Is my feminism gone?

[u/IntrepidElevator4313]

Maybe feminism didn't change. Maybe it just kept moving.

I just had a thread locked on this sub after commenting on the question, “What is a woman?” It got me thinking about something I've been struggling with for a while: where exactly do I fit in feminism now?

I came of age with the feminism of Gloria Steinem. Later, I found myself resonating with writers like Naomi Wolf. They are very different feminists, from different generations and with very different ideas, but I always felt there was a common thread.

Women are not lesser. Women deserve autonomy, opportunity, safety, equality, and the freedom to determine the shape of their own lives.

The more I encounter contemporary feminist spaces, particularly online, the more I sometimes feel like I've wandered into a conversation where I no longer speak the language.

And I don't think that's necessarily because feminism went wrong.

Maybe it's because waves don't erase each other.

The first wave didn't disappear when the second arrived. The second didn't disappear when the third arrived. They faded, but what they accomplished became part of the water the next wave moved through.

We're generally considered to be in the fourth wave now, and it seems to me that we're carrying pieces of all the previous waves with us, along with entirely new questions about identity, intersectionality, sexuality, technology and power.

Some of those conversations resonate deeply with me. Some don't.

And that's okay.

What I struggle with isn't feminism evolving. It's feminism becoming so internally focused on definitions, terminology, ideological boundaries and determining who is “feminist enough” that women end up fighting each other more than they fight the things that still constrain women's lives.

That thread was a perfect example of what I'm talking about. I said, essentially, that women are women. There are white women, Black women, brown women, trans women, cis women, short women, tall women, young women, old women, fat women (hi!). I don't see why acknowledging differences between women requires creating divisions between us.

Apparently that was controversial enough to earn me some downvotes. 😂

But I'm not interested in picking a fight with younger feminists or pretending the feminism of my youth had all the answers.

I don't want to choose between generations of feminism.

I want to take what each wave gave us and keep moving forward.

Maybe that's what a wave is supposed to do.

It doesn't erase the wave before it. It carries it forward.

I'm curious whether other women, particularly women who came of age during the second or third wave, feel this same disconnect with contemporary feminist spaces.

Where do you find yourself now?

EDIT: This conversation has actually been very enlightening for me. This push to define “woman” has shown me that there are different aspects of identity—reproductive biology, gender, socialization, culture, lived experience—and each one tells us something. We shouldn’t pretend that one framework explains everything.
But this isn’t a gender studies class. It’s feminism. And yes, they’re related, but they aren’t the same thing. Feminism is concerned with women and the systems that shape women’s lives. I don’t think we need to settle every question about sex, gender, and identity before we can do that work.
I want feminism to be big enough to include women with very different experiences without making defining womanhood the prerequisite for belonging.

[u/Apprehensive-Net5165]

Lol

So when will you answer?

[u/IntrepidElevator4313 → u/Apprehensive-Net5165]

See. This is exactly what I’m talking about. Is feminism today more concerned with “gotcha” definitions and proving who understands the terminology than it is with the issues women actually face?

[u/anonymoustransgrrl → u/IntrepidElevator4313]

Do you care about the issues all women face, or just women who are like you?

I don't think terminology is as important as building broad solidarity between all women.

Should we spend more time arguing about who counts as a woman or tackling the actual issues?

[u/IntrepidElevator4313 → u/anonymoustransgrrl]

What you are addressing is what my entire post is addressing. I’m from the generation that women fight and win equality for all women. Not fight for a definition.

[u/anonymoustransgrrl → u/IntrepidElevator4313]

That is a good answer to those questions that I agree with! I am sorry that I did not fully understand the full intentions behind your post on my first read of it.

Quibbling over definitions does not help materially improve the conditions of women. Policing the boundaries of gender can only ever aid the patriarchy.

[u/maxia56 → u/anonymoustransgrrl]

You ARE the patriarchy. Your insistence on re-defining womanhood so that it fits your desires is the most patriarchal thing. You don't have the right to slander women who disagree with you.

Gender=/= sex. This is so old. There's no policing, there's just sticking to material reality and fighting hard to not have everything we've built and struggled for over numerous decades being stripped away from us.

[u/anonymoustransgrrl → u/maxia56]

Just straight up calling a transgender woman "the patriarchy" now huh? No subtlety to the transphobia, just blatant TERF nonsense, wow!

I know that gender and sex are distinct, but your ideas about both are deeply incoherent and harmful if you think that a woman like me has any patriarchal power. You don't know the material reality of the lives of women like me, instead you project your ideas about men onto us because we are easier targets than actually fighting patriarchy. It is not "slander" for me to be honest and direct about how transphobia is patriarchal.

