IF Biology determines one's "biological class" AND "Radical feminism" constantly reifies this class structure by the assertion of the essential separation of males and females AND the end goal of radical feminism is "women's liberation"
Then how exactly can women be "liberated" in this way? Like, my understanding is that the aim of radical socialists is to eliminate the class system entirely, right? The only way out of the cycle of class warfare is to abolish class, which communism is eminently capable of doing. It's a social construct maintained by the social mechanisms that defend and perpetuate privatized relations toward the means of production. How exactly do radfems hope to liberate women from biological sex? It doesn't really seem like they do, because they're committed endlessly to women this and women that, women only this and women only that, and the central tenet of this description is the opposition of womankind to mankind and their inherent patriarchy and oppression.
So if they're not out to destroy the class system that they're oppressed by, then doesn't that just render them into a privilege-seeking "special interest group?" If it's a class system, doesn't that mean that there are inherent conflicts between these "classes?" If biological class cannot be undone, then doesn't that extend this class conflict indefinitely? Wouldn't that resign the sexes to endless power-struggles over class domination between males and females? If the sexes are doomed to eternal conflict, then doesn't that make this vein of radical feminism/"radical feminism" about establishing female primacy in biological class relations instead of any kind of actually radical or revolutionary or liberatory change?
50% 50%, female oppression is systemic, not biological.
Landon Rogers
imo a lot of feminism de facto comes down to being an interest group because 'the patriarchy' is never defined concretely and it's also never defined concretely at what point equality will have been reached. That way, feminism becomes endless pushing of perceived female interests against a perceived oppressive structure with no clear end in sight. (I'm not sure whether this is very bad per se. Nothing much wrong with being an interest group).
But yeah radical feminism is often a form of gender essentialism which believes women are essentially better. The radical feminists I met usually disliked men, whether from a perspective of nature or nurture. If you ever see a male radical feminist, I predict he will be a tortured and self-hating soul. If all of our society would be like that, it would hardly bring us mental peace imo.
Elijah Watson
...
Blake Walker
...
Cooper Rivera
Radical feminism is interesting. Imo that's it. Radfem theory is mostly garbage, built on guided prejudices and pseudo-Marxist jargon.
Alexander Wilson
But they are, otherwise unspecified philosophy isn't philosophy, dipshit. Oh yeah, being real with you the Patriarchy, at least in the west has been abolished, feminism has other demons to tackle though.
Blake Richardson
The second kind of does. Vaguely, and that said it doesn't really contradict the poster that dictionary poster was replying to. Patriarchy would have to be loosely defined in order for the second definition to apply to the US.
Ian Adams
t. retard
Cameron Baker
t.retard who tries acting smart Imagine if Marx had vaguely said there was a system causing unhappiness but never specified it.
