reblog if you’re a radfem
(i wanna follow more of you xoxo)
just a lonely intersectional feminist trying to explore radical feminism without being a total cissexist, transphobic, racist shit lord.
You might want to start with tempering some of those pre-conceived notions then.
Radical feminism is inherently intersectional. Crenshaw probably has nightmares about the ways her theory has been hijacked. Intersectionality is a legal theory meant to address the shortcomings in how courts address multiple axes of oppression. Crenshaw sought to develop a theory that would allow black women to seek recourse for both racism and misogyny, not to apply feminism to every group under the sun.
“Cissexism” is such a stupid concept. The idea that your genitals and “your gender presentation” (read: the gender role you’re thrust into based on sex) should align is actually a mechanism of sex-based oppression — that is, it abuses gender non-conforming women and men just as much as a person who transitions, if not more, since most people looking to alleviate their sex dysphoria aim to blend in so they can go on about their lives whereas most of us non-conforming folk will never, ever win within this system. Gender is a system of oppression, not a way of identifying. It’s stupid to call radfems “cissexist” when we’re actually rallying against the same thing, just with terms that actually address the root of the issue instead.
I sincerely do not understand why people assume radical feminist theory is inherently racist when third-wave theories erase whiteness as an axis of privilege by propping up choice-based rhetoric that inherently requires privilege in order to be a viable mode of action.
Hope this helps!