#radical feminism critique | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

haggishlyhagging · 10 months

Text

“One of the other criticisms to be levelled at the radical feminist analysis is the pre-eminence given to heterosexual sex, to the phallus, as the root of women's oppression. In both the psychoanalytic and radical feminist accounts the phallus is castigated - and yet it is simultaneously reified through the attention given to it. According to Daly, to Dworkin, to Jeffreys, and by implication many other radical feminists, women who are engaged in heterosexual relationships are brainwashed dupes. They are violated, degraded, subordinated and objectified by penetration with the all-powerful penis, the literal representation of the phallus. Women are reminded of their subjugated status as they are fucked, and fooled into thinking it pleasurable. But is it not ridiculous to claim that 'the basic elements of rape are involved in all heterosexual relationships' (Griffin, 1971)? Many women desire men, and many women have not been sexually abused or assaulted by men. Those women who have are dismissed by this analysis of all heterosexual sex as rape for, as Segal argues (1987: 37), 'It diminishes rather than clarifies rape's hideous reality and prevalence.'

Equally it is naive to claim that, by freeing ourselves from the sexual oppression of men by embarking on sexual relationships with women, we will be free. For there is no lesbian utopia where women live together in peace and harmony without conflict or oppression. If it exists, it is only in the pages of feminist fiction. The continuation of this particular brand of rhetoric and its use as an explanation for women's madness is both naive and short-sighted. We cannot replace one restrictive discourse (that of compulsory heterosexuality) with another (that of compulsory lesbianism). Sexuality is part of our oppression as women - but the radical feminist answer does not suit all women.

It is naïve to place a pre-eminent emphasis on heterosexual sex and the phallus as being at the root of women's difficulties, for it ignores and denies all other factors which are central to the oppression of women. It also, paradoxically, glorifies the phallus, celebrating it as the powerful symbol in a discourse analogous to that used by the misogynistic males so comprehensively castigated. As Lynne Segal argues:

Are there not sturdier weapons than the penis? . . . we are forced to leave behind the complex historical formation of men's social power - and how this social power confers a symbolic power to the penis as the defining characteristic of the male - to return to a naked sexual capacity which can be, and therefore is, used to control women. In the description of the relentless power of the steely prick, the biological, so forcefully ejected from the front door, swaggers in, cocksure, through the back. (Segal, 1987: 101)

This preoccupation with male sexuality and with heterosexual sex solely as the act of vaginal penetration - an act presented in the same graphic form in much radical feminist polemic as it is in pornography - is also short-sighted. As women's sexuality cannot be reduced to penetration - to pleasure from fucking (as it was in the myth of the vaginal orgasm) - neither can men's. To reduce men's pleasure (and power) to this one act is to ignore the many complex factors that form the discourses of male sexuality. As much as we need to explore women's sexuality, creating new ways of exploring our desire, so we need to understand and not simplify men's sexuality, if women are to remain in sexual relationships with men, as many women wish to do. For men's sexuality can be no more reduced to a single experience (fucking powerfully and oppressively) than can women's (passively receiving without pleasure). Male sexuality is clearly ‘the site of any number of emotions of weakness and strength, pleasure and pain, anxiety, conflict, tension and struggle, none of them mapped out in such a way as to make the obliteration of the agency of women in heterosexual engagements inevitable' (Segal, 1990: 215). To deny this, by positing that sexual or marital therapy merely coerces women into heterosexuality, or that heterosexual sex is always oppressive for women, is a nonsense, and denies the existence of pleasure in heterosexual sex. In the same way that it is insulting to women who are distressed, women who are mad, to imply that all women are mad within a patriarchal culture, it is insulting to imply that all heterosexual women are oppressed.”

-Jane Ussher, Women’s Madness: Misogyny or Mental Illness?

#jane ussher #female sexuality #male sexuality #female oppression #radical feminism critique #heterosexuality

6 notes · View notes

wrathsofgrapes · 5 months

Text

Concours de Femmes: Our Dirty Secret

There's a particular facet of womanhood and girlhood that I find to be barely talked about, usually only briefly mentioned in feminist discourse - the competition between women, and beauty standards as a means to even be accepted by other women. I feel like "the competition" (as I will now be referring to it) takes up such a large space within women's lives, and I would argue even more so than the approval and acceptance of men, such a large space that we have barely known alternatives, or what the lack of the competition could look like.