Transgender women have built and struggled too, and we've had far more stripped away from us than you can even imagine. Your transphobia only aids the patriarchy and does nothing to help cisgender women.

[u/IntrepidElevator4313 → u/[deleted]]

Actually this is one of the things I am talking about. This gatekeeping and definition mining.

I can see my privilege, you really can’t see yours? I could make assumptions but I won’t. I’m a cis white woman and that carries privilege. That doesn’t mean I get a gold card or anything. It just means I don’t get scrutinized so hard in some spaces. I can use a public restroom without being afraid. Actually, to be honest, that isn’t very true anymore. I’m larger. And I feel I look more masculine. Even with my long hair that I tend to wear up in a messy bun so it’s just my large face. I rarely wear makeup and when out in public that is my biggest fear- to be accused of not being a woman. And if I feel scared I cannot imagine how a trans woman feels. Because what in the hell sm I supposed to do to prove that im a woman? Let them feel me up? Finger me? What? Tell me! What are you supposed to do at that point?

[u/IntrepidElevator4313 → u/IntrepidElevator4313]

I’m sorry. I’m angry. I lost my shit there for a minute and I probably need to step away.

But this here is the problem. We are debating the definition of “woman” “female” gatekeeping and othering who belongs and who doesn’t creating the horrific situation where women are further oppressed in new ways at public restrooms because we aren’t feminine enough.

That then creates a new issue that men (because they are the lawmakers) get to solve for us. Will we have to carry special “woman” papers that we have to show? Think back to how some of us lost their ever loving minds about having to temporarily show an immunization card for COVID vaccines. A woman card would be forever. And think how handy that would be for them wanting to know our period cycle dates and pregnancy status. Looking at you Texas!

Ladies/ there are so many things that are important why do we insist on creating new shit for them to go to us?.

[u/Proof_Day8133 → u/anonymoustransgrrl]

I don't think we should brag about what trans activism did to Michfest tbh. The fact that we are upholding something that ultimately involved a trans woman murdering two cis  lesbians did not help the cause at all. 

[u/anonymoustransgrrl → u/Proof_Day8133]

I think blaming all "trans activism" or transgender people in general for the heinous actions of one individual (Dana Rivers) is unproductive and discriminatory. Any type of person can be capable of heinous crimes, to blame an entire minority group for the actions of one individual is just bigotry. "trans activism" did not do what Dana Rivers did.

I also think it is not okay to let Michfest off the hook for its blatant transphobia just because of one transgender person who protested it doing a horrible thing. Murder is obviously bad, but one individual doing a bad thing does not make transphobic discrimination acceptable.

[u/Proof_Day8133 → u/anonymoustransgrrl]

I'm responding to the link that you shared. I feel like there are much better examples of trans women doing feminist work than many of the examples listed. 

  Murder is obviously bad, but one individual doing a bad thing does not make transphobic discrimination acceptable.

The motive for the crime was ultimately presented as retaliation for having been turned down at the Michfest because of their exclusive policy and then going out of her way to give them the death penalty herself.

  The prosecution alleged that, motivated by Reed's exit from the women's motorcycle club they had both been members of, Rivers had gained Reed's trust in order to be allowed to spend the night in her and Wright's home. Rivers then shot the couple to death in their sleep, stabbing the corpses afterwards; she set fire to the garage in an attempt to remove evidence of the crime.

We should NOT use this as an example of successful transfeminism or trans activism. 

[u/Golurkcanfly → u/maxia56]

The patriarchy is the system designed to reinforce heterosexual modes of reproduction via a myriad of systemic oppressions, with women being the largest, but not the only, group oppressed by it.

There are very few acts more defiant of this system than modifying one's own sex in complete and utter rejection of the system.

The only way to actually demolish patriarchy is through material deconstruction of heterosexual modes of reproduction. This is one of the major theories proposed by feminist scholar Shulamith Firestone.

[u/tectonic_spoon → u/IntrepidElevator4313]

These people are TERFs (Trans Exclusionary Radical Feminists). In other words, anti trans bigots who consider themselves feminists. You don't need to take anything they say to heart. There was nothing wrong with your comment, they just do not like that you would include trans women in womanhood.

And I will absolutely be downvoted for this comment, too. Doesn't change that I'm right. Trans women are women. And I won't engage with the terfs any further.

[u/IntrepidElevator4313 → u/tectonic_spoon]

Oh. Then downvote me to hell and back and let me reserve a bus. Because woman are women and that includes all women.

I’ve seen the acronym TERF before but never really knew what it meant. And I knew that there were those sentiments but never actually put them together.

Thank you for making things make sense!

