So I was replying to a post about libfem vs radfem ideas but it was deleted. Here is my reply, I hope it clarifies stuff for the newbies and sparks some thoughts, I'm interested in hearing what you think and also, please educate me further if I'm missing something.
I would say that for me, the big difference between the two comes down to sex.
Liberal feminists think that the kind of sex you like is pretty much a personal, individual thing that is not influenced by larger systems of power, and that shouldn't be scrutinized in any circumnstances. The more libertarian the feminism, the more they believe that "transgressive sex" is not just an individual preference, but politically revolutionary by default (see BDSM etc.). They fancy themselves social constructionists but compartimentalize some areas of existence that in their opinion cannot be influenced by society, areas in which people entirely 100% self-actualize, and sex is one of them. They very much rebel against purity culture (and rightfully so) but completely fail to understand and refuse to acknowledge the ways in which "sexual liberation" was made by men and for men. So basically they fight the right wing patriarchal notion of female sexuality ("woman=madonna") by enforcing a left wing patriarchal notion of female sexuality ("woman=whore").
Radical feminists, on the other hand, believe that the way people have sex under patriarchy is ultimately influenced by the patriarchy itself, and therefore is up for critical analysis and debate. In this system, sex is done in a way that primarily benefits men, regardless if they're right wing purity types or left wing transgressive types. Radical feminism recognizes these as two sides of the same coin and, since it's historically a left wing movement, has focused a great deal on criticizing left wing patriarchal notion of sexuality from the inside, which is the reason why it's banned, hated, slandered and misrepresented as "sex negative" (because not even left wing men want to give up their sex slaves). Radical feminism analyses ways in which the sex industry harms women and participates in the cycle of violence against women. It analyses the link between childhood sexual trauma, pedophilia, incest and the sex industry. It analyses all the ways in which women are pressured to "perform" sexually a certain way in order not to be as labeled prudes or frigid, or close minded, all for the male benefit. It analyses how the patriarchy sees uncoupled women working
... keep reading on reddit ➡tl;dr: The earliest idol fandom culture in Korea in the 90s and early 2000s was intense and full of angst. I think that it’s because young women’s sexuality was really severely repressed. The recent radical feminism in Korea, in its origin, had a link to the remainders of the culture. I wonder if anyone relates
** Potential trigger warning.
The other day I wrote a post about memories as a female queer (https://www.reddit.com/r/korea/comments/rwa4ur/memories_of_lgbt_culture_and_sexual_repression_in/), then I reminisced a bit about the fandom culture in the 90s~early 2000s because of some discussions in the comment.
Common arguments were that the homoerotic fan fiction is a common feature in extreme fandoms in Western cultures as well, and it has nothing to do with Korea, or queer culture. But I still think that there was something uniquely Korean about the phenomenon, so I’d like to put out a bit of thoughts.
First, the fandom/fan fiction culture really influenced female teenagers across the nation, and the culture was shared in classrooms and school. When I was like an elementary school student, literally all girls in my class were divided into either H.O.T. (using all three punctuation marks was very important) camp or Sechs Kies camp. I was really young, but I remember. The H.O.T. fandom was particularly strong and fanatical. Probably H.O.T. was comparable to Beatles in the 60s?
The lyrics of H.O.T. songs were full of teenage angst. Their debut song "Age of Violence" starts with:
>Argh! Who do you think you are? Why are you hitting me, why, who do you think you are? You're chocking the weak, I want to be free from you now" (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7ggXa28ADLE)
This song was about violence and bullying in school, but in retrospect, can't it be also interpreted as about domestic violence? It was 20 years before the second wave feminism that swept across Korea, and domestic violence, child molesting, sex trafficking, even incestual harassment were all too common but invisible.
In many cases H.O.T. concerts looked like a mega-church evangelical revival event, with full of girls fanatically crying and shouting. This creeped out a bit the adults and rest of the society. When I think about the level of misunderstanding and repression against young female libido back then, it is
... keep reading on reddit ➡I recently joined a radical feminist group over on Facebook, and was disheartened to see many women getting nasty about a post I made. The post in question was a discussion on feeling like childbirth and motherhood were slightly "anti feminist", predominantly because mums tend to get left with health conditions (such as vaginal or/and rectal prolapse, tearing during delivery and needing to be stitched back up, having their vagina and anus become essentially one hole, losing their teeth and hair, gestational diabetes and much more besides) and are expected to do the lion's share of housework and childcare on top of working.