Mainstream feminist discourse often centers around the general idea that "women do not do [xyz] to please men!" - often referring to makeup, cosmetic surgery, and other aesthetic rituals. In reality, in many instances, it genuinely is partially for men, but I will argue that it is mostly for the approval of other women. Women want other women to be jealous of them. Women are in a constant competition to be the most desirable, the most fuckable, and on top of it all, we are in a competition to see who can pretend as though we are not even aware of the mere existence of the competition, who can convince other women that they are the most -effortlessly- desirable and fuckable. Because if you fit a certain beauty standard that traditionally fits what is called the "male gaze", then you also fit in with other women that are in the same place in "the competition" as you.

Mainstream feminist discourse too often focuses on what we, feminists, can do about men, when we, women, are just as wounded by our patriarchal matrix and heteronormative delusions. It is rarely discussed that women will go through lengths of extreme aesthetic alterations (nose jobs, BBLs, lip injections, and whatever else is popular right now) not only to fit the male gaze and feel that euphoric rush of male approval, but also to be accepted by groups of women, to fit into the "pretty" group, for other women to perceive you as competitor. Because ironically, it happens quite often where the more you are seen as competition, the more the competition want to be friends with you. Society loves a group of pretty women. Think of the Kardashians, the Real Housewives, the appeal of sorority culture, and think about how reality shows about groups of pretty women are often solely based around the competition between each other. Because the truth is, we (as a whole) have been conditioned to find entertainment in a "catfight", we're all perverts, eyes and ears glued to the objectified gaggle of women claiming to be "best friends" as they jump through hoops to see who can be the most successful in fame, desirability, money, and often intellect as well. We secretly want them to fail; we have been trained to secretly want our own friends to fail as well.

In terms of desirability, I will speak on personal experience when I say that in adolescence into young adulthood, most girls do not actually want to have sex, especially not with the partners that they usually "choose" in adolescence (I use the term choose very loosely. I actually think young girls often get tricked into thinking they have full control in their choices). No, rather, they would like to be desirable, fuckable. Not only that, but they would especially like to tell their friends about how desirable they are via tales of sexual and romantic (mostly sexual) exploits with boys. Sexual gossip is a very important bonding factor in friendships between girls and young women, and I will argue that for some it is one of the largest reasons why many will partake in our current zeitgeist's soulless digitalized hookup culture.

In high school, I was fascinated and intrigued to hear about the sexual adventures of my girl friends, not only because I had none, but also because none of these stories were positive. They made me sick to my stomach. Stories of boys who refused protection, stories of boys who coerced girls into anal sex, stories of dry, painful penetration, stories of boys getting girls too drunk or stoned to consent. And the girls? Too often did they tell me these stories with a proud smile on their face, thinking that it was funny, not a big deal. I think when you're young you thirst for experience whether it is good or bad. You want stories. You want to be interesting. You're definitely more interesting than your prudish and awkward friend (me). They liked it when I freaked out about these stories. They would reassure me that it wasn't a big deal, as if they were telling me that I will experience it one day, because they think every girl does, and that's just how it is. They liked feeling older, more mature and more experienced than me. They liked when I pried them about their sexual experiences in detail. I only pried because I wondered if they'd get to a point where they really heard themselves, and the words they were saying to me. I don't think anyone's really having any great sex in high school, and everyone was trying to convince everyone else that they were having great sex.