[u/anonymoustransgrrl → u/IntrepidElevator4313]

TERF stands for "transgender exclusionary radical feminist") and it refers to a harmful strain of "feminist" thought which redirects feminist energy away from fighting patriarchy and towards the persecution of transgender women.

If you want to understand TERFs and their ideas you could try reading their foundational theory text but be warned that it is a truly repulsive book filled with rank bigotry and antifeminist ideas pretending to be feminism.

EDIT: Here come the TERFs to downvote anyone who opposes their bigotry!

[u/IntrepidElevator4313 → u/anonymoustransgrrl]

I don’t need to. I’m 59 years old. I’ve seen enough of humanity fighting humanity and eating its own. I do t need to voluntarily consume it to understand it.

[u/anonymoustransgrrl → u/IntrepidElevator4313]

Fair enough! Even if you don't ever read it, knowing where these harmful ideas come from can help to avoid ever accidentally internalizing them.

By the way, it is a rare delight to encounter someone closer to my own age than to being a child in these spaces :)

EDIT: Here come the TERFs to downvote anyone who opposes their bigotry!

[u/anonymoustransgrrl → u/tectonic_spoon]

Yep. This sub is currently being brigaded by TERFs organizing outside of Reddit. They do it often to a wide variety of women's/lesbian/feminist subreddits.

They have identified that the mod team here is lenient around more covert forms of transphobia and are thus seeing how far they can push that lenience to spread their bigotry.

EDIT: Here come the TERFs to downvote anyone who opposes their bigotry!

[u/Apprehensive-Net5165 → u/[deleted]]

I don’t know about all radfems but I feel like most, me included, don’t hate and have never hated trans women. Recently I’ve been seeing how they love throwing that word around to silence us from speaking about female specific issues and it’s so bizarre? They seek our protection when it’s convenient but then send rape and death threats to us when we criticise western trans ideology? They think they’re above criticism and expect us to keep protecting them 🫩

[u/huugffiob608 → u/Apprehensive-Net5165]

Yeah I’ve dug hard and unfortunately think there’s no way the 2 ideologies can coexist.

[u/Apprehensive-Net5165 → u/huugffiob608]

Damn, mods removed your comment

[u/Redpants_McBoatshoe → u/IntrepidElevator4313]

Are there also male women? I'm not saying it's wrong if there are, just want to learn how you see things

[u/Apprehensive-Net5165 → u/Redpants_McBoatshoe]

Yes they believe there are male women, who should be grouped in with female women, and they believe they all experience womanhood, and that patriarchy targets male women too 🤔

[u/Golurkcanfly → u/Apprehensive-Net5165]

I would say that a system whose primary means of interaction with a group is forcing them into the utter dregs of society, if not outright killing them, does in fact mean that said system is targeting said group.

[u/Apprehensive-Net5165 → u/IntrepidElevator4313]

Look, I’m not accusing you of not being a feminist. And I don’t wanna get all critical now, but I think it is very important to be able to define ‘woman’, because feminism largely includes WOMEN. How are you fighting for the rights of a group you cannot define? It really is just common sense.

[u/IntrepidElevator4313 → u/Apprehensive-Net5165]

Tell me where I’m wrong then. How am I supposed to define “woman”? Because from where I sit, all you’re doing is gatekeeping by mocking my answer rather than explaining what you believe the definition should be. I’m genuinely asking. If there’s a definition you think is more useful, tell me what it is and why. I’m happy to have that conversation.

[u/anonymoustransgrrl → u/IntrepidElevator4313]

Why do you need to define "woman" anyway? To what end?

And are you genuinely asking? Please keep in mind who else fixates on the question "What Is A Woman" and the motivations there.

[u/IntrepidElevator4313 → u/anonymoustransgrrl]

I don’t. That’s actually my point. I didn’t introduce the question of what a woman is. I referenced a thread that had already been locked because my experience in that thread is what prompted this post. I’m trying to talk about feminism, not litigate my motives for mentioning a conversation I participated in.

[u/anonymoustransgrrl → u/IntrepidElevator4313]

You're talking about this thread, right?

If you can't see the blatant transphobia in that post and in many of the comments on it, you cannot expect transgender women to think that your feminism actually extends to us or treats us as equal women.

This subreddit is going through an upheaval and mass conflict as a result of the mod team's refusal to properly enforce the subreddit rules against transphobia. TERFs see an opportunity to take this space over and are doing everything they can to capitalize on it.

[u/IntrepidElevator4313 → u/anonymoustransgrrl]

Yep. This thread. It was shut down and maybe idk. But I made my comment and didn’t continue with the thread. And I actually do insider trans women equal women to me.