I had one woman in particular going on at me, asking if I'd ever been pregnant and saying all the conditions I mentioned were rare. I don't think a few liked the fact I am childfree by choice either, and thought my post was "anti mother" and that I had internalised misogyny (wtf).
I didn't know radical feminism was about being very pronatal, and seeing pregnancy and motherhood as goddess-like ventures with no problems and "the beauty of being a woman" as one woman in the group put it. Is this just a few overzealous types, or is pronatalism a key feature? I've never seen evidence suggesting so when I've researched radical feminism, but I could be wrong.
Hi so I didn't really know where else to post this. Even though I'm part of multiple female-centric subreddits like r/TwoXChromosomes etc I am too afraid to ask this on other platforms due to fear of being banned etc. If this is in any way harmful, please delete this post.
What distinguishes one from a feminist to a radical feminist? What are the issues of contention bw the two? Where do TERF/SWERF fall in this spectrum (for lack of a better word) of feminist thought?
Tryna educate some ppl
I've recently finished Material Girls by Kathleen Stock because of a recent review by Richard Dawkins and would like to read more on the subject. Thanks in advance!
Andrea Dworkin has been extensively referenced by the pinkpill and blackpill community, as well as those who identify as some sort of gender critical/TERF/radfems.
My question is that what is her actual opinion on trans identity and trans people. is it true that she rejects trans identity? is she trans phobic?
which leads to my second question: is radical feminism incompatible with trans people?
it seems hard for trans people to fit into radfem circles and it's even harder to find trans friendly radfems.
I agree with certain radfem beliefs like anti-porn and anti-sex work stances but minus the trans exclusion.
I’m also not religious. Like… at all.
It’s so frustrating bc I feel like when anyone says they’re against porn, people would assume their hyper-religious or in the same terf vain as JK Rowling.
This opinion is of course very often held by terfs but ive also seen it held by some inclusive radfems on this sub. And many progressive gender abolitionists hold the opinion.
I dont think its an abhorrent opinion to have, it would be good to live in a world where everyone is just happy with the body they have from the start.
But the idea itself just seems a bit unfounded. Why would someone stop wanting the sexual characteristics of the opposite sex in a post gender society? Why would it stop 4 year olds from wanting to be the other sex? Why would gay drag queens who already act more stereotypically womanly than most women, come out as trans?
/qj
TRANS WOMEN ARE WOMEN.
TRANSMEN ARE MEN.
NONBINARY PEOPLE ARE VALID.
Fuck all the way off,
J
I've been hearing about the controvery of FDS as of late, and this certainly isn't the first one. I made this subreddit after the long post from FDS in an attempt to distance itself from WGTOW/FEMCELS/Pinkpill, and I posted a comment in that original post which I can't quote as FDS has been made private. Once it is up again I will post it.
It was essentially saying that No Dating IS a dating strategy, especially in the climate young women like myself are living in today. It used to be agreed upon universally in FDS that despite your high standards, despite your levelling up, you may not ever be able to find a HVM, and that it is a very real possibility that you may end up not being in a relationship at all, and to find acceptance in that. Why has this changed? Are we supposed to be dating, over and over again, in a groundhog's day of weeding out LVM when the majority of men are that? Isn't that exhausting? Isn't that a waste of time? And how could it even be possible for every woman to find a HVM when they are so rare? It makes logical sense that many of us will end up alone.
I think it is a mistake for FDS to distance itself from other tenets of new wave radical feminism. I think that is what FDS used to stand for, and I remember finding that subreddit nearly 2 years ago, and naturally finding other tenets of radical feminism. It shaped my thinking for what it is today. I wouldn't be here without it.
Are they doing this to prevent the inevitable bans that other radfem spaces succumbed to? I could see why they would do that. I even thought of doing the same thing on this subreddit. I have changed my mind. I think it is part of why I abandoned this subreddit. It felt phonyish. Why not allow women here to talk about the likes of pinkpillfeminism? It is the truth and will always remain so. Is there really any point to stifling an emerging wave of feminism, all for the sake of preserving it on a website that so clearly hates women? Wouldn't it be more productive, more effective, to gather a cohort of like-minded women, and create our own platforms?
I will also point out that many of the mods active on FDS used to participate in r/pinkpillfeminism. It is a shame that they are trying to other us when I reckon they have so many of their mindsets due to what was discussed in subreddits like that. It feels like selling out. I can understand it though. Losing FDS to the banwave will be heartbreaking, and I imagine the work they put into it would be in vain. H
... keep reading on reddit ➡
When I was a child I read a book I shouldn't have about some Saudi Arabian woman's life, and it was nightmarish. That made me open my eyes to the reality of having a woman's body and how it marked me as separate from my brothers. But, that was followed by the Spice Girls telling us to do whatever we wanted and to go for things with boldness, so maybe women could overcome any sexism they came across if they were a bit more aggressive? I was safe.