I feel for these girls. I feel for my sixteen year old self that secretly envied these girls. I acted shocked to them as they told me of these traumatic events with a smile on their faces, having read Germaine Greer and De Beauvoir, trying to explain to them why they deserve to be treated better, and how male validation is not worth it. They simply thought I was a silly virgin who did not understand. I secretly wished to have just not thought about these things. Back then I thought things would be so much easier, simpler, if I just let myself be treated that way. I would feel more loved. I would feel closer to my friends. I'd have some really "fun" stories to tell. I felt alienated from my friends because I couldn't relate. Back then I convinced people around me that I was not so lonely. That I didn't see a point in relationships, that I was too busy to bother with them (busy with what?? Algebra 1? Who was I fooling...). That I wasn't so interested in sex. I wanted to act like I was above sex and love (or what high schoolers thought love was). I even identified as asexual and later, gay, for some of this time because I felt so alienated from the adolescent rehearsal of heterosexual sex and love.

But that doesn't mean that I was above an interest in boys - especially platonically. I think I have noticed (as well as perpetrated) women and girls not only competing for sexual and romantic desirability in the eyes of men, but also platonic desirability (which in reality is often just hidden sexual desire because straight men and women often cannot fathom of pure platonic relationships between each other). An example of this is women having a complex, often encouraged by men, that they are "one of the boys". Women saying things like "I just get along better with guys", feeling a sort of competition to see who can have the most male friends. Women can be guilty of valuing men and male friendships over women, just as men can. Men often don't view women as -full people-, and maybe, just maybe, many women subconsciously feel this way too.

Don't get me wrong, I am definitely still trying to shake out of being entrapped within the competition. I think we all are, especially recently. But it's hard when one is surrounded solely by people who are perpetuating the competition further, when one is trapped. I get that. This post is definitely not to bash other women and girls for perpetuating the competition in any way. I was and probably always will be entrapped in the competition in one way or another. We women are all traumatized, brainwashed to romanticize that trauma, and brainwashed to compete in who has more of it, because -trauma makes you interesting-. I think it's getting better, I really do, but that might also be my experience from the people I choose to surround myself with and love. Sometimes I find myself talking with a girl who I would not normally talk to, and find myself back in high school again, prudish as she is beaming with tragedy.

I think when women live in more privileged societies in terms of gender equality (I mean as in, women who are not forced into marriages, are able to access education, etc.), internalized misogyny is just as important of an issue to address as the everyday misogynies of men. It is too often that men pit women against each other, especially explicitly, and women will agree and be complicit to it. It starts with recognizing the misogynies. It starts with analyzing why you -really hate that girl you have never talked to-. It starts with recognizing the difference in how you act around men versus around women.

Simply saying empty phrases like "girl power!" and "women need to stick together!" means nothing when we merely have an illusion of power and unity in groups of women, because due to internalized misogyny and the competition, what should be a "safe space" is filled with re-enforcers of our own oppression. Women often don't even feel safe in groups of other women, because within every woman is a little misogynist speaking in our ear. It starts with the slow and painful killing of that prick, who has been with you since you learned to speak, and has controlled your speech ever since.

#feminist critique #feminism #divine feminine #intersectional feminism #misandry #radical feminism #radical feminist community #gender critical #male violence #pick me girl #misogny #my opinion #judith butler #andrea dworkin #germaine greer #simone de beauvoir #girlhood #womanhood #feminine rage

94 notes · View notes

mai-333 · 7 months

Text

“Buy less. Choose well.”

-Vivienne Westwood

Vivienne Westwood Fall 1995 Ready-to-Wear Look 35 Modelled by Kate Moss

We are living through a global collapse as our oceans are killed by plastic, and our land melted by global warming. The big companies that run our world have decided that money is more important than the planet we all live on, and the fashion industry is not innocent. 10% of the worlds carbon emissions are from the fashion industry alone. Just last year, 235million items of clothing were sent to landfills. In this culture of fast fashion, and micro trends, clothing has become one of the biggest pollutants.

Fashion has always been a major part of society, going as far back to the old ages where it was a sign of social status, to today where it is our main form of self expression. Yet this has been exploited. The pay for labour to make clothing is decreasing, the quality of the clothing is decreasing, and yet the cost is still increasing. Even cheap companies such as Shein are racking in an impressive profit just down to their abysmal production costs. The fashion cycle goes faster, churning out new designs and trends (often stolen from independent designers) so fast that within a month they are old. Even if you aren’t one to be bothered by wearing out of style clothing, don’t worry because the clothes will be unwearably damaged in no time.

