asked if she’s being inefficient in her activism by making people who want to take away her rights look better to the voting populace.

[–]HouseplantWomen who disagree with QT are a different sex 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Way to miss my entire point and divert to political party naming nuances, and nitpicking over not quoting you verbatim and using the word bad instead.

Can you respond to my point instead of this dithering over my language, please.

She can’t be any more efficient when she’s being actively deplatformed and you know that.

How is taking advantage of the last float you can reach legitimising or lending anything at all to the float?

Again, why does this woman lose her individuality and become a “right-wing” person by speaking on their platform when we can all agree that the people who support “liberal” platforms are not all complicit in the actions of individuals like Alok Venon or Christine Chandler or John Money?

[–]SnowAssMan 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

"Both parties" are conservative, & both are to blame for the latest development regarding RvW.

What are feminists supposed to do? Pretend Dems have their back? Make/vote for a third party that'll never make it, but even if it did, it'd just get infiltrated by the same corporate party that controls the two major parties?

Infiltrating the Conservative party is easier than trying to influence the "liberal" party. Boycotting the conservative party would be counter-productive.

[–]HeimdeklediROAR[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Infiltrating the Conservative party is easier than trying to influence the "liberal" party.

Is it though? And is giving more legitimacy to right wings group not a greater risk than simply being unable to significantly influence left wing ones

[–]HouseplantWomen who disagree with QT are a different sex 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Radical feminism and gender critical feminism exist outside of the American political dichotomy and so it’s weird to associate the two so much.

There is no American right wing in Australia.

I’d say it’s pretty weird to say that if a radfem speaks on the one platform that will allow her to speak, a republican one, she’s now right wing but whenever a TRA is outed as a pedo or rapist they are immediately disconnected from the platform and are to be spoken about as an individual with individually bad ideas.

Why is a woman speaking next to a shitty man grounds for her to be a bad woman but a bad man representing your interests is an individual not representative of the group?

[–]BiologyIsReal 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I think it would be self-defeating for American feminists to limit their reach by not using conservative platforms. I mean, it's not like liberal media will suddenly allow any trans critical view. And they are going to be called conservative not matter what they do, anyway.

Then again, from my point of view, both conservativism and liberalism are right wing ideologies, and I don't trust liberal media anymore than I do conservative one. But for what I've seen many American women do care a lot about not being associated with conservatives. And in spite of how much they hate to be smeared as conservatives by TRAs, they don't have any problem in using the same tactics over anyone who criticizes US foreign policy. So...

[–]GenderbenderShe/her/hers 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Most GCs try not to associate with conservatives. In fact for most GCs, their only conservative beliefs are about trans people. However, many sites that don't allow right wing rhetoric also ban gender criticals views so GCs end up posting on Saidit or Odysee which of course don't censor right wing views but are one of the few places where GC views are welcome.

[–]Omina_SentenziosaSarcastic Ovalord 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

In an ideal World, we wouldn' t associate with either right wing or left wing since they' re both mysoginistic shits that hate women and they are both responsible fo the state of women' s rights, including abortion.

It doesn' t matter if we stop associating with conservatives anyway, we' re going to be called right wingers regardless of what we do and say. We were called that way before some of us started using conservative platforms, in fact part of the reason why some of us even started was that we were thrown out from "leftist" places and called nazi and alt-righters.

I don' t like associating with right wingers, but I don' t like associating with left wingers just as much nowadays.

On top of that, the USA are not the one and only country in existence: in other countries we are not having the same problems related to reproduction that Americans are having, so whatever issue you have with American GCers associating with conservatives, I don' t see how that should touch upon GCers from other places.

[–]HeimdeklediROAR[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

The question was more about whether appearing on such conservative media outlets help conservatives appear more legitimate and thus make them more electable. Is it inefficient activism.

I mean GC activists and viewpoints being used by conservative politicians to increase their electability is an international occurrence.

[–]strictly 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

I sometimes find it funny when for example American liberals vilify conservatives in more liberal countries as these conservatives might be more liberal than the American liberals criticizing them, conservative is a relative term. I also see a difference between collaboration in single issues and putting a group into power. If I was a politician I would for example have no problem voting against males participating in female sports and “help” people I otherwise disagree with outvoting the other side in this single issue, but I wouldn’t put my vote on a party I overall disagree with just because I agree with them on some trans related issues.

[–]HeimdeklediROAR[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

So do you think it’s possible to work with conservative politicians in one area without increasing their overall electability?

[–]strictly 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

So do you think it’s possible to work with conservative politicians in one area without increasing their overall electability?

