#osa radfem

[crazystemcatlady]

i made this blog specifically to follow radfem blogs/tags but when i search radfem tags there's no option to follow, what's up with that? :^(

[g-a-r-f-i-l-e-d]

Fr when I first started participating in radblr and saw posts regarding osa radfems' bfs or men saying "not my Nigel" I didn't know who that was and just thought Nigel Thornberry??? Like:

[heterophobicdyke]

i think seeing that trans-identified males are male is common sense. i don't think that should be considered "radical feminism." hell, trad christians can notice the biological differences and advocate for female-only spaces. doesn't make them pro-woman, let alone feminist.

the issue with radical feminism today is that people mistake "radical" for "hated." radical feminism registers to people as "controversial feminism" rather than "revolutionary feminism." that's how you get "radfems" allying with the far right. that's how you get women in nuclear married families with men claiming to be radical because they understand the difference between male and female, and that consent can't be bought. oh, and the husband watches porn.

and if you question how radical her choices are she'll claim you are the misogynist

[radfem-polls]

is bisexuality "both heterosexual and homosexual" or is it its own third thing? ive heard ppl say that homosexual means EXCLUSIVELY attracted to the same sex (& same w/ heterosexual) & then ive heard some other people say that homosexual just means attracted to the same sex but you can be attracted to the opposite sex & still be homosexual... also i decided to put this in the radblr polls because you guys actually know what sex is (as in biology not as in intercourse) & if i put this question in a normie (normie for tumblr at least) poll blog that would skew the results

ANYWAY. the two choices:

-homosexual means attraction to same sex only, heterosexual means attraction to opposite sex only, bisexuality is its own thing

-bisexuals are both heterosexual and homosexual

NO nuance NO "see results" button. YOU have to decide or not vote at all.

again, i know this isnt really important im just curious what other ppl think about this

Hi thank you for your submission!

No nuance, no results:

[menalez]

interesting how little it takes to be dogpiled by hetfems

[valeriesolanasapologist]

I really feel like if you truly want a relationship with your average man, you have to really lower your standards and accept a lot of behaviour/attitudes to make it work.

I can't remember where I read it, but someone pointed out that, for a woman to have an on going relationship with a man, there is a certain amount of misogyny that she has to accept because it's just so ingrained. That being said, I don't think I could do it.

[hard--headed--woman]

lmaoo OSA radfems just love to hate on lesbians, to blame us for everything and to act as if we oppress them don't they?

i agree with the og message of the original post which was that women who date men do not deserve to be abused and that we shouldn't send them hate but notice how women in the notes were quick to go like "OMG yes lesbians are such bad feminists who hate and oppress us for being OSA!!!" and to act as if we "blame them" for being OSA (so so close to scream "heterophobia" lol) or exclude OSA women from our feminism because we think we're the only ones whose sexuality is ok. go all touch some grass and stop thinking that claiming you're a radfem gives you a free pass for being lesbophobic - there was no need to attack lesbians or to claim we hate you for being straight in order to support the original message of the post

[aaafeminist]

(reblogs help reach a larger sample!)

[radfae]

sick of the radblr discourse like why is it half of my dash omg

[heterophobicdyke]

I think radblr is more concerned with recruiting normal mid-feminist women to radical feminism, as if it exists as some normie non-venomous movement of heterosexual sisterhood, rather than acknowledging that the point of radical feminism was never to be normal feminism but to actually achieve complete female liberation at any cost (even Nigel/Jakey). Like I genuinely want females liberated so no more girls get molested and no more women are fearful of walking the street and you’re all spending your “feminist” energy claiming reverse-homophobia because lesbians hate your husband.

[feministdragon]

this business of trying to figure out who is “privileged” and who is the most oppressed group is bullshit that has been infecting activism and tearing us apart for years, since at least the early 2000s. i am sick to death of it.

trying to understand and bring forward the experiences of marginalized groups has turned into: only those with the most pain have the right to speak,

which is one reason tras are trying to claim most oppressed: if there a competition men want in on it because they love winning.

we need to stop competing on worthiness. we need to stop competing on authenticity. we need to stop competing on validity. it’s all bullshit.

what we need to build a movement is finding common ground. this has been well known since the civil rights movement. everybody has different ideas of what needs to be done and how to do it, and this is a good thing because that level of versatility and creativity is how you find solutions to common problems.

the key is that we have common problems. and we need to find common solutions. what do the overlapping categories of mothers, lesbians, osa women, global majority women, chronically ill women, etc have in common? and how do we fix it for ourselves?

i’ve seen criticism from some quarters that working on smaller problems like opening a women’s shelter or getting protective laws passed is somehow reformist and useless. this makes me angry, because it’s exactly this kind of work that has gotten me what freedoms i have today. bank accounts, women’s schools, consciousness raising groups, lesbian bars, books theorizing about women’s oppression, title x protections, all of these things have directly contributed to my ability to be a fully conscious and nearly-independent-of-men woman. this wouldn’t have been possible even 60 years ago, my mom needed her dad’s signature on a loan to buy a freaking car. this isn't possible in many places in the world right now

helping women get access to abortion. to proper medical care. to safe, male free spaces. helping laws get through that create safety and opportunity for women. helping women enter professions that earn them money and get them skills. these are all real things that can be done, that concretely help all women.

