Okay. This is going to close soon.

So, first, I'm going to just make some observations I found interesting or surprising from the poll, then I'm going to very briefly about why I asked the question, then explain what trans-inclusive radical feminism usually entails, then tie that back again to the reason for the poll.

First, I mentioned in another toot that everyone should be aware of the structure of radical feminism, just to be able to recognize the framework without the overt bigotry. For trans folks, I think the TERF version is easier to sniff out. However, I was surprised to see a lot of trans folks and allies who weren't aware of the larger ideas of radical feminism, regardless of how it handles the existence of trans people.

As a philosophical framework, there's no one definition of radical feminism. There are some modern people who call themselves radical feminists but because of things they say, I don't find that a useful label. I will give a working definition of radical feminist soon

1/?

not because I think I can gatekeep radfems, but because if you remove some central pillars of an ideology it ceases being what I need to be talking about right now and there are and have been people who subscribe to these specific take no prisoners conditions of radical feminism - and that's what I need to talk about.

So first observation was that I was surprised how many folks weren't able to connect TERF with a broader "radical feminism." This terrifies me, for reasons we'll get into later.

Second observation was a bit expected and discussed a bit - that many felt confident they could break it down from the name. This was expressed in a few ways and I don't want anyone to feel called out partially because this is by design and no one needs to feel bad for falling from it - just learn. I love all the words in "trans-inclusive radical feminism" but I do not love trans-inclusive radical feminism. I like thinking objectively about things sometimes, but I don't like objectivisim. 2/?

Third observation was also expected and just tiring. There were a few folks who felt the need to debate me on feminism or in ways to justify how TIRFism can be coherent or saying it should have another name. I'd actually rather it not have another name because it *has* sometimes in some circles and renaming it just lets it ferment and I'd rather it call itself what it is. Trying to include the concept of trans people into the framework of radical feminism.

In fact, that's part of why I asked. A good portion of my online presence as a trans person has been influenced and shaped by trans-inclusive radical feminists. As has a lot of other trans people's. The reason I asked trans masculine folks not to answer the poll is because based on a few conversations, they would likely skew the data and don't help me try to have some of the conversations I think trans people and their allies need to have and need to confront.

3/?

Now, I need to state first and foremost:

- I have no interest in gatekeeping anyone's gender.
- I am not interested in placing blame for past events
- Even in that case, I am uninterested in blaming trans women. Trans women are not a monolith and most trans women did not participate in this and some actively fought against it and lost just as much
- I am more interested in exposing radical feminism in its form that it more easily infiltrates trans and Leftist communities and has done so, so that we know what to look for going forward
- I do recognize that this problem was made worse by the horrible amount of transmedicalism in the trans masc community at the times I will speak of, which will be mentioned as needed. Transmedicalism hurts everyone and allows problems like this to fester, and must also be recognized and called out when noticed.
- Many of the people involved in these situations manipulated through their trauma and deserve to participate in restorative justice processes

4/?

So, the radical feminism we will be working with can be boiled down to:

all oppression originates from the violent oppression caused by men and done to women

this is not a systemic oppression first and foremost, although it can be

there is no room for intersectionality because misogyny is oppression

this is a personal direct struggle, women need to take direct action to liberate themselves from men and anyone who isn't doing that is enabling the oppression of other women

In this framework, black men are not oppressed because they are men. Black women do not experience more oppression than white women. Class doesn't matter - literally, oppression is boiled down to gender.

This is part of why third-wave feminisms hinge on intersectionality. It was a reaction to this type of rhetoric that could not consider a broader context.

This also explains why so many radfems are middle to upper class white women who have experienced direct male violence. 5/?

Many routes grew out of this basic framework, but aren't as essential.

Political lesbianism became an obvious result of the framework, but is not inherent to it. Being against pornography similarly, as many radical feminists cannot see any heterosexual relationships as consensual because of this framework. Which brings up its own can of worms.

But there's a problem.

This base framework is trans agnostic. Like most of the world, it was constructed without ever thinking about the existence of trans people, at least explicitly. (There is some evidence that trans women have been involved in radical feminism from the start, but how accepted that was by your average radical feminist is hard to say, which bleeds into another concern we see in TIRF frameworks, so put a pin in that).