In some places being pro choice, pro same-sex marriage, pro democracy could be a conservative position, conservative fully depends on what what kind of values they want want to conserve, it’s a relative word. I think supporting values you agree with tend to increase the overall electability of these values, and I care about the actual values, not the label. If the so called "good guys" have homophobic values I can't vote on it will hopefully motivate them to become less homophobic in the future.

[–]HeimdeklediROAR[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

You don’t worry about unintentional consequences of giving conservatives messaging that only sounds feminist but will actually lead to the enforcement of legal gender codes

[–]theory_of_thisan actual straight crossdresser 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (12 children)

Gender Critical feminists overlap with some social conservative thinking. But they also diverge.

A problem is social conservatives are a larger percentage of the population and gender critical radical feminists. So popular gender critical feminism gets overwhelmed by social conservatives who aren't interested in radical feminism.

Gender critical feminism has a relationship with masculinity that defines it's audience.

[–]peakingatthemomentTranssexual (natal male), HSTS 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (11 children)

Gender critical feminism has a relationship with masculinity that defines it's audience.

What do you mean by this? I do feel like many Rad Fems are super anti femininity and feel like it only exists to keep women oppressed.

[–]theory_of_thisan actual straight crossdresser 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (10 children)

Radial feminists often seek to reject femininity, I think they end up in masculinity, but then I think they are often drawn to masculinity. That's natural.

But the pattern appears of gc lesbians being attracted to expressing masculinity, not caring what men do as long as they stay away. GC gay males being attracted to masculine men, and not "pretending to be women." Straight GC are down for all of that, liberation for women and gender conformity for men.

The trans debate itself is gendered.

This creates a pattern in the sides.

[–]MarkTwainiac 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (8 children)

LOL, this is like saying that all the people in the world fit in into one of two groups: red wine drinkers or white wine drinkers. When the reality is, a whole lot of people on earth don't drink wine at all. Plus, a good portion of the world's population at any given moment are too young to drink wine, even if they live in wine-appreciating cultures and will grow up later on to have a taste for it.

Just because you personally see the world through lenses that are hyper-focused on masculinity and femininity doesn't mean everyone else does. Please stop projecting your own views, preoccupations and hangups onto others - particularly women whose vantage point(s) and views are very different to yours. From your posting history, I have the impression you don't have a clue what radical feminists, a lot of other women and many "GC" men think.

[–]theory_of_thisan actual straight crossdresser 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (7 children)

Well I'm glad I can still entertain you.

Just because you personally see the world through lenses that are hyper-focused on masculinity and femininity doesn't mean everyone else does

Aren't we all hyper focused on gender here? Doesn't gender critical want to talk about masculinity and femininity?

From your posting history, I have the impression you don't have a clue what radical feminists, a lot of other women and many "GC" men think.

I've chatted with gc plenty times to know and respectfully report their opinions.

[–]MarkTwainiac 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (6 children)

Aren't we all hyper focused on gender here? Doesn't gender critical want to talk about masculinity and femininity?

No and no. People on the gender critical side are critical of gender, which we see as oppressive and limiting, and we are critical of gender ideology and genderism. Your side is the one that wants to talk about masculinity and femininity all the time, not us.

I personally find masculinity and femininity to be pretty boring - and being "hyper focused on gender" IMO leads to migraines, myopia and madness.

[–]HeimdeklediROAR[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

Not true, there are trans inclusive gender crits. We believe gender is unnecessary but that it is possible to have non-harmful versions of gender before it’s eventually abolished. Like people who don’t believe in marriage but aren’t militant about all of their friends divorced. Change takes time

[–]HouseplantWomen who disagree with QT are a different sex 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

What exactly is a non-harmful gender norm or role?

How can there be any sort of system that says x object/trait/aesthetic is for woman and y object/trait/aesthetic is for men that isn’t reductive and harmful?

[–]HeimdeklediROAR[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

Those aren’t the sort of systems I’m talking about. It’s more like people having subjective associations with things due to instincts and socialization and using artificial labels to categorize things in a personal way while not assuming that others share the same definitions as you.

[–]HouseplantWomen who disagree with QT are a different sex 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Literal word salad.

[–]adungitit 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Radial feminists often seek to reject femininity, I think they end up in masculinity, but then I think they are often drawn to masculinity.

Women who reject femininity are not masculine. They are neutral. The patriarchy has labelled anything neutral and normal as property of men, because women are seen as foreign subhumans. You have been explained this difference before many times, shut your mouth, and then merely returned later to parrot the exact same things as if you suffered brain damage and amnesia.