Anonymous asked: serious question: if radical feminism wants to do away with gender roles, why is it against agender or genderfluid identities & people who defy all gender expectations/roles? I've tried googling "gender abolitionism" but haven't gotten much, and most of the tumblr links were criticizing it so I wanted to learn about it from someone who promotes it.
interesting question, really.
first of all, radical feminism is out for getting rid of gender entirely. not just gender roles, not just expectations, as gender would still exist and those problems would still likely rise. abolishing the idea of gender and the hierarchy it has created would truly set both males and females free, but radical feminists tend to occupy their time more with spreading on how gender hurts females (which, in my honest opinion, gender harms females worse than males)
the thing is is that the identities of ‘agender’ and ‘genderfluid’ still hold the idea that gender still exists or that it still should exist, which is what gender abolitionism has tried so hard to keep down. creating 1,000 new identities to suit every single person isn’t exactly liberating, and it’s not exactly questioning gender, just more running loops around it.
that, and most “agender” or “genderfluid” people i’ve seen are, at best, gender nonconforming. obviously, this doesn’t make them bad (a lot of radical feminists i know are gender nonconforming too, and i can be considered myself), but these identities are rather… irrelevant, in my opinion, and wouldn’t need to exist with gender being out of the way entirely.