Who benefits?

“Radical feminism is a perspective within feminism that calls for a radical reordering of society in which male supremacy is eliminated in all social and economic contexts. Radical feminists view society as fundamentally a patriarchy in which men dominate and oppress women.”

Prostitution

Purchased consent is not consent, it’s coercion. Sex work is dehumanizing and traumatizing for women, and fueled by sex trafficking. The commodification of female sexuality is a mix of misogyny and capitalism.

Pornography

Prostitution on camera. See above for key points. Additionally, female sexuality should not be monetized and sold for male entertainment. The industry is rife with rape, abuse, coercion, trafficked women, drugged women, and CP. It harms not only the women involved in the videos (physically and mentally), but it also harms the viewers in the long run.

Surrogacy

Similar to prostitution and pornography in the sense that women’s bodies become acquirable products for sale or rent. A woman's organs should not be for rent, as it creates a perverse incentive. Most surrogacy is outsourced to disadvantaged women in developing nations, where they are made to sign contracts they can't read and undergo poor treatment.

Bodily Autonomy

Understanding that a woman should have complete and utter control of her reproductive system; including abortion, birth, and sterilization. Understanding a woman should have access to informed and accurate medical care. Understanding a woman should have complete control over when and if she engages in sex with a partner. Understanding that PIV is often an unequal act.

Nuclear Family

This allows for the isolation of women, both emotionally and financially. The family unit, ideally, includes a large safety net of family and friends who assist in child rearing. Women should not be financially dependent on men, as this open the potential for abuse and difficulty leaving via power imbalance.

Capitalism

The system that allows the commodification of women and their bodies. Women shouldn’t have to sell or rent out their bodies in order to survive.

BDSM/Kink

Wherein the majority of subs are women and the majority of doms are men. Fetishization of slavery, power imbalances, rape, incest, pedophilia, and abuse. Hurting your partner does not suddenly become healthy if you can orgasm to it. Power imbalances that lead to physical and emotional abuse and trauma.

Patriarchal Religions

All holy books were written by men and serve to maintain and legitimize patriarchal power structures. Patriarchal religions falsely attribute the gift of creation to men when in reality every man on earth was molded from the flesh of women.

Postmodernism/Queer Theory

Radical feminism is based on materialism. Women are oppressed because of their biological reality, which is not subjective, subjectable to changes or personal interpretations. Postmodernism and queer theory are.

The Beauty Industry

Fills up the pockets of men who make money by ever-changing standards of female beauty. Keeps women insecure, low self-esteem, their value and self-worth forever dependent on their physical appeal (to men). Demands women change how they appear (makeup, shaving, dieting, cosmetic surgeries) to appear prepubescent (lithe, hair free, firm not soft) which is a part of what we identify as 'pedophilia culture'.

Marriage

Marriage would be described by some as the wheels on which patriarchy is carried onwards. Historically, marriage has been nothing but a transaction: a daughter, who belonged to her father, now belongs to her husband. Her reproductive labor, domestic labor, emotional labor, and physical labor all at his disposal. This is how marriage continues to work and act culturally in a majority of societies

Individualism

As opposed to class analysis. Arguably the most overlooked and hardest ‘’issue’’ to overcome. It’s understandable that most women gravitate towards liberal feminism because they don’t have to analyze the reasons behind their actions, they don’t have to come to difficult and unappealing conclusions, they don’t have to feel the need to take action and stop engaging in whatever they are doing that’s harming women as a class. Known as 'choice feminism', which affirms any choice as a personal one, despite what influenced that choice or how it may affect the female class at large (see: plastic surgery, "makeup makes me feel confident!", "I like being hurt during sex!")

Gender Critical/Gender Abolitionist

Gender is a social class applied to biology. Each individuals sex is innate, and gender is the series of roles, expectations, socialization, cultural practices, and personality traits applied to that sex. Sex is "this baby has a vulva" and gender is "so give that baby a pink blanket and a dolly". Therefore, radical feminists understand that gender is a means of oppressing women. They wish to abolish gender. This creates clashes with pieces of trans rights activism, which upholds ones gender as innate. Read more here on this topic.

The main clashing beliefs are as follows:

-Being dysphoric doesn’t automatically means trans, since transitioning is only a way of treating dysphoria, and there are many reasons someone might be dysphoric.

-Instead of “identifying as a man/woman/nonbinary”, we should abolish gender altogether.

- Males remain male and females remain female, even if they’re dysphoric/gnc. Biology is innate. Therefore, for example, a transwoman that rapes someone, is an male abuser. It is male violence.

- Males have male privilege, regardless of how they identify, because society is built upon upholding and amplifying males.

- Females will be opressed, regardless of how they identify, because society is built upon the females-as-a-resource model that holds us as sexual and reproductive resources for male pleasure and male heirs.

Radical Feminist Goals

Women's liberation via the dismantling of male power structures, and the rejection of a woman's "role" within society as a lesser class.

Ways to Achieve This

Separatism/Male Exclusion - simply deciding to center one’s life and actions around females in all possible aspects. The keeping and protecting of female only spaces. Ultimately, this might look like a female-only society that any girl or woman could enter or leave at will.

Introspection - analyzing one’s actions and maybe asking oneself: why do I want these things? What's drives this action? Is this the healthiest option for me, physically and mentally? Am I hurting a woman or girl if I partake in this option?

Raising Awareness - of all the issues mentioned above. Talking to women and girls about radical feminism. This is not a solution but a step towards finding or creating more solutions as a community.

Being Politically Active - political agency and action is essential for female liberation; especially concerning topics such as reproductive rights, legislation of prostitution, electing representatives ETC.

Male Reform - investing time and effort into making men aware of the issues, in the hopes that they’ll do their part for the liberation of women and do the same with their fellow men.

