[–] furyosa terf immortal 28 points

Glad to see him standing firm in this still. I've been listening to Material Girls audiobook since a couple of days ago. Stock is brilliant. Still unsure if Dawkins is gender critical or just a conservative sex materialist.

Don't know about conservative but almost certainly a sex materialist. He's not stupid and he's an evolutionary biologist. Sex is the foundation of evolution and you quite literally cannot understand evolution without understanding sex.

Tbh I am fine with that, too. Dawkins isn't going to be some feminist hero, but he could be a strong voice in just calling out the absurdity of sex denialism if he sticks to his guns.

I don't know his political views, but he'd probably agree that equality between the two sexes is good, and sex stereotypes are bad. These were the progressive views from 30 years ago and are now halfway conservative, I guess? I've seen TRAs say that both are "TERF dog whistles".

People do use the 'gender critical' label for those who are merely 'transgender critical', unfortunately.

There are people on this site who clearly use the GC label just to criticize transgenderism, which, honestly, I find very obnoxious. You can't be a radical feminist without understanding Marxist materialism and without familiarity of second wave feminism.

But you can be gender critical (wanting to abolish gendered stereotypes, especially those that lead to the subjugation of women) without being a radical feminist.

We need people who don't have time to sit down and pore over history and theory on our side, too. Let's not attack them for not being as "educated" as others and lacking ideological purity. That sounds too, too frighteningly familiar.

No, you don't need familiarity with some man's theory to be a radical feminist. And even if they succeed in erasing so called "second wave" feminism, the radical notion that women are human and want the man's boot off their throat is something that is still going to be applicable.

You really can be a radical feminist without understanding Marxist materialism. We don't take an exam. No one is gatekeeping us like we're lawyers.

Theory is over-rated. People who like theory over-estimate the value of their understanding theory. Understanding ideas isn't equivalent to getting stuff done. Ideas don't change the world, work does. Feminism is about improving women's lives – our material conditions. The greatest feminists focus on work and practice, not scaring women away by telling them they can't be involved unless they dive into some research which might slightly impact the direction of their work.

I wish people would read more old books too, especially in the era of Twitter soundbites and memes. But there is no such law that someone has to understand Marxist materialism to be a radical feminist.

It's good to have more allies. I just hope he changes his opinions on a few other really questionable things he said.

[–] Archie 5 points Edited

Like what things? I don't know the guy beside the fact that he's apparently some kind of sex symbol for atheists (which I appreciate)

He's a really good writer. I strongly recommend you his biology books. The Selfish Gene is great. It's written in a way a layman can understand it but it's not dumbed down.

[–] emptiedriver 1 points Edited

I saw some people tweeting about how sad they think it is and how he's gone "right wing" and "anti trans" now, and this article was linked, which of course is frustratingly biased & at first I thought maybe just a scrapped together hit piece... I was gonna shrug it off but I was curious about the site and I noticed that the masthead included several academics and respectable people including Krista Tippet who I remember listening to on my local radio back when that was how I got news. So, not scrapped together at all. Well funded and organized website with an utterly unconscionable report.