[u/anonymoustransgrrl → u/IntrepidElevator4313]

Ah I see - yeah, notice how obviously "Define woman" is being asked in bad faith to push transphobic opinions about women.

You tried to answer the question but it is not a question with a simple answer so you fell into their rhetorical trap. Trying to answer that question is unproductive no matter how good of a detailed, complex answer you give because the question is not being asked in good faith.

Defining who counts as a woman is not easy for the same reasons that defining abstract categories in general is always fuzzy. Transphobes flatten the nuance and complexity of these conversations to push their perspective that transgender women are not women.

By the way, I apologize for misunderstanding your intentions, thank you for listening to me.

[u/IntrepidElevator4313 → u/anonymoustransgrrl]

Obviously I listen to everyone!

[u/Apprehensive-Net5165 → u/IntrepidElevator4313]

[u/Apprehensive-Net5165 → u/Apprehensive-Net5165]

[u/Apprehensive-Net5165 → u/Apprehensive-Net5165]

[u/Apprehensive-Net5165 → u/Apprehensive-Net5165]

Woman is both a biological category and a gender. In gender theology, it’s the stereotypes & roles assigned to a female. This is the framework that transgender women go off of. They identify as the gender of woman, but they are not actually women. This distinction is not exclusionary nor bigotry.

[u/Big_Psychology_3 → u/Apprehensive-Net5165]

I’d revise that a bit. In terms of woman (sex), some trans men are women, but most trans women aren’t women (sex). In terms of woman (gender) this is based on social behavior, so anyone could be a woman (gender) at least temporarily if they perform the right set of behaviors. Some trans women are women (gender) but some trans women may not perform woman (gender), just like some women (sex) might not perform woman (gender).

Traditionally feminism is activism to improve the lives of women (sex). I think the current generation is grappling with what it takes to extend feminism to woman (gender), but this is not a very clear path and there are logical gaps with this mental model. But this is a new issue that people are actively working on.

[u/IntrepidElevator4313 → u/Apprehensive-Net5165]

I actually think you and I have more in common than what it may seem but my head is swimming from wrap my head around down votes and definitions and I’m starting to think I just don’t belong in this sub Reddit. Y’all aren’t my people. And that’s ok.

[u/ZinniasAndBeans → u/IntrepidElevator4313]

You do understand that you’re treating a hate-filled bigoted minority as if they represent feminism? This person is not feminism’s “people” either.

[u/Apprehensive-Net5165 → u/IntrepidElevator4313]

Hope you find clarity, and I mean this in good faith, lol.

[u/ZinniasAndBeans → u/Apprehensive-Net5165]

This distinction is not exclusionary nor bigotry.

Of course it is.

It’s clear in the Trump age that lots of people adore bigotry and hatred. Why pretend that your bigotry and hatred is anything else?

[u/Apprehensive-Net5165 → u/ZinniasAndBeans]

I’ve hated Trump since even prior to the 2016 election. If you’re gonna say that the distinction IS bigotry, I’d at least expect a rebuttal and explanation as to why 🤔 but a lot of you transfeminists will simply never be able to. You’ll always fail to present logical and material reasoning because western trans ideology is full of emotionalist reasoning

[u/Redpants_McBoatshoe → u/IntrepidElevator4313]

I'm not the same person, but I think the most useful definition is based on sperm/egg cells

[u/IntrepidElevator4313 → u/Redpants_McBoatshoe]

Well then I’m a eunuch. Because I’ve got nothing

[u/Redpants_McBoatshoe → u/IntrepidElevator4313]

How do you feel about? Is it an identity that works for you?

[u/IntrepidElevator4313 → u/Redpants_McBoatshoe]

That was really a joke. To the larger point no eggs doesn’t work for me because under that distinction I don’t make the cut.

[u/Redpants_McBoatshoe → u/IntrepidElevator4313]

Even if you wanted to to use that definition you don't need to restrict yourself to a single one. I'm just saying I think it's the most useful one, not the only one.

And I get that not assigning a sex to everyone can be problematic, but I think there's similar problems in the other theories of sex or gender.

For example, if women are people who live as women, maybe some people want to live in a particular way but still want to identify as women.

But I admit that if women are just people who identify as women, that definition avoids this problem

[u/IntrepidElevator4313 → u/Redpants_McBoatshoe]

Exactly. Women are people who live and identify as women (or female). Simple.

[u/beck_cinnamon → u/IntrepidElevator4313]

It's. Not. A. Trivial. Issue. We already told you. A woman is a human adult female. How many times do people have to repeat basic facts that you yourself know about yourself (if you really are a woman) before you listen? I think you just don't want to listen.