Ethical and quality clothing may be more expensive, but in the long run it will cost just the same as the countless cheap versions that have to be bought. Second hand shops, reselling and repurposing, are all great alternatives for shopping ethically. Even sewing, or knitting new clothes will make such a difference. It may be harder to follow all these rapid trends, but by buying less and better quality clothing you will be able to achieve a stable wardrobe that doesn’t need replaced monthly.

75 notes · View notes

sweetstarcollector · 10 months

Text

So this is not a bad video, I agree with this video 100% that the current push to ban no fault divorce makes marriage incredibly unsafe for women. Female suicide rates fell ~20% after states passed no fault divorce laws, the rates of women being murdered by their husbands fell after states passed no fault divorce laws, domestic violence rates fell as well. If there’s even a chance no-fault could get revoked for you, I’d think twice about marriage, especially marrying a man.

What really stood out to me in this video though, was her phrasing of “they’re not gonna stop at marginalized groups, they’re gonna go after women too”. Implying that women aren’t a marginalized group. How has female class consciousness been eroded so much that we can be talking about our oppression and not even realize we count as oppressed? Lawmakers are trying to get rid of a law that traps women in horrible, abusive marriages, until they’re either murdered or kill themselves to escape. But that’s not *real* oppression. Lawmakers are forcing women to be pregnant and give birth. But women aren’t a marginalized group. They’ll come for men next!!

What laws could they pass that target men in the same way they target women? No-fault divorce didn’t cause any change in male suicide, in the number of men murdered. Forcing men to impregnate women would be a severe violation of bodily autonomy, but it doesn’t have the same physical danger that comes with being forcibly impregnated. So it’s not even just that these (majority male) legislators won’t *want* to pass laws that target men, it’s that even if they wanted to *they wouldn’t be able to*. There is no male equivalent to female oppression.

#this isn’t a critique of this woman specifically btw #her video just gave me an avenue to talk about this overarching problem #radfem #radical feminism #radical feminists please touch #radical feminists do interact #my post

81 notes · View notes

p1nkityyy · 5 months

Text

The thing I find most infuriating with bimbo feminism is a misunderstanding of the need some women feel to be incompetent.

I believe women should be allowed to be stupid and not be bashed for it; the same way men are praised or even desired for being dumb without being overly sexualised to the point of dehumanisation. I think that can only exist in a perfect, equal world, where women don't have to be informed for their safety and basic respect (which is rarely granted) but also aren't pushed into boxes of stupidity.

And to some extent I can understand it. Yes, it's easier to succumb to the patriarchy in a few ways after being pressured your whole life. Yes, this necessity to be informed is tiring, and depressing and annoying, however it's needed. women should stay informed as much as they can, atleast living as they are right now.

Pushing that being dumb is feminist in this current climate is extremely dangerous, especially pertaining to safety. Information is always power and I think those ppl lose sight of that conscience while also (in a way) undermining the feminists fighting for women's education.

the word "bimbo" alone dehumanises women even if you think you are somehow reclaiming it, you aren't. You're using it for it's intended purpose. Bimbo is a porn term that I have seen SO MANY FUCKING TIMES within alt-right and incel spaces (much of these spaces you can easily find on this platform) that believe all women should be s*x slaves and so on and so forth. By believing this word is freeing you are pandering and buying into these people's ideology, that's exactly what they want you to do; to think that being dumb is freeing so that they can more efficiently trap you.

#Bimbo feminism #radical feminism #feminism #feminist critique #liberal feminism

35 notes · View notes

slowtides · 9 months

Text

I feel like as long as women speaking about their experiences either A) speak from a universal assumed position or B) are assumed to be speaking about a universal assumed position, then it will be incredibly difficult to engage with and embrace women's subjectivities and differences and rely on them as a strength. This is specifically referencing white, american, cisgender, able-bodied women who can't seem to grasp the difference between solidarity across differences and unity through erasing differences. Our subjectivities as women--disabled women, black women, indigenous women, white women, trans women, queer women, lesbian women, etc--are not something that should be erased or elided because they are dangerous to talk about due to risking divisiveness. Feminists of color, especially and specifically Black feminists, have shown for decades that the only path forward as feminists is to embrace and engage difference as a source of power and knowledge, not as a threat. Because when difference is treated as a threat that needs to be ignored or erased, then what you are really saying is that the person who is different is a threat who needs to be ignored or erased. And fuck that.

