bluebell-would
replied to your post “prosthetical:
calligrafiti:
scarimor:
lupinatic:
rhodanum:
…”
I’d love to see evidence that it was radfems who where/are against the term queer.
I should’ve thought to grab a copy of that post from before all that debate, because it wasn’t the part I was after.
I think it’s a mistake to say ‘radfems’ in general take this stance, because radical feminism has spread far beyond its original shores and there are a lot of people with differing opinions who now embrace that label.
But there are absolutely subgroups of radical feminism that oppose the inclusive usage of ‘queer’. I have been presented with the argument from the horse’s mouth more than once, from radfems who believe that ‘queer’ is not an acceptable term/movement because it includes groups such as trans women, bisexual people and asexual people. (Based on their various explanations, their reasons for why those groups or portions of those groups should be excluded seem to differ from one individual to another to varying degrees, although I’ve never found any of them convincing.)
I couldn’t say whether they are the cause of the term ‘queer’ facing a kind of anti-renaissance, but it’s undoubtedly true that some radfem subgroups oppose it, and they generally make no secret of doing so.
from Tumblr http://ift.tt/2FIT8RF