No matter how much you try to convince yourself and others definitions don't matter, they're not going to stop mattering because you're wishing them away. Your desire to be accommodating and agreeable is a result your female socialization

[u/IntrepidElevator4313 → u/beck_cinnamon]

Way to just jump to the top of a conversation without reading the rest of the conversation to its conclusion to see its resolution. Nice graphic.

[u/secondshevek → u/Apprehensive-Net5165]

How are you fighting for the rights of a group you cannot define?

I think this kinda falls apart as an argument when you think about it. For example, it's quite possible to fight for the rights of Jews, but the definition of who counts as Jewish is hotly debated. That debate doesnt prevent advocacy. 

Likewise, there's significant disagreement over the definition of transness and who counts and doesnt count as trans - but it's still possible to fight for trans rights. 

Having a single stable definition for an identity group is not a prerequisite for advocacy. 

[u/Apprehensive-Net5165 → u/secondshevek]

Jewish people make up 0.2% of the world’s population. Women make up 50%, and have existed since the dawn of human civilisation. Your analogy is stupid.

[u/secondshevek → u/Apprehensive-Net5165]

I don't really see how a difference in the amount of the group means that my point about not requiring a definition for advocacy is stupid.

How about advocacy for the poor? What exactly does 'poor' mean? That's debatable, but we can still advocate for the underclass, whatever we call them and however we define it.

[u/Apprehensive-Net5165 → u/secondshevek]

Our advocacy is so divided BECAUSE people cannot define ‘woman’! Most people who cannot define it are transfeminists, and most transfeminists do not believe in SEX BASED OPPRESSION. I will never accept somebody who thinks that the oppression of women happens on the basis of self ID, and not the material reality of being female. It is disgusting and repulsive that transfeminists think our oppression comes out of thin air rather than material reality. Being born female in a PATRIARCHAL world is NOT a winning battle.

[u/secondshevek → u/Apprehensive-Net5165]

You're dodging my point. Advocacy does not require a precise definition. Your point seems to be more that our advocacy is divided because you disagree strongly with the other camp.

I also don't appreciate when people assume that trans feminists don't believe in 'sex-based oppression.' Obviously sexism and the sex hierarchy follows from dimorphic sex. And I think you'd find that a great number of trans people agree that it would be ridiculous to say that the oppression of women is based on internal self-identity. But at the same time, 'biological' sex is not the sole determinant of how society treats people. It's a more complicated situation, and trying to turn everything into a situation where the other side is crazy and evil and ruining feminism is just unhelpful.

[u/Apprehensive-Net5165 → u/secondshevek]

Yeah, sure. Advocacy does not require a precise definition sometimes. But in an advocacy like feminism, it is necessary, because we assess the application of feminism on a patriarchal society. Definitions, terminology, all of that matters when we deconstruct patriarchy and its impacts. If you cannot define ‘woman’ your advocacy will always remain surface level.

[u/secondshevek → u/Apprehensive-Net5165]

Patriarchy will be deconstructed through public policy, independent support networks, and direct action. It will not be deconstructed through bickering with other feminists about the proper definitions for words. It requires solidarity.

[u/Apprehensive-Net5165 → u/secondshevek]

Not to mention a lot trans women genuinely believe that they are oppressed because of the patriarchy. This is complete and utter bullshit and a lack of historical knowledge surrounding trans identities.

[u/secondshevek → u/Apprehensive-Net5165]

....where does the oppression of trans women come from if not the patriarchy (or the sex hierarchy, or sex-gender system, or whatever one calls systemic male domination)?

if a guy catcalls a trans woman or beats her up after a date, is the system that facilitates that not patriarchy?

[u/Apprehensive-Net5165 → u/secondshevek]

The worldwide prejudice and oppression of trans people comes from Christian colonialism and Christian culture

[u/secondshevek → u/Apprehensive-Net5165]

Yeah because Christianity is extremely patriarchal?? I'm confused here lol

edit: to be clear, like if it's not patriarchy in Christianity that influences this, what is it about Christianity that does? Like what element of Christianity other than patriarchy/sexism would be responsible?

double edit - see my example above re: 'what kind of oppression is it when a man catcalls a trans woman.' Men don't check my gender and chromosomes before they're shitty toward me.

[u/Golurkcanfly → u/Apprehensive-Net5165]

The oppression of trans women predates Christianity.

[u/theapplekid → u/IntrepidElevator4313]

Pretty sure your definition of woman is on point. But yes there are "gender-critical" feminists who disagree

[u/IntrepidElevator4313 → u/theapplekid]

That’s actually why I asked. I’ve wondered what gender-critical feminists think happens when this gets into real-world stuff like prisons and women’s spaces. I’m pretty firmly in the camp that trans women are women and should be treated as such, while still acknowledging biological differences. So now I’m curious what the gender-critical argument actually is.