#this is only 5% about the barbie movie. but it's mostly about radical feminists and white feminists on tiktok #who think there is even such a thing as a Female Experience or a Womans experience #or that there ever was.#feminism #I should clarify: there are valid critiques of difference framework in that it could lead to otherizing people.#but i don't think that means to throw difference as a framework out. i think it means learning how to do difference better.

24 notes · View notes

nix-that-rad-lass · 2 months

Text

I mentioned in my art appreciation class that almost every portrayal of a woman by a male artist is the same.

Of the paintings I saw, this was no clearer than in the one pictured above: “The Barricade”

The Nazi soldiers are shadowy figures, clearly men, but there is subtle variation in them. They retain their individuality, they retain the portrayal of being human even though they have given up their humanity.

The male prisoners are humans, are people. Portrayed with different body types, expressions, experiencing different emotions- the painting focuses on the crime it is to harm these men because the painter uses them to portray humanity.

But the women... the women are passive. They are nothing more than decorations. Notice how they share the same body, their faces are hidden, they pose like they are present for a pin up. They are not allowed to show fear, to show anger, to be human.

No, in art by male artists, women exist only to be decorations, and most often women are stripped nude to be the pervert male artists personal pornography.

This is a recurring theme I noticed in all the art presented in my class- all male painters and artists, every last one of them, portrayed women as mere objects for their own pleasure. They gave the males in their art humanity, individuality, emotion. But they stripped these from women.

It’s shocking to see how this same attitude extends across society, culture, and time.

Men are people. Women are decorations at best, more often objects to be used and abused.

At what point will this change?

Art from thousands of years ago shows the same pattern. Art today is just as bad.

When will artists, those people who are often touted as being more advanced, more enlightened, when will they break free of this ancient misogyny?

#misogyny #sexism #misogyny in art #sexism in art #male artists #male art #feminism #feminist #radfem #radical feminist #radical feminism #art critique #art criticism #double standards #female erasure #female objectification

6 notes · View notes

overtlydinosaurian · 10 months

Text

I saw a QoTD in a rad-aligned forum that got me thinking.

What's the most humiliating part of being a woman.

Some said how our reproductive processes are treated. Some said penetration. Some said femininity. I think all have good points, but I personally think the worst thing about being a woman is that our humiliation and dignity is never considered. Never taken seriously.

Women's views of herself, no matter what she thinks of herself, is mocked. Otger people decide how you feel. It's mocked, exactly the status quo, or someone's kink.

Femininity can be humiliation. To fall in love with an abuser can be humiliating. To be assaulted and just have it made about you, expected, or deserved. To be stuck to server people less intelligent and less deserving than you.

Never can we talk about humiliation or our dignity without someone else just deciding that's what's normal for all women- so why care?

You see this especially in how people talk about assault between the sexes. Men are just to embarrassed to come forward. And.. women aren't? (Mocked. Belittled. Status quo.)

You see this in femininity. Dresses are humiliating. Either "Yeah we all think that but it's okay, that's how a woman dresses up" or "well I like it. I've decided all women do too." (Status Quo)

To have trusted someone completely and have them hurt or betray you. Yeah "scorned wife" but women are normally bitter and jealous! Wait you mean you feel vulnerable? Lol no you're supposed to be mad. You want revenge. Sexy revenge wirh eyeliner and a skintight dress to show him what he lost. (Someone's kink)

What do you mean women have dignity? What do you mean she's humiliated.

That's just what women are to most people.

#femininity #critique of how others view and treat womanhood #ofc I feel womanhood is more than just humiliation. im specifically talking about the one worst part I feel.#womanhood #radical feminism #performative femininity

4 notes · View notes