Once I arrived in university I was still angry about women's bodies being treated horrifically in developing, and war-torn countries, but it also dawned on me that women were also treated as less-than by medical professionals in my own first-world country, leading to preventable deaths, so was there a connection? Was I safe?
Despite this, I started to become disillusioned with feminism and all things women's rights.
Feminists were angrily calling things out as misogyny that were basically just insensitive, dumb comments, while at the same time being absolutely blind to real misogyny. I could not connect to them. I wondered if I was over-reacting to things I thought were wrong, and under-reacting to things they thought were wrong.
I also had no patience for how much energy was devoted to "the media making girls feel bad about their looks" as a talking point. My aunt's neighbour was black and blue from being beaten by her husband, so I could never relate to the prioritising of women's feelings over women's brutal reality. But, I didn't intellectually grasp this at the time, I thought maybe I was just uncaring or cold. I didn't clock that I was just never going to find middle-class problems as truly worth centering when there's actual violence being inflicted daily on women.
And then, in my worst moment, I thought to myself that maybe women's rights aren't taken very seriously because feminists are wasting their time dancing around in pussy hats? And that maybe things weren't so bad in my country compared to others, if this is what feminists were organising to spend their time on?
So, I decided that if I just distanced myself from groups I obviously don't belong in, and ditch the feminist title, I could Lean In™ and power my way up some career and achieve some form of female progression to be proud of, even if it's just for myself. But, almost immediately as soon as I started in my first "real" job, I felt this overwhelming sense of gaslighting settle in. The creepiness, mediocrity, and sometimes blatant m
... keep reading on reddit ➡
Analysis of our structures from birth and beyond are bedrocks of Feminism. Everything from toys, clothing, and media are analyzed in hopes to answer the whys of women and our lives in the patriarchy. Rarely is there analysis akin to this discussed by and for men as Meninism doesn't exist.
Structures created by and for men are largely violence based. In early childhood and nowadays extending well into adulthood, video games with war-based and/or violent themes are prevalent. Toy soldiers, toy guns and swords, and action figures are staples in a young boy's toy box. Throughout mens' lives, "Man up! Don't be a pussy!" are frequently uttered phrases by both sexes and used as a method of controlling men emotionally.
American football is the most popular sport in the US and Canada. Fathers often initiate and ritualize their sons into following professional teams and having hard schedules around viewing the games. It becomes very apparent to most young men that these are the men they should strive to be like. In many families, the son being a football star or even just playing the sport is a great source of pride. Boys as young as 3 will start playing football. Men are physically stopping other men from advancing across the field. Chronic Traumatic Encephalopathy occurs from repeated blows to the head and is a frequent injury in football players and military men. One of the complications of CTE is violence. The tragic story of Aaron Hernandez is likely the most famous example of CTE and its devastating effects. After a posthumous biopsy found he had the most advanced case for someone of his 27 year old age, this sparked many players coming forward and hoping for more research and treatments for CTE.
Crime is where men really shine. Statistics are consistent in that males win first place in every crime category and for every age group. Over 90% of the US prison population is male and I would imagine other countries' data would show the same. Mass shooting perpetrators are 98% male and often carried out for incredibly misogynistic reasons. These men demand female subservience and when this fails they react with unfettered violence towards women and children often unknown to the shooter.
It is clear that male validation is achieved via strength, stoicism, and the proof of having subservients. This is more often than not achieved through physical force, but men are no stranger to emotional manipulation. The best and most deadly example of this is the military.
... keep reading on reddit ➡Comment in question: https://www.reddit.com/r/AskReddit/comments/o12s5e/what_recent_movies_will_be_considered_classics_25/h207qyt/?context=10000
From here, the user in question quadruples down on their bad takes, bringing up Nazis (invoking Godwin's Law himself in the same damn comment), "149 million dead from communism", and of course rushing to defend Daddy Trump. The slapfights are continuing even as I type this, so I'll try to update if arguments keep coming.
One fun exchange:
Take a breath incel. You use a lot of words for someone who doesn’t say much of anything.
Dude plays dumb when someone calls him an incel:
Is "incel" just some random insult to throw, like calling someone "retarded"?