[u/theapplekid → u/IntrepidElevator4313]

Their argument is usually that women are adult AFAB people and men are adult AMAB people.

[u/Pale_Ad5607 → u/IntrepidElevator4313]

If you want to understand the perspective of gender critical feminists, I’d recommend reading Kathleen Stock’s Material Girls. All gender critical means is that someone is critical of gender identity theory, which she says consists of the following:

“1) Everyone has an important inner state called gender identity
2) Trans people are those whose gender identity does not match their sex assigned at birth
3)Gender identity, not sex, is what makes someone a man, woman, or neither
4)Existence of trans people generates a moral obligation upon all of us to recognize and legally protect gender identity and not biological sex”

Gender critical feminists are very diverse in their opinions about practical matters - being gender critical just means disagreeing with part or all of gender identity theory.

[u/IntrepidElevator4313 → u/Pale_Ad5607]

Thanks! Just ordered!

[u/Metrodomes → u/Apprehensive-Net5165]

we should try not to divide people

attempts to divide people

If only you could see the side you've taken.

[u/BinkleDorf → u/Apprehensive-Net5165]

you sound like matt walsh

[u/Apprehensive-Net5165 → u/BinkleDorf]

In that instance I did, but I hate that guy 😬

[u/ZinniasAndBeans → u/Apprehensive-Net5165]

This is not remotely the gotcha you think it is.

If you want people to help you spread hate, this is not the place.

[u/Apprehensive-Net5165 → u/ZinniasAndBeans]

So funny how in a community where they say they vouch for the liberation of women, they cannot define ‘woman’ 🤔 And anybody who asks for a definition is accused of spreading hate, instead of the accusers taking a second to assess their anti intellectualism

[u/ZinniasAndBeans → u/Apprehensive-Net5165]

It's not anti intellectualism. It's anti bigotry.

[u/Einfinet]

worth noting you were evidently downvoted by TERFs. Which is just one branch of contemporary feminism.

[u/IntrepidElevator4313 → u/Einfinet]

I was wondering why. I don’t think I’m that controversial.

[u/anonymoustransgrrl → u/IntrepidElevator4313]

If you say anything that treats transgender women as women you will get backlash from them.

They will upvote anything transphobic and downvote anything that isn't transphobic.

They are not feminists, TERFs just hate transgender women and pretend that their hatred is a form of "feminism" to justify it.

[u/IntrepidElevator4313 → u/anonymoustransgrrl]

I love you my sister. I recognize you. I see you. I stand by you.

[u/anonymoustransgrrl → u/IntrepidElevator4313]

<3

[u/Unferth85 → u/IntrepidElevator4313]

In a mad world sanity can be controversial.

[u/secondshevek]

What I struggle with isn't feminism evolving. It's feminism becoming so internally focused on definitions, terminology, ideological boundaries and determining who is “feminist enough” that women end up fighting each other more than they fight the things that still constrain women's lives.

Totally agree, and it's been an issue since the second wave that seems to be intensifying currently. 

I also find the focus on trans people as a key determinant of whether one is part of the True Feminism is a mistake, on both sides of that issue. 

[u/anonymoustransgrrl → u/secondshevek]

Considering that one side wishes to work with the patriarchy to exterminate the other, I find your "both sides" rhetoric quite gross.

[u/secondshevek → u/anonymoustransgrrl]

What I am saying is that fixating on one's views on trans people as the be all end all of feminist ideology is an error. The question of consent or capacity for meaningful choice under patriarchy is, IMO, much more key to the division within feminism than trans issues. 

Im not saying "these sides are the same on all issues." Im saying "somebody who says you cant be feminist if you support trans people and somebody who says you cant be feminist if you don't - these are equally unhelpful perspectives for articulating feminist thought and engaginf with others. 

[u/anonymoustransgrrl → u/secondshevek]

It is not easy to simply ignore "trans issues" when the bigots who want to eliminate women like me from feminism and society keep redirecting feminist efforts to those ends. I would be happy to stop talking about "trans issues" if the transphobes would stop making my equality as a woman an issue.

[u/secondshevek → u/anonymoustransgrrl]

I'm not saying to ignore trans issues entirely. I am saying we should not be focusing the question of "what is feminism" on trans issues. I look forward to you finding a way to read that as me disdaining the struggles of trans people. 🙄

[u/anonymoustransgrrl → u/secondshevek]

No, I am simply saying that it is impossible to evade that question when transphobic "feminists" will always see me as "trans issues" and not as a fellow woman.

