Archives for the month of: April, 2012

I have spent ages lately doing tonnes of introspection and trying to figure out some of the core components behind radical feminism. I shall share these here. Feel free to add to or refute anything, of course.

Radical feminists are extremely critical of males because they understand at a primal level the things which males are “supposed to do” with females. This is partially biologically reconstructed, but mostly societally enforced. This level of awareness brings with it criticism of how males interact with females and strong opinions and introspections on these behaviours. Although the results of this introspection may slightly differ between radical feminists based on sexual orientation, these perceptions and criticisms are very real and extremely important for both making women aware of possible things to expect from men and even making men aware of things they should or should not do.

Along with this, radical feminists are also blatantly aware of the reality of male violence against females. Radical feminists do not resort to victim blaming tactics or other misogynist, perpetrator-enabling tactics. Radical feminists approach the problem at a basal level, seeing the reality of male entitlement and propensity for aggression and violence, and how males harm females.

Radical feminists are extremely critical of trans women because they do not share the biological experience of being female that most of all women share (exceptions are XY and XXY females with various complications, although these exceptions are typically not part of the trans experience and thus still different), yet trans activists work to conflate gender and sex by saying that trans people must change their bodies because they are too feminine or masculine, and thus reinforce stereotypes of femininity for female born people. Trans also claim that their innate feelings and abstract ideas are what defines a woman, even if female born women say otherwise.

This conflict is not resolved at any sort of objective, basal level as radical feminists can do with biology, and thus radical feminists must be and remain trans critical. Not to mention the reality that some trans people have no intention to even change their hormonal make up (which is a large part of why males are more likely to show aggression with physical violence, and the driver of male sexual behaviour) or genitals, making them 100% male and thus bringing in worries of the criticisms of males.

Radical feminists are also critical of the society and interactions within it which enable the negative aspects of the things criticised. That being, a society which encourages male violence and aggression, while discouraging females from participating in certain occupations or activities due to negative stereotyping. Radical feminists must be and remain critical, along with as much of the population as possible, if this is ever to change and be corrected. Radical feminists are not around to bully anyone, but to make sure a balance forms between sex lines (not gender lines, as gender is a current problem) and females no longer need to fear male violence and harassment, or unequal opportunities.


Many times radical feminists, lesbians, other women, and probably carpets and puppies as well are accused of being “transphobic.” However, what does it actually mean? Is there one particular aspect of trans people we are to be scared of in general which superscedes the others?

Because in this case, I probably am transphobic because I am scared of the impact trans people will have on invisibilising sex-based work discrimination when they get a job in a male-dominated field as male, then switch sexes to get counted as female in equality statistics which a business can lean on, only then to be thought of by others as having enough male DNA and experience to get the job in the first place. (See Another Issue with Trans)

I am probably transphobic if it means being scared of how they empower the idea of traditional gender expressions to the point of making it a reason for transition. That being, since they were “too feminine,” they must actually be women. (See Issue with Trans Women)

I probably am transphobic if it means worrying about the impact which trans men will have on the identities of butch and other non-feminine-conforming women in the future; women who would normally have no desire to be male yet may be turned to this idea due to it becoming such a popular social path, as to almost be as popular for deviant FAAB women as intense femininity is for straight FAAB women.

However, the onus is on the trans people who shout that I am “transphobic” to calm my fears through their actions, not yell that I am transphobic, and do nothing to actually prevent the issues that they actively are causing. I am not bigoted; I am concerned.

This months old post brings up yet another important way in which trans politics harms FAAB liberation from stereotyping, subjugation and workplace discrimination.

Speaking of male privilege, which Gray kept along with his dick:

Miss Gray, who is now a full-time consultant engineer, is keen to help others who may be hiding their true nature away.

Great, another tranz proxy. A male-dominated profession, and his place will count in the Equality Statistics as “female”, once again hiding the inequality that FAABs face in the workplace.

And that’s not the only problem with this either. See, the people (mostly men) working alongside Gray may do well to refer to Gray with female pronouns and such, but theywill still always keep in mind that Gray is/was male. As such, to them someone who is female bodied will still not be seen as a viable candidate for this job because the one who has it had the mind of a male when they learned it.

So in turn, this reinforces the idea that there is shit which female bodied people cannot do, along with already creating yet another false statistic since the individual got this job as a male, no matter what happened after the job was acquired.