There’s nothing ‘radical’ or ‘feminist’ about being trans-exclusionary

Content Warning: transphobia, anti-trans violence, white supremacy, the objectification of womxn

If you’ve been engaged in feminist discourse (specifically on social media) in the past few years you may be familiar with the term ‘TERF’. If not, a TERF is an abbreviation of the term “trans-exclusionary radical feminists”, this branch of (self-identified) feminists also often refer to themselves as radfems or “gender critical”. Recently, the term TERF has become more popularized in leftist-political rhetoric as a result of the light being shone on J.K. Rowling’s bigotry and transphobia. However, these radfems and TERFism have been around for decades. 

First originating in the ‘70s among radical feminist circles in which it was seen as important to decipher between those who were trans-exlusionary and those who weren’t,¹ TERF’s were often known for inciting violence against trans womxn that occupied womxn and lesbian exclusive spaces.¹ Although, prior to internet discourse, the term TERF has always been one that was often viewed as political jargon within progressive feminist circles, this dialogue shifted to mainstream media in the 2010’s upon the support for trans-womxn in Hollywood.

For folks that aren’t familiar with TERFist dialogue and common arguments, here are a few key points that they typically push in their rhetoric. At the core of their so-called feminism, they boil down gendered politics and oppression to genitals. They push the often oversimplified and naive argument of ‘vagina=oppressed’ and ‘penis=oppressor’. Although feminism throughout history has been shown through many different branches and lenses, many folks acknowledge that there’s no ‘one-size-fits-all’ to feminism, TERFism inherently pushes a perspective against the liberation of womxn. This black and white thinking not only inherently exclude trans, non-binary, and intersex folks, but also oppose one of the core principles of feminism itself: that womxn are more than their bodies. The dialogue that argues that ‘trans womxn aren’t womxn’ due to genitalia or due to the fact that they may not be able to conceive a child pushes the narrative that the sole purpose behind womxnhood is to bear children, and that womxn are ‘only good for their bodies’. This is also evident in the policing of the term lesbian as many TERFs falsely argue that trans womxn and non-binary folks that identify as lesbians are predators. Radfems make this argument on the basis of many non-cis lesbians not having a period, or being able to have a baby, or the ‘right chromosomes’. Not only is this argument anti-feminist, but it is scientifically incoherent as not all people assigned female at birth have XX chromosomes. The assumption that every cisgendered womxn has XX chromosomes is an overgeneralization as the six most common karyotypes are X, XX, XXY, XY, XYY, and XXXY, and to realistically know which set you possess you would have to get your chromosomes tested.² 

Not only does radfem rhetoric push a very cisgendered, ignorant view of feminism, but it has an overlooked racist history as well. Historically, white supremicists have tokened the term ‘race-realists’ to advocate for social Darwinism and ‘race science’, both which are often used to justify systemic violence against BIPOC.³ Today, TERFs often use the term ‘gender-critical’, in an attempt to co-opt academic sounding language used to mask bigotry from the far-right in the past. The concealed racism of the TERF movement doesn’t stop there, radfems have been often characterized by their heavy policing of binary gender. Although binary gender today is not inherently racist, the practice of policing another’s gender identity and even the origins of binary gender have roots in colonialism and white supremacy. Race science in the 19th century believed that BIPOC who were more ambiguous when it came to their expressions of gender were more primitive in contrast to white people.⁴ In their belief, white people were seen as capable of civilization and Black folks were dismissed as animalistic and ‘un-evolved’.⁴ The sex binary then became seen as a racial achievement because, in their eyes, white folks had used binary gender to evolve more than radicalized folks, consequently the pushing of gender and sex norms became seen as a way to advance their white civilization.⁴ These narratives then have translated into the very ones pushed by TERFs, and furthermore leads to violence against trans folks, specifically trans womxn of colour. 

The blatant disregard for the importance of intersectionality in feminist narratives is at its core what makes anti-trans “feminists'' so harmful. Their bigoted narrative of freedom and humanity only for white cisgendered women often hides under a veil of ‘feminism’. However, this is not feminism at all, the movement instead likens itself to anti-liberation and anti-equality of all. Radfems at their core cannot correctly label themselves as radical when they push the same colonial narratives that the far-right has pushed for centuries. It's naive to see feminism as for only a small percentage of womxn and leave the rest behind. At its heart, the TERF movement doesn’t fight for womxn’s rights but advocates for the continuation of oppression that trans, non-binary, and racialized folks have been continually fighting to escape.

1 "TERFs: the rise of “trans-exclusionary radical feminists,” - Vox." Accessed October 14, 2020. https://www.vox.com/identities/2019/9/5/20840101/terfs-radical-feminists-gender-critical.

2  "The 6 Most Common Biological Sexes in Humans." Accessed October 17, 2020. https://www.joshuakennon.com/the-six-common-biological-sexes-in-humans/.

3 "TERFs: the rise of “trans-exclusionary radical feminists ... - Vox." Accessed October 17, 2020. https://www.vox.com/identities/2019/9/5/20840101/terfs-radical-feminists-gender-critical.

4 Schuller, K. (2018). The biopolitics of feeling: Race, sex, and science in the nineteenth century.