Gloria Steinem’s Awesome, Relevant Statements About Gender Identity

Gloria Steinem on “trans woman” Renee Richards:

“a frightening instance of what feminism could lead to” or as “living proof that feminism isn’t necessary.”

“At a minimum, it was a diversion from the widespread problems of sexual inequality.” She writes that, although she supports the right of individuals to identify as they choose, she claims that, in many cases, transsexuals “surgically mutilate their own bodies” in order to conform to a gender role that is inexorably tied to physical body parts. She concludes that “feminists are right to feel uncomfortable about the need for and uses of transsexualism.”

“If the shoe doesn’t fit, must we change the foot?

Outrageous Acts and Everyday Rebellions contains an essay on trans identities in which she cited Janice Raymond and the fantastic book The Transsexual Empire.

Was it fair for women to face someone trained physically and culturally for forty years as a man?


In other words, transsexuals are paying an extreme tribute to the power of sex roles. In order to set their real human personalities free, they surgically mutilate their own bodies…


Instead of serving more lifesaving but often less lucrative needs for their surgical and hormone-therapy skills, some physicians are aiding individuals who are desperately trying to conform to an unjust society. It’s a small group of successful physicians she [Janice Raymond] names ‘the transsexual empire’.




  1. Yeah, Gloria Steinem wrote this years ago. However, it seems her position may have changed, as in a more recent college talk she did, she says transgender individuals should be at the head of the movement.

    Personally, I see transgenderism as a symptom of living under male supremacy. I care about whether people are *promoting* transgenderism as a practice as well as their other feminist politics.

    1. Completely agree.

    2. Serious question here, I don’t understand how can people who believe in innate gender be leaders of a movement that aims to eliminate gender? Isn’t that like an anti-war movement being led by people who believe war is a biological necessity?

      1. If we knew how to make sense of it, we might agree.

        They usually argue that both sex and gender are social constructs with no basis in reality while simultaneously claiming that there’s such a thing as “brain sex.”

        Makes no sense to me, either.

%d bloggers like this: