Swerf = sex work exclusionary radical feminist Terf =trans* exclusionary radical feminist. They go hand in hand.
The loudest non religious voices opposed to sex workers rights, Bindel and Burchill in the UK, Dworkin, Brennan, Farley, among others, describe themselves as radical feminists. I leave the argument of whether they are feminists to others, it’s the radical that intrigues me. Since the 1960s a certain cachet has been given to groups who are counter cultural, linkages are made between organisations who stand against the dominant narrative of western capitalism and heteronormative values. This was seen in the Occupy camps, where many disparate groups with different reasons for existing were united far more by what they opposed than by what they supported. We cannot escape history, and as the third generation since the 1960s takes to the streets we have absorbed ideas about how “radical” groups look, sound, behave.
The fact is though radical feminists are extreme social conservatives with attitudes towards sex that Pope Francis would approve of.
Follow
Ann Tagonist@radscummery@kittystryker sex work is so much better. u only get fired for refusing to have your face ejaculated on and you’re never sexually harassed!
The attitude towards facials, as the most disgusting sex act possible is just one aspect. BDSM, group sex, anal, bisexuality, pansexuality, almost every sexual act that your Great Grandad would have (publicly) disapproved off is also disapproved of by the radical feminists. That is even before you get into their disapproval of women daring to make money from sex work and challenging the patriarchal idea that men are the gatekeepers of female sexuality.
Why then the insistence on calling themselves radical? When your attitude to porn is ban it, when your attitude to sex is only with the lights off and never with any acts that might not be papally approved, when your views are those that reinforce patriarchal tropes of the whore /madonna split, what is radical?
We need to go back to the opening sentences, and I think look at the worlds second biggest group of real life trolls, the Westboro Baptist Church. The world is a far more complex place than it was 50 years ago, Old certainties, especially when it comes to sex have been overturned. Books like The Happy Hooker may seem unnuanced to us now, but along with others a different, more open, more empowered attitude to sex, relationships and sexuality was espoused. We live in a world where the Conservative party passes a same-sex marriage law and millions of women fantasies about being tied up and beaten by their own Mr Grey.
Not liking certain forms of sex is fine, not personally wanting to do X,Y or Z is the right of every human being. However being squicked by tit, pulling a Tebbit and finding them morally wrong, purely based on your squick is something, quite rightly, most people do not think should any longer be the basis for law and policy. Radical feminists are left between a rock and a hard place, wanting to be radical, because history tells them that is a good, powerful thing to be, whilst having personal views that are anything but.
So, looking around they dig out extreme theories that confuse radicalism and bigotry. They confuse not being mainstream with being counter cultural. When the WHO and UNAIDS support decriminalization then opposing it is certainly not mainstream, and becomes a core value for people desperate to find something radical to cling to. Look, they cry, I am not boring or conventional, I hold a radical view! Those with an external locus of evaluation need others to approve of them, to support their view of themselves, and thus conferences are held, blogs written where people prove to each other that they are radical, since they all believe it.
Which brings us rather neatly to the Westboro Baptist Church.
If you have got this far I am sure you can see the parallels. They take the bible and selectively quote and misinterpret. One of their big claims is that they are the only true Christians. The more Christians and non-Christian groups call them out, the more their belief in themselves as a persecuted minority who know THE TRUTH is reinforced. For WBC their internal view of themselves is built on being the only Christians.
For radfems it is built on the idea they are radical and counter cultural and the only true feminist. Both refuse to listen to others who read their doctrines and interpret them differently, both have little contact with those outwith their cult, and both respond with violence, anger and hatred to anyone who challenges the walls they have built up to keep out the ever-changing progressive world.
Which is the other aspect of this mentioned in the title. Now some people are transphobic through fear and ignorance. It is not acceptable, but like many forms of prejudice can be tackled through education. This may be the case for some radfems (again fitting with my argument they are in fact personally social conservatives attempting not to be seen as such). However the vehemence with which trans* women are attacked suggests a dogma, a belief that is at the core of the cult, in the same way WBC pickets the funeral of dead service men and women. Many Christians are homophobic, only WBC have raised it to being the corner stone of their faith. In the same way radfems have mistaken radicalism for extremism.
Sex workers and trans people are dying because of the stigma against them, it is time for all people who oppose bigotry and prejudice to stand up against it. There can be no compromise. Just as there are wonderful groups, from hells angels to parents who now turn up to shield the mourners at funerals the WBC picket we need allies to block out the terfs and swerfs, do not allow their voices to be heard, oppose their meetings, challenge them wherever they push their beliefs. Only by excluding them can you be on the side of those oppressed and marginalised.
Related articles
- TERFs attempt to sabotage the long standing Glasgow Feminist Network (thevenusenvy.wordpress.com)
- Wedding held at the Rainbow House across from Westboro Baptist Church (queerlandia.com)
- The hate group masquerading as feminists (salon.com)
everyday whorephobia 
jemima2013
August 3, 2013
Reblogged this on Sometimes, it's just a cigar and commented:
It often seems to be claimed that it is OK to support some of what radfems are doing, and simply ignore the bigotry and hate, that is not good enough, total exclusion, protest and opposition is the only acceptable reply to them
iamcuriousblue
August 3, 2013
“The world is a far more complex place than it was 50 years ago, Old certainties, especially when it comes to sex have been overturned. Books like The Happy Hooker may seem unnuanced to us now, but along with others a different, more open, more empowered attitude to sex, relationships and sexuality was espoused.”
