The TERF "debate" — the ultimate 3rd rail?

Post Reply New Topic

So the problem with TERF is the 3rd letter which stands for "Radical". So the first question we must ask, is it possible for Feminism to be TOO radical?

So then must a radical feminist be Trans-Exclusionary to be thought truly radical? Do TERFs accept feminists who aren't trans-exclusionary as radical?

Can a TERF, being Trans-Exclusionary, nevertheless claim to not be transphobic?

Can these questions be discussed in a civilized manner? Dare to accept the challenge!

You're overthinking it. It's just a silly term that stuck. I think that is why many trans people and allies began using "gender critical" instead

You can be a radical stamp collector, or a radical Celtics Fan, or whatever...if you take the belief or practice to an extremely extreme extreme. Especially if you add in intolerance of others.

So you can be a radical feminist, or non radical feminist, and you can be a radical feminist who excludes trans women, and you can be a radical feminist who includes transwomen. Why not?

There is nothing inherently contradictory about any of that, in the way that being a "Jewish Nazi" or a "Black KKKer" would seem to be an inherent contradiction. And even then ...who knows? Right now in our Post-Trump world there are starting to be Hispanic neo Nazis, and Hispanic "Christian Nationalists" and "White supremists" -which would seem to me to be self contradictory. But dont seem that way to the folks in question (for some reason).

There are also radical feminists who are not trans-exclusionary.

In a Vinn diagram, the TERF circle overlaps a little bit with the much bigger "radical feminist" circle.

Here is a Guardian (U.K.) article, published 28 Nov 2018, by Viv Smythe, the person who has been credited with coining the term "TERF." And here is the blog post in which she first used that term back in 2008.

There's a video I posted in another thread that explains the history of feminism and "queerness", and touches on the "TERF issue". Apparently it's "too long" to watch/listen to, whatever that means. It's a dense subject.

[opinion=mine]

I believe that the animosity the SOME feminists MAY feel toward trans-women is rooted in some weird kind of Freudian-oid penis envy/hatred, even if the offending member has been surgically removed.

[/opinion]

Do you truly believe those qualifiers will protect you from accusations of misogyny?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D5Df191 ... el=Weidmoo

I certainly did not expect that ^

Nobody does, join the club.

A misogynous statement would be to post a slam against ALL feminists and/or ALL trans-women.

There is no need for hatred on either side (or from us).  If someone's way of being does not suit you, just walk away and let them do their thing.

I have known feminists, and I have know trans-people.  Most people are nice.  It is the minority of every group that makes their entire group look bad.

I got on well with H. Dublo. Not tried Trix or Marklin myself but told that Trix was problematic and Marklin was not so easy to get.
So Hornby Dublo it is.

Yes, as long as some radical feminists accept trans women and others don't, having some term is going be necessary.

Both groups are massive hypocrites, so it's probably not that important in most cases.