It's kind of easy to see how you can make the framework trans-exclusionary, though. Trans people can't exist and we keep the gender essentialism. Bam, done. The rest is gross set dressing.

6/?

But how do you explicitly include trans people in this framework?

There's two general ways and neither are good and they can be taken to different outcomes depending, much like the basic framework.

1. Trans women are women. Trans men are men. Full stop. Thus, trans men are oppressors and trans women are oppressed.

2. "Woman" is defined by the patriarchy. If a trans woman experiences misogyny, she is a woman. If a trans man experiences misogyny, he is a woman while still being valid as a man. (Don't think about it too long or too hard.)

The first quickly turns to some scary outcomes fast, outcomes I have personally experienced. The second can lead to scary outcomes, but usually just gets trans men to skip your picnic because you're simultaneously saying "oh I totally accept you as a man, but you don't experience the world as a man" and it just sets off every alarm bell and I'll eat lunch at home, thanks. There's a further concern with the second, though.

7/?

At this point, I hope everyone knows that not everyone is fully honest about their bigotry. I hope we're all on that same page already. If we're not, I'm sorry, I hope for a world like that some day, but welcome to reality?

So, the second option also better incorporates non-binary people which is also better because you might notice that's... not going to work with the first. But the trouble with the second is not just that it is invalidating of trans men in a well-meaning way, that would often be the written policy, but not the actual experience.

So the support group would be open to anyone who's experienced gendered sexual violence, even if the type of gendered violence they experienced does not fit their gender identity on paper, but if you show up as a trans man or trans masc, you would not be trusted, often told that you're making things unsafe, and be accused of being violent to others. Writing this, it sounds like I'm exaggerating or watching anti-SJW cringe compilations, but no.

8/?

I experienced this. Others have talked to me about experiencing this. I've seen discourse about groups talking about how this happened because of this policy and trying to figure out how to fix it.

The trouble boils down to radical feminism.

It is not interested in systems.

In radical feminism, oppression is personal. It is violence. It is men hurting women directly.

So, someone showing up to the meeting just being male is, in this framework, violent by essentially bringing the ghost of the oppressor along. I don't matter in this equation.

So, how am I going to react next time I see a similar policy, where all "oppressed gender identities" are welcome? Is it going to be safe for me to go?

Because here's the really scary part.

The policy enacted by someone who includes trans people in the second way does not exclude trans-inclusive radical feminists who prefer the first way from attending.

And time and time again, they were there.

9/?

I feel the need to pause right now and remark that radical feminism is a with any means necessary ideology.

Anti-fascism states that fascism is such a threat that any means necessary should be taken to ensure it doesn't flourish.

Radical feminism states any means necessary must be used to take power from men to keep them from oppressing women.

If you do more than read their books but listen to their lectures and their podcasts and watch their vlogs, this is very literal and very much endorses the use of violence to achieve these ends.

This is a bit hard to write, which is going to get worse as I explain not only the outcomes of what making a trans-inclusive radical feminism looks like, but how I personally experienced them.

so

content warnings are going to start about now because if I'm struggling to write about it because of what I experienced, I'm probably a bit late

please assume that if there is a bigotry, it will come up. sexual violence, violence, and mental health will be... a lot.

10/?

So, the two major paths you can take with the first type of TIRF ideology boil down to how you think gender identity works.

For context, this is a framework where people stated you could choose to be a lesbian and that it was the only ethical choice.

So who's surprised that if you state trans people are valid... this evolves into gender is a choice.

There's a few communities where this ideology ran rampant. Someone gave me some good resources and archived information about the early to mid 2010s Baeddel invasion of tumblr. That ends up being the outcome if gender is a choice.

Men who choose to give up oppressor status by becoming women sacrifice the most, so are the best.

But this means trans men chose to become oppressors. In this framework, if you are a trans man, you are doing so *to* oppress women.

This makes you not just a gender traitor. It makes you a cop. A fed. A stooge. You had a choice.

11/?