who tf cares which kind of mother is oppressed more? we are all fucking oppressed! can we start arguing instead about where is the best place to start getting abortion laws reinstated, or what’s the best way to set up accessible women’s lands, or how do we set up mutual aid groups in different cities, how do we create food security for rural women, menstrual product access for poor women, mental heath services for beaten and bullied women, how do we stop the trafficking of women for sex and for producing custom-made babies, how do we stop the terroristic filming of violence against women (p)rn. this is the stuff that needs working on.

there’s a ton of stuff to do, and you can see what’s needed for the women around you, you can look for women you trust to work with. you don’t have to find radfems, or even feminists. just find women who see the same problems as you do and go, “i wonder what we could do to address this” and then just fucking start.

women's rights are human rights

on hopelessness in political movements

[idiot-teque]

Some of you straight women love scapegoating lesbians for your romantic frustrations. It's jealousy, and it's obvious. I understand the desire to be in a relationship with someone, I've had it too. But at the end of the day, you're going to be happier without a man than with one. This isn't to take your happiness away. That's an emotional reaction to think that. This is women looking out for you. You can get mad, but get mad at men. Get mad at men for not seeing you as equal, for abusing you, for treating you as subhuman. Just stop targeting lesbians for your anger. That energy should always be for men only.

[secretterfsideblog]

Everywhere you look, osa women are being sold a narrative: the narrative of a loving, equitable, and mutually respectful heterosexual relationship. Of course, we realize that as we grow that these things are not only incredibly rare and largely unattainable, but that there is little alternative to exist outside of heteronormative hegemony. If you do, you are Othered. You will never find love, at least in the way you imagined, and never outside of the insane patriarchial framework. Yes, you may be happy with how you live, but there are people who will force you into their stereotypes. The spinster. The cat lady. The wine aunt. As much as we _want_ to believe that people can think whatever they want of us and that it doesn't matter, the fact is that these things actively harm you. These are stereotypes that men will use as excuses to subject you to violence, and that women still buying into the patriarchal ideal will use to ostracize and marginalize you.

We are sold, almost since birth, the idea that, if a man finds us beautiful and virtuous enough, that he will treat us as an equal; we realize later on that this was a ploy so that we can be their pets. We realize, eventually, that cinderella traded her dirty, ashen cage for a gilded one. The question is why, time after time, we seem to fall for this. What is the reason? Even though we've learned in some of the most bitter and vile ways, time and time again we reach for the fantasy. The Hallmark movie, the romance novel. There comes a point in every woman's life; however, when these books stop being expectation and move strictly into the fantasy realm. How unreal, that men would simply _treat us like people._ Why is it, said in such plain language, so damn alarming? And why are we so mired in this expectation? We've known, usually from quite a young age, that there are Bad Men, and we've heard our mothers warn us about them, turned to our mother for comfort or refuge from them. But we always expect, somehow, a prince charming whose one and only "charming" factor is that he sees our humanity.

Why do we expect any good thing from men at all, when even the "good" ones let us down with exhausting consistency? Why do we expect, after their behavior as a class, that the prince charming archetype is anything but a pipe dream, even for the most beautiful and virtuous among us?

I have a sneaking suspicion that most of it has to do with capital. Who profits off of our preening, especially in a culture where beauty and virtue are (for some godforsaken reasoning) intrinsically linked? The beauty industry is run by men. A sick, disgusting irony that they sell us, in order to make us more "profitable," most acceptable for the ideals they create. Who profits off of selling us makeup, clothing, cosmetic procedures, and most importantly, who profits off of selling us _prince charming himself?_

[mire-7viii]

Not to be especially vulnerable, but this slow acceptance of lifelong celibacy is making me feel a little bit better about being a virgin. You know, after repeatedly being told I'm unlovable, pathetic, incapable of adult conversation and a mental child forever.

[gendercriticalthinking]

After seeing the same issues I've had with certain radfems' beliefs keep cropping up over and over, especially among popular blogs, all the while getting very little pushback, I've decided I'm going to abandon this blog. I'm still 100% gender critical, I still believe in and try to practice feminist ideals. I don't think either of those things are related to or must end up leading to ostracizing, or even victim blaming, OSA women for being OSA.

In my post about my ""brother"", he's actually my boyfriend. I wrote it that way because I felt like I'd be seen as a bad person for having a boyfriend on here. I'm not alone in noticing this. Literally just an hour ago I got privately messaged by someone who agreed, who said she didn't feel comfortable saying so publicly. This is not the first time this has happened to me.

This

If you're gonna act confused about how transgenderism can brand itself as feminist while simultaneously shitting on half the population, how are you radfems not doing the same right now?

A ton of women on here left the trans movement because we got fed up with that, and the hypocrisy of blaming women for men's problems, the misogyny of implying social issues can be solved by women changing their sex lives to make other people happy, the incompatibility of saying "you can date whoever but based on the sex you date you will be judged for it" with the fact that sexuality is innate. We're tired of it and we're not going to put up with it.

If you feel the same, send me an ask or DM and I'll reach out. It doesn't have to be this way. This is not feminist, nor what being gender critical is about. Just because you feel like something is feminist and believe it's feminist praxis doesn't make it so. You are not immune to internalized misogyny.

[heterophobicdyke]

if you think makeupless women get to critique makeup, heelless women get to critique heels and women outside the sex industry get to critique the sex industry, but you think lesbians should shut up about the damage done in and because of male/female relationships then you're just a garden-variety homophobe