RadFem Without Borders

The answer moves beyond a simplistic, binary definition and reflects a broader, more nuanced understanding of gender.

For example:

"A woman is an adult who identifies as a woman. While sex is a biological concept, gender is shaped by social, cultural, and personal factors. Womanhood isn't defined solely by biology but also by identity, lived experiences, and societal roles."

And one could have a thoughtful response that both acknowledges the complexity of gender while addressing the intent behind the question.

I've seen "What is a woman?" used often to challeng inclusive views of womanhood, particularly by those who advocate for a strict biological definition based on sex assigned at birth.

The implication is that failing to recognize sex differences puts people at risk, as though this is an issue of predator detection.

But let’s be clear: men are not inherently predators. There is no biological basis for the idea that men are "naturally" wired to hunt women.

"Those who try to disrupt, confuse, or otherwise obfuscate our ability to trust this instinct are abusively eroding our social safeguarding capacities."

This phrasing makes it clear that the argument isn’t really about mate selection or reproduction—it’s about perceived threats and safety.

Additionally, in many social species, not every individual is expected to reproduce, which is one explanation for why same-sex pairings exist in humans, wolves, penguins, and others. The system functions even when not everyone is focused on mating.

The idea that "sex recognition is our most primal survival instinct" is dubious at best. If we're talking about fundamental survival instincts, something like "don't walk off a cliff" is probably higher on the list—you can’t reproduce if you’re dead.

Today, Trump has:
-indicated he'll purge the FBI of everyone who isn't a fanatical loyalist
-allowed his crony to seize all government funding in an effective coup
-ripped the entire federal government off the internet

Today, Democrats have:
-done nothing
-said nothing
-tweeted about egg prices

There's a particular legal theory rabbit hole I've been going down while taking a good hard look at the trans panic defense. (I've pulled a lot of insight from asking how transmisogynistic phenomena resemble violence against cis women.)

So let's talk about "rough sex" and "nagging and shagging".

It's scary how liberal men will look at antifeminist backlash, say "I can't believe they'd do all of this because women play video games now!" and then instead of taking that seriously, start brainstorming how to lean into male supremacy just enough as a quick fix to keep GamerGate men on the left.

it’s also worth pointing out that bloom may not have even been referring to mtf transsexuals with the term “cross-dressers”
and it’s willfully misleading to suggest that all mtf transsexuals cross-dress or even need to do so to pass

Trying to claim that this review proves Dworkin was a TERF is just intellectually dishonest.

TERFs often twist historical feminist writings to fit their narrative, but if they actually read Dworkin in full context, they'd see that she was deeply invested in critiquing patriarchal power structures—not in gatekeeping womanhood.

The section about "cross-dressing heterosexuals" and "fetishistic relationships to dressing in women's clothes" is an attribution to Bloom's perspective, not Dworkin’s personal stance.

In the first paragraph, Dworkin explicitly describes Bloom as a "humane, liberal book" that explores gender fluidity and challenges rigid binaries. Throughout the review, she is summarizing Bloom's observations and conclusions, not necessarily endorsing them.

For Terfs: This is a book review of Amy Bloom's Normal, not Dworkin's own personal manifesto. 🗣

Image credit: @bugbearts.bsky.social

We’re about:
✔️ Women’s rights & bodily autonomy
✔️ Ending male violence & oppression
✔️ Gender abolition without trans erasure
✔️ Economic justice for all
🚫 TERFs & misogynists—keep moving. 🚫
#RadicalFeminism #TransRights #FeminismForAll