"TERF Wars" - The Ideological Divide Between Transfeminists & Radical Feminists

Image Credit

In the final sections of the “Trans Issues” chapter of her book Beyond the Binary Thinking About Sex and Gender, author and philosophy professor Shannon Dea presents the reader with background surrounding the deep, and in her words “painful” ideological divide that exists between radical feminists and the transgender community (Dea 108). Radical feminists, Dea explains, are members of a movement that argues that the patriarchy, i.e. “the organization of power, authority, and goods in society—indeed all societies—serves to privilege men and disadvantage women” (108). According to these radical feminists, the supposed gender hierarchy is so deeply entrenched in all aspects of our society, and so pervasively oppressive to women, that it is simply beyond reform. In the eyes of many of these radical feminists, the oppression of women is intrinsic to the very concept of gender, and as such oppresses women by design, rather than as an unintended consequence. Therefore, the only reasonable path toward liberation for women from the patriarchy for many radical feminists is the complete eradication of gender. 

This, of course, places the goals of radical feminists in diametric opposition to those of trans folks, as many trans people lean into the very outward expressions of gender that radical feminists seek to dismantle. For instance, radical feminists will often “reject gender divisions of labour, gendered conventions around attire, grooming, and behavior, etc.” (109). But, for many trans people, the behaviors that a radical feminist might refer to as “gendered conventions” are the very ways in which they might express and validate their gender identities in their day to day lives. In the eyes of many radical feminists, this is particularly egregious in the case of trans women, who they often view as “reinforcers of feminine gender stereotypes” (110). This, they see as counterproductive to their “decades-long effort to dissolve those very gender roles” (110). And, taking it a step even further beyond gender roles, some radical feminists hold the view that trans folks who undergo sex reassignment surgery are “mutilating” themselves “in order to conform to conservative ideas about gender” that they seek to dismantle (110). Many trans people find these radical feminist ideas incredibly hurtful and harmful, and attest that it is a product of “cis privilege” that these feminists can advocate for the abolishment of gender altogether. This is because, in the words of Dea, “never have to defend their identity or fight to express it,” so they can be “cavalier about gender, treating it as if it were dispensable” (110). 

Tensions are so volatile between these two groups that many trans folks and allies of the trans community refer to radical feminists that hold exclusionary beliefs about trans people as "TERFs," which stands for trans-exclusionary radical feminists (112). Many radical feminists view this title as a derogatory slur, and often, derogation is precisely the intention of those using it in reference to them. Recently, this controversial term has even made headlines for its use in reference to author J.K. Rowling, of Harry Potter fame, following tweets that were perceived by many as transphobic. 

So the question remains, is there any way to balance radical feminists’ opposition to gender binarism with trans people’s hard-won right to their preferred gender expression? Obviously, there is no simple answer to this question, as this ideological difference has created an incredibly painful and sensitive riff within feminism. All I can offer is that I disagree with the radical feminist notion that the constitution of gender itself is intrinsically oppressive and therefore beyond reform. Even if radical feminists are correct in arguing that gender was constructed from the start to be oppressive and that the origins of gender are rife with oppressive intentions, I have trouble believing their argument that there is absolutely no possibility that our systems can be reformed. I would be interested to read some more arguments from radical feminists on why they might believe that the patriarchal scars left on our systems are beyond healing in order to understand the basis of their view.

I would also argue that radical feminists seem overly concerned with the idea that gender itself is harmful. In my view, the more pressing issue to focus on eliminating is not gender and gender expression, but rather our societal valuation of certain masculine traits over feminine traits. I can confidently attest that there is nothing inherently superior about masculinity that makes it better than femininity, and vice versa. And, I believe that both masculinity, femininity, and everything in between and beyond are important ways in which humans identify and express who they are. Therefore, I think the best course of action for feminists is not the eradication of all traditional masculine and feminine gender expressions and roles, but rather working toward creating a society in which we value masculinity, femininity, and everything in between as neutral and equivalent. This way, all people can be free to fall wherever they do on the gender spectrum, and express their gender in whatever way best validates their identity. This would remove the need for people themselves to change their gender expression, and instead directs reformative efforts toward how our society views and values the traits/roles people already possess. Therefore, I disagree with the radical feminists and do not think we should eradicate gender. Rather, I think it would be far more helpful and trans-inclusive to work toward eradicating the hierarchy that exists in our society that places masculinity in a preeminent position above femininity. 

I would love to know what you all think!