• Enter search term(s):

Paradoxical Neoliberalism of Radical Feminism and the Radical Feminism of Trans Liberation

demand to examine constructedness of cisphillic desire is actually a radical feminist proposition

The following exchange took place in Portland Feminist Meetup group on facebook. The group is considered public, but since it is invisible to anyone not using facebook, I have removed the name of the person I was responding to (but if the parties wish their names to be published, please let me know!).

Forum: Portland Feminist Meetup (facebook group)
Date: 02/21/2012

Elly Parker shared:

[Participant A (name withheld)] wrote:

People not wanting to have sex with you is a social justice issue.
February 21 at 5:07pm

Making sure theres enough people that want to have sex with you is a rather ridiculous political priority.
February 22 at 1:21pm

I find it interesting that radical feminists are relying on liberal perspective to dismiss this article which can be summarized as "the personal is political." I think the article comes from the lineage of "The Woman-Identified Woman" and other classic radical feminist texts that interrogated the construction of women as the second-class citizens through not just political institutions, but also cultural and sexual ones.
February 27 at 11:05am

[Participant B (name withheld)] wrote:

Sorry, but getting laid is not a basic human right nor is anyone entitled to it.
April 29 at 10:01pm

Who suggested that anyone was entitled to get laid? It's one thing if you happen to disagree with the article, even vehemently so, but it's not fair to grossly distort its content in order to ridicule it. Disagreement or criticism is not the same as mocking.
April 30 at 2:19am

[Participant B] wrote:

Of course it's about getting laid. It's not about being fat, disabled or a minority. This bullshit is about trans. The vast majority of trans are male - which means they're men. Men are walking dildos who think they're entitled to get laid and sexually serviced by women - including by lesbians. Lesbians are not attracted to men or their disease carrying penises, not even if men throw on a frock, heels and some lippy and call themselves trees, rocks, giraffes or women. These men are not entitled to have women/lesbians participate in their kinky fetishes or porn fantasies. Men are not oppressed or marginalized if women refuse to do so. In fact, we have a word for men who coerce, manipulate, pressure or force women to have sex with them against their free will and choice. It's called rape. So what are you saying? Men, especially if they wear frocks, are oppressed and marginalized if they can't rape women? I mean, I know we live in a woman-hating, rape culture and all, but this is absurd and downright insidious. Voltaire sums it up rather nicely - "As long as people believe in absurdities they will continue to commit atrocities." Now spare me your absurdities, Emiko. I'm not interested in supporting these atrocities.
April 30 at 8:42am

I'm not going to argue with you about whether or not trans women are really just men, or whether or not trans women (wrongly) feel entitled to have sex with other women. We are clearly not going to agree. But I am pointing out that nothing in the article promotes the idea that getting laid is a basic human right. When Adrienne Rich demanded straight women to examine how they have internalized compulsory heterosexuality and to prioritize their connections to other women, she was not suggesting that lesbians were entitled to have sex with straight women. Neither is this article arguing that trans women are entitled to have sex with cis lesbians.
April 30 at 10:46am

[Participant B] wrote:

So what's your point? Adienne Rich was addressing women. Trans aren't women. They're men. Rich's words do not apply to men and you simply have no case. Trans are predominately male. White males, no less. They are not an oppressed group. They are the most dominant and most oppressive pricks in the history of this planet. Your logic goes completely south when you ignore these power gaps and pretend we're all equal now. According to your logic, the slaves were oppressing the master if they showed any resistance to his further labeling, colonizing and enslavement of them. Would you take the words of Frederick Douglas, Nelson Mandela and Malcolm X and pretend they were talking about white men too? I'm sorry if radical feminism goes clear over your head and you have no understanding of it, Emiko. But twisting RF words to mean whatever you want them to mean simply isn't going to work.
April 30 at 2:41pm

As I've said, I'm not debating with you about your view of trans people. I am simply pointing out that the article in question is not advocating for something you seem to think it is.
April 30 at 5:02pm