This. It’s not that the Sexual Revolution, free love, sex-positiviity, etc are beyond critique, but there’s a huge difference between critiques that are progressive and move rights and freedoms forward, and critiques of those ideas that are basically conservative and regressive. (Which is not to imply I sympathize with “sex-critical” positions, either – way too much “radical feminism is kind of right about sexuality” for my taste.)
Sheila Jeffreys writing underlines just how regressive and conservative the radfem position actually is. In “The Spinster and her Enemies”, she attacks the entire Sexual Revolution clear back to *19th Century* progressives like Havelock Ellis, and casts her lot with the Victorian Social Purity movement. Contemporary “radical” feminism is just the modern heir to this.
everydaywhorephobia
August 8, 2013
I agree, and think that more of us need to call out their total lack of radicalism.
Vanessa Emma Goldman
June 21, 2014
Wow, I knew that Jeffrey Sheilas was very bass ackwards and neoconservative, but had no idea she was this horribly behind the times! “Victorian social purity?” Seriously? She may as well drop any pretense of being any sort of feminist, and just admit she is basically a religious fundamentalist! Go join the Westborough Baptist Church already, Sheila!
thevenusenvy
August 5, 2013
Reblogged this on THE VENUS ENVY.
everydaywhorephobia
August 8, 2013
thank you
Ervin
August 7, 2013
I despise that some seek to subvert the equality and honesty that (to me) are the real fruits of the sexual revolution by selling it back to women as being about nothing more than our right to dress sexy and manipulate men with our sexual power. That is reactionary, not radical. I respect every human’s right to be a slut. I’m one myself. Still, its hard not to see the current proliferation of over-done, ass kissing pandering women as Uncle Toms of a sort.
everydaywhorephobia
August 8, 2013
Not sure exactly what you mean, men have dictated how women should dress to be acceptable for thousands of years, that some still do, and some women still believe they have to conform to win the approval of patriarchy is nothing new.
Mike Caputo (@hanytimeh)
October 30, 2013
A little late to the game here, but I came across this and thought it was interesting. I will certainly never contradict anyone who finds a problem with “radical” feminists, but I have a different perspective on where they’re coming from.
I would find it hard to believe that the radical feminists I’m thinking of object to the sex acts you mention because they’re closet social conservatives. I believe it comes from one basic founding principle: that any act, relationship, word, or thought which even momentarily allows a heterosexual male to appear to have more power than a female is necessarily bad. This is because they believe heterosexual males (and I’m referring to the standard definition here of “a person with a penis and testicles who desires sex with people who have a vagina and breasts, i.e. females”) are, almost universally, oppressive brutes whose sole aim is to ensure the enslavement of all who are not members of their club in order to be able to rape at will and have sandwiches made for them.
There may well be closeted social conservatives in the feminist camp whose real goal is to be protected and provided for while still being free to follow their pampered hipster hearts in whatever direction is most interesting at the moment – in other words, having their cake and eating it too. But I don’t think that’s necessary to object to non-traditional sex acts. The perceived power differential is more than enough, and because the acceptability of those acts would, in their minds, perpetuate broader manifestations of male oppression of females, they must be railed against regardless of the desires of the females who engage in them (it goes without saying that the desires of the males are inconsequential).
So, anyway, just thought I’d put that out there. It’s always nice to see people who can’t be dismissed as “right-wing fascist racist misogynists” calling out radfem hypocrisy. The enemy of my enemy is my friend.
danah gaz
June 3, 2014
Shiela Jeffreys as much as admitted to being a social conservative herself, and Janice Raymond was a theology major and former nun, so I’m inclined to agree with the article.
Francois Tremblay
May 15, 2014
You go all feminist-than-thou on radfems, but you’re the one calling women whores. You’re the one supporting the mass objectification and mistreatment of women. Stick in your eye, bigot.
everydaywhorephobia
May 15, 2014
You do realise this is a sex worker blog? We call sex workers whores, as is our right in reclaiming a term of abuse
Francois Tremblay
July 16, 2014
So you use a term of abuse but claim it’s for “reclaiming” purposes. What’s the difference between you and a misogynist again?
danah gaz
June 3, 2014
Are you seriously telling sex workers how they are allowed to identify?
everydaywhorephobia
June 3, 2014
It seems they are, wonderful person that they are
Francois Tremblay
September 30, 2014
I am not telling anyone to do anything. I am saying you are a misogynist.
lib
August 25, 2014
As a prostitute who is also a radfem, and has never once felt excluded by radfems but has been silenced by libfems, I call bullshit.
everydaywhorephobia
September 30, 2014
You must meet very different ones then to the ones who call us pimps and ask us if we were raped as children and threaten us with arrest
everydaywhorephobia
November 9, 2014
Why, it is an opinion piece not an academic piece? Or do you think academics should have a voice but not sex workers?