Now, a lot of the stuff TIRFs end up saying and doing hurt trans women as well, and I do want to acknowledge that. However, it's hard for me to speak about those aspects - or their impact on the intersex and non-binary communities - because I didn't personally experience those.

My big experience with the first type of TIRF was on Livejournal circa 2008-2010.

Almost all trans spaces required elevation of trans women's voices over all others because of oppression. Like it was the first rule of general trans spaces at that time. And I didn't want to be in the trans masc spaces because as I alluded to before they were very, very transmedicalist and despite very much needing and seeking out medical transition I can't engage with that.

But what I'm about to explain answer a question a lot of people have been asking:

Where are the trans men? Why don't they speak up?

Hopefully, it will help us heal.

12/?

My experience is not universal as well. I can't speak to why so many trans men are quiet. I think there's a lot of reasons. But this is a reason I think we need to reckon with together.

TIRFs have an easier time existing in Leftist spaces, especially spaces dominated by trans women. They do not need a lot of the "trappings" that made it worse that I described. And just like TERFs they gain power, relevance, and stealth when their talking points spoken by people who don't know the problem with said point are left unchallenged.

And unchallenged is a lot of the issue here.

When I had four people yelling at me that as a trans man I couldn't be raped and if I was raped, then I wasn't a man, only one person spoke up. And not for long.

When I was told to kill myself because I tried to discuss dealing with the dysphoria of menstrual cramps, no one came.

13/?

When I mentioned a physical assault that was a direct hate crime, I was told I deserved it.

And deserved it came up a lot.

Now, I want to specify that most of the people in these groups were almost assuredly not TIRFs.

But because of how radical feminists couch their calls for violence in feminist terms and give a level of justification, it's harder to directly see. And it's harder to know when to intervene.

I think the rules these spaces had to try and make sure trans women were heard, especially when a huge number of trans men were basically being Buck Angel was needed. But it also meant that trans men were every day told that they were violent, they were oppressors, they should be hurt, corrective rape would be a good option, that testosterone is poison, that they were crazy, that they were unable to experience oppression, and every step they took would hurt the people whose voices mattered.

14/?

if i left, i could have the incredibly toxic transmedicalist "FTM" communities

this was 2008

i had a small local support group within a larger LGBT group that we used as cover not to get clocked, but literally, this is what i had to choose from

maybe i could have found a perfect non-TIRF infiltrated non-transmedicalist community but I didn't and I know a lot of others didn't either so we had to make do with what we had

and we had to hope that talking about experiencing wouldn't end up being told we were talking about trans femmes and making them feel guilty about not having menstrual cramps and that actually, we should just kill ourselves, that'd solve it

15/?

so the reason I didn't want to include trans men and trans masc folks in this poll is because even if trans men have heard of trans-inclusive radical feminism or haven't but are like "oh thanks for the words" now or have been lucky enough to never experience these people I'm less concerned about our awareness right now

because i want to make sure that everyone else is able to see what i see when i start getting little red flags piling up because we need to be on the same page

not just because i hope you care about trans men but because radical feminism is not able to be vindicated without a complete refactor

it. hurts. everyone.

i've read the experience of trans women victimized by it, non-binary people, trans men, intersex people and in the long run, no one benefits from a framework that looks at oppression as this simply men violence women bullshit dynamic.

16/?

I have never had the luxury to not understand trans-inclusive radical feminism and I was a bit surprised when people would ask why I'm careful or reticent or often stressed and afraid to talk about my experiences and I would couch it in terms like "being afraid of toxic masculinity"

When I say that's why I have a hard time speaking up in trans femme spaces, when I allude to that being a reason trans men are often quieter, THIS is what I'm referring to.

So I guess my hope here is simple.

I hope this helps people identify this form of radical feminism and keep it from taking root.

I hope this helps a lot of folks navigate the question of "where are the trans men" with more understanding of how deep the rabbit hole can go.

And I hope no trans man ever, ever again feels like they have to choose between no community and one that supports corrective rape.

17/?

uhhhhhh any questions?

follow up?

thoughts? experiences?

please CW as needed

18/18