strongly believe you should be fully aware what original theorists wrote before endorsing their movements. radical feminism is from the 60s. the originators of radical feminism were not concerned about race, class, or disability and that is so deeply baked into their ideologies and practices. radfem was never just a belief, it was always a set of instructions. what radical feminism was in support of, it was always strict about. it is a controlling form of feminism and it was made that way because they wanted to streamline the feminist movement. they thought there were too many feminist concerns and it’d be better if all women just picked a few, and so they chose the white issues to frame as most important. no less, it was inspired by the civil rights movement and yet never touched on race because whiteness was their main concern. co-opted their protests, their signage, their advocacy and never gave the civil rights movement another thought.
are modern radical feminists, the ones that claim intersectionality, aware of this? if you are, how do you rationalize it? I’m genuinely asking why you wouldn’t just choose intersectional feminism, which focuses on the multiple pathways of oppression women face depending on their varying identities (including men, their main concern! it still covers that main concern of the patriarchy)
turnnoffyourmind
snowghoul
jbbartram-illu
germansingergirl