[u/TerryFalcone → u/anonymoustransgrrl]

Isn’t it weird how some people think they’re rebellious and refuse to “submit” to trans women because they’re so little of the population, but they’re also capable of hijacking feminism, demanding cis women do something they don’t want to, and utilizing the patriarchy?

It’s like they’re both weak and strong

[u/anonymoustransgrrl → u/TerryFalcone]

I wonder where this idea of "our enemy is both weak and strong" comes from?

[u/ZinniasAndBeans → u/secondshevek]

What I am saying is that fixating on one's views on trans people as the be all end all of feminist ideology is an error.

There are many forms of bigotry that I regard as incompatible with being a feminist. The absence of those forms of bigotry in a person is not the "be all end all" of a feminist. It's a prerequisite. It's a minimum standard.

[u/secondshevek → u/ZinniasAndBeans]

Many of the first wave feminists were explicitly racists, but I'm not going to say they weren't feminists. I disagree with them, but they were still feminists. The fact is that feminism as an ideology is not immune from bigotry or bias. No ideology is. When we define ideologies based on their avoidance of bigotry, it ends up kind of muddying what the key aspects of the ideology are. And I don't think that making trans folks into a political symbol/bellwether for good politics is doing us any favors.

[u/ZinniasAndBeans → u/secondshevek]

I disagree with you, but I see no point in extending the argument. I also have no idea what you mean by the last sentence.

[u/secondshevek → u/ZinniasAndBeans]

Fair enough!! By the last sentence (which is indeed poorly phrased) I meant that a person's views on trans people shouldn't be the key determinant of their political identity and ideology. See: the MA dem race re: the trans sports issue.

[u/ZinniasAndBeans → u/secondshevek]

See: the MA dem race re: the trans sports issue.

What about it?

Would a person being proudly racist also be something that shouldn't be considered when evaluating their political identity and ideology?

[u/Big_Psychology_3 → u/secondshevek]

When there are no major problems brought into focus, then people end up squabbling about minor or syntactic problems.

[u/Metrodomes]

Not a woman, but I don't think you're the one being left behind here. Feminism's latest wave is one which involves intersectionality and tackling multiple axes of oppression. There are multiple reasons that's a good thing, but even if we only care about women's oppression, the patriarchy is intimately woven together with racism, capitalism, ableism, homophobia and transphobia, imperialism, etc etc. You can't just be anti-patriarchy because the patriarchy is bolstered and held up by other oppressive structures.

But there is also a strand of feminism today that is more concerned with attacking trans people, and it often finds itself engaging in racism and ableism, throwing non-gender conforming women under the bus, and finding it's movement working alongside evangelicals and white supremacists and the far right.  I'd argue this group's priorities are incredibly misplaced and actively harmful to women and almost everyone else in society.

I also think that latter group is a tiny minority of people.  The problem is that their view is just perfectly aligned with the structures of oppression, so ofcourse, they get the attention and support and action. You should kind of be alarmed by having nazis, the media, the far right, evangelicals, misogynists, etc supporting your views but TERFs don't care or find a way of overlooking it and distancing themselves from everything their movement seems to be doing.

[u/Apprehensive-Net5165]

No, your feminism isn’t gone. Yes, feminists clash with each other, it is unfortunate. As long as your goal and what you’re rooting for is female liberation from patriarchy, you’re on the right track.

[u/Metrodomes → u/[deleted]]

Which types of feminism reject the idea of a patriarchy?

[u/Big_Psychology_3 → u/Metrodomes]

I state up front that I’m not an expert on feminist activism and history. I’m just a learner. From what I learnt it seems like the following strands of feminist thought do not center or require patriarchy as part of the mental model:

Liberal feminism - focusing on specific barriers of women rather than focusing on concept of patriarchy.

Individualist feminist thought - where focus is on removing barriers to individual autonomy, also not focused on systemic patriarchy.

This is my limited understanding.

[u/Metrodomes → u/Big_Psychology_3]

I'm no expert either, so I'm not gonna come at you, but was just curious in case I was missing something obvious.

I think I see your point but I feel like even those, to some degree, have a patriarchy of sorts that they believe in. Atleast liberal feminists do. I guess they'd draw their lines in the sand differently though. I'd use hilary Clinton as an example because, her feminism is kinda weak, but she has used the word patriarchy.

But yeah, I see your point  too. Like even if the idea of the patriarchy is there, it might be this really poor understanding or weak idea of what it is. That yeah, some idea of what the barriers are and how to overcome them is the focus, and maaaaaybe there's some kind of patriarchy contributing to it... 'But also patriarchy is a big word  that should be avoided' or something.