Childrearing - Focus on advocacy and action around raising girls and boys the same way, to begin to treat the class divide at the root. This is very difficult without full societal support.

Conclusion

“Am I bad for eating this? Am I lazy? Am I careless? Am I gluttonous? Am I immoral? Should I be eating something else? Should I be eating at all?” All this is the prison that millions of women live in every day of their lives. It is this context that makes judging women by their food an objectively unfeminist act.

No, they should be apologising for letting her get threatened with death and rape, witch hunted, diffamed and harrassed for years, all for expressing warranted concerns about women and children's rights, without ever even suggesting this attitude was going too far.

These people owe JK Rowling their life style, their millions and their career. Do you think Daniel Radcliffe and Rupert Grint, with their frankly average looks, would have gone on to be anyone in Hollywood or Broadway if it weren't for Harry Potter? Do you think Emma Watson, with her terrible acting skills, would have gotten to share a screen with Saoirse Ronan, Florence Pugh and Tomothée Chalamet? Of course not. It's hard out there, even for people born into privilege and who can afford to go to acting school and get great agents.

The least they could have done (which is something some people who owe her far less HAVE, like Eddie Redmayne) was to make it clear they disapproved of the treatment Rowling had to endure for her views. They could also have given her the benefit of the doubt and actually engaged with the points she was making in her essay regarding the trans issue. Rowling isn't some far-right fearmonger. Watson, Radcliffe and Grint didn't just say "i disagree with her views", they completely ignored her views and parrotted the mantra "trans women are women", and coldly went on with their lives as she received waves after waves of targeted, vitriolic abuse and attempts to make her sound deranged and demonic. They didn't say a peep as Pink News was publishing up to 50 incidiary and false articles about Rowling a month, didn't say a thing about her receiving threatening pictures of men showing off their penis, or posing in front of her house.

ALL FOR SAYING THAT RAPED AND/OR ABUSED WOMEN DESERVE SPACES AWAY FROM MALES IF THEY NEED IT TO FEEL SAFE/RECOVER, AND THAT MALE FEELINGS AREN'T THE ONE THING THAT SUPERSEEDES EVERY OTHER HUMAN'S NEEDS.

Peter's character is made up of two allegories for transitioning: 1. changing sides in the First Wizarding War, and 2. living as a rat instead of a person

Changing sides in the war is a metaphor for transitioning because he fundamentally changed who he was from his original identity to the exact opposite, but kept his new identity a secret even from his friends specifically in order to fool and harm them. This is just like how JKR believes trans women try to fool and harm cis women with their identities.

Peter's initial betrayal/transition ended in the ultimate effect of giving a man (Voldemort) access to a cis woman's (Lily's) private room (sound familiar?) which was framed as the ultimate evil by JKR. Here, Voldemort plays the role of JKR's trans woman when he forces his way into a cis woman's private space (Lily's bedroom) specifically to harm a cis woman (Lily) and a child (Harry). This scene ends with the cis woman brutally murdering the trans woman, which the narrative frames as very positive and the readers are supposed to agree with.

Notice how Peter then eventually also betrayed Voldemort, which is an allegory for detransitioning. JKR believes trans people's "true selves" are their original selves/assigned gender, and that everyone is always going to detransition. Peter ended up on the same side he started because JKR believes trans women are always still men deep down.

Peter living as a "Rat" is a metaphor for living as a "woman" after he transitioned. Notice how the narrative frames it as if Peter was never "truly" a rat, just a person pretending to be a rat (like how JKR believes trans women are not truly women just men pretending to be women).

Peter was never given the opportunity to tell the reader whether he was a rat or a human, the text decides for us that his "real" identity is always human no matter how long he lives as a rat and passes as a rat. The choice of a rat to represent a trans person shows how JKR believes trans people to be animals/inhuman. And also a rat represents sneakiness and dishonesty so that's obvious.

When Peter talks about being a rat in the Shrieking Shack in PoA, he is met with disgust and revulsion from Ron. We're supposed to read this as Ron being rightfully disgusted and distrusting of a person he just found out was trans.

Peter lived as a rat for 13 years (a notoriously evil number), concealing his "true" identity (which was seen negatively by the text because JKR is saying that Trans people's "true" identities are evil) in order to sleep in Ron's bed. This is meant to be read as a child molester allegory because JKR believes all trans women are child molesters.

Other evidence

Peter was barely taller than 13 year old Harry because he's not being a man properly (not a "Real man") according to JKR's bigoted and cisheterosexist worldviews. What other reason does JKR have for specifying how short Peter was?

He was also shown to be balding at a very young age as another reference to not being "man enough" for JKR.

He was ugly.

Since wands are used as a phallic symbol in the series, we can further see Peter doesn't have a penis anymore because in GoF he uses Voldemort's wand rather than one of his own.

Peter cut off his own finger, which is an allegory for gender reassignment surgery/vaginoplasty. Peter not having a finger anymore is a metaphor for a trans woman not having a penis.

He later cuts off his own hand, just furthering and cementing the reference to bottom surgery.

Peter then gets a human-made bodypart in place of his "biological" hand, a silver hand made by Voldemort. This is just like how trans people will get human-made bodyparts installed after they get their other ones removed. Of course JKR makes it the evil villain (Voldemort) who plays the role of the evil doctor who provides gender-affirming care. JKR believes gender-affirming surgeries are evil. And notice how Peter was coerced by Voldemort into getting the surgery when he really didn't want to deep down, which is very telling.

As we know, Peter's silver hand (his vagina) eventually killed him. And he died by suicide, which feels in very bad taste given the symbolism JKR is working with here, but knowing her that was probably intentional.

"OP is a TERF"

"TERFs aren't welcome on MY blog!"