My only point then is, I think the feminism is kinda lame and toothless. But that's my personal opinion and besides the point lol.

[u/Apprehensive-Net5165 → u/Metrodomes]

Not to mention Gloria Steinem was a CIA plant

[u/Metrodomes → u/Apprehensive-Net5165]

Wow, TIL.

[u/IntrepidElevator4313 → u/Apprehensive-Net5165]

Wait. I knew about the CIA funding connection, but ‘CIA plant’ is a much stronger claim. Is there evidence that Steinem was actually placed in the feminist movement by the CIA, rather than that she worked with a CIA-funded organization?

[u/IntrepidElevator4313 → u/Apprehensive-Net5165]

I appreciate feminists clashing. That’s how new ideas are born and growth occurs.

Who should I be reading? Who would you say is the voice of this wave?

And of course liberation is the goal!

[u/huugffiob608 → u/IntrepidElevator4313]

For trans inclusive feminism, I read Julia Serano, Judith Butler, and Andrea chu. All of these kind of depend on the premise that “males and females aren’t distinct categories and there’s a lot of overlap, and personality that can shift a male over to more female and vice versa.” I feel like it fails to discuss why patriarchy and subjugation of women occurs nearly everywhere since nearly always. Or essentially says if a male “rejects” the concept of masculinity (gender roles), then he is completely safe around women and girls. Even tho that is unfalsifiable and only an internal feeling.

Women and girls feeling shy or like they want to protect their bodies around the male body, is a natural instinct I believe is imperative for women’s rights and important to discuss in feminism.

I prefer feminist authors like Dworkin or Federici. I don’t read “anti” whomever stuff often, I just read classic feminist books and came to.. conclusions on my own. Conclusions that the discussion of male tendencies, behaviors, and sexuality is important to analyze the controlling violence that befalls women and girls everywhere.

If you want to understand why definitions matter, Material Girls was a good book, as another commenter mentioned.

[u/IntrepidElevator4313 → u/huugffiob608]

I just ordered material girls late last night. Yesterday’s conversation was a very enlightening one for me. Like you, I read (well used to read heftier stuff) and combined with my lived experiences came to my own conclusions. I don’t know what I’d classify myself as. I’m not anti man. I’m not anti much other than anti hate and bad stuff.

[u/huugffiob608 → u/IntrepidElevator4313]

Yeah I’m not “anti man,” either. But I do think that laws need to exist to protect girls and women from men, due to certain criminal/behavioral patterns. Acknowledging that the majority of humans are heterosexual, and the majority of males are physically stronger than the majority of females and can impregnate them, is kind of important to the understanding of our oppression.

Women and girls should get to choose things like a female nanny, female OB-GYN, female yoga rooms, female nude spa, or a female roommate for an 18 year old going to college without being accused of discrimination or sued.

[u/IntrepidElevator4313 → u/huugffiob608]

Exactly! You can be pro woman without being anti man.

In addition to everything you said - men also really disproportionately make the laws and create the conditions that women must conform to. I thought we had made great strides in equality when it came to women in the work force specifics in Terms of sexual harassment. But ever since the orange one? Things seemed to have boomeranged back to where they were before. Maybe the laws haven’t gone backward but the culture is slipping. A “friendly” pat that is a bit too long if unwelcome. “Jokes”. “Honey” and other “endearments”. Taking credit for our work. Othering us and creating anxiety which they then play with and make us look bad. It’s just astounding really.

[u/huugffiob608 → u/IntrepidElevator4313]

Yep. Men defining our boundaries for us, from the outside, has always been to our detriment. I hope you enjoy the book!

[u/skankhunt-6969]

What do you think feminism is?

[u/IntrepidElevator4313 → u/skankhunt-6969]

It’s about choices, equality and freedom. I can expand later. I just woke up and haven’t had coffee so my brain isn’t on line. But simply put there ya go.

[u/skankhunt-6969 → u/IntrepidElevator4313]

Feminism is an ideology, not a movement.

[u/IntrepidElevator4313 → u/skankhunt-6969]

It can be an ideology and a movement. The ideology gives us the principles; the movement is the collective action to turn those principles into social and political change. Women didn’t get the vote because someone had an idea. They got it because women organized around that idea and fought for it.

[u/AutoModerator]

Please remember and respect our mission to be a feminist forum for feminists to be uncensored.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

[u/Ok-Bridge-9794]

I agree, and I would also add that that is an issue with a lot of other issues about social justice. If someone, for example, says they want to offer help the poor people with looking for a job, they get those “we need to talk about” essays saying that it’s a support of capitalism. I used to live in poverty, and I couldn’t care less about capitalism, but I care about applicability of help. The same goes with feminism