Collective article record

Playing Nice Here With Radical Feminists

Collective Archive Number CAN-0000-1311-4363 Permanent resolver

Source Summary

Ya know, maybe it’s because I’ve read every goddamn post on the radical feminists take on transgenderism, but I’m pissed. I won’t denigrate this blog with my rant. If you want to read it, it’s here. I’ve read the following posts: Any Excuse to Denigrate Lipstick 275 comments Queer Dewd Layeth The Bitchslap Down For Sex-Positive Feminism Twisty Goes to Camp: A Very Special Episode 96 comments Okay. 316 Are Feminists Allowed to Be Partnered with Transmen and Transwomen? 310 comments 2007, toe gingerly dipped in blogosphere: oprah, mental patient’s makeup, which fem to choose, briton’s beer Well, we have an update 159 Diving into the Wreck (as it were) 20 Did I miss the party? 3 Other People Say Things I Missed 8 Just Thought I’d Put Up a Post About This Bullshit 23 Saving the world can be glamourous. One more bitchy note before I put on my

The Source Summary reproduces the first 150 words of the source article unless a Collective editor has explicitly locked a replacement.

Read the original article View inbound sources

Interpretive context

Why this article may matter

Community significance

“Playing Nice Here With Radical Feminists” may matter to community readers because it preserves a first-person or testimonial account connected to feminism and gender politics, while also engaging transgender identity and history. Such accounts can document how an issue was understood and experienced from within the period or community being discussed.

Historical significance

As a publication record from 2007 at Transadvocate.com, “Playing Nice Here With Radical Feminists” provides dated evidence of how feminism and gender politics was being argued in relation to transgender identity and history. Comparing it with earlier and later records can reveal changes in vocabulary, evidence, and emphasis.

Policy significance

No dominant policy frame was detected in “Playing Nice Here With Radical Feminists.” Its policy relevance, when present, is therefore likely indirect: the article’s treatment of feminism and gender politics may shape later arguments about institutions or public practice rather than proposing a specific rule.

Content analysis

Ranked themes and framings

Rank 1 is the dominant inferred theme or framing. Parent labels identify broader theme families; the relationship key beneath the diagram explains the line styles used for hierarchy, same-family relationships, overlap, and separate-but-related themes.

Themes

1
Feminism and gender politicsTheme family: Power, ideology, and social conflict
100%
2
Transgender identity and historyTheme family: Identity, culture, and community
30%
3
Healthcare and medicineTheme family: Institutions, law, and public life
20%

Academic framing

1
Clinical and medical analysis
100%

Editorial function

Source topics

Relationship key

Separate but related themes

The diagram distinguishes hierarchy, same-family relationships, overlap, and separate-but-related themes inferred within this article. It does not assert that all themes are mutually exclusive.

These classifications are inferred from article text and source metadata and remain directly editable. Relationship labels express corpus-analysis judgments, not immutable facts.

Granular comparative context

How “Feminism and gender politics” appears across the Collective corpus

This article appeared 6 year(s) before the theme reached its highest annual presence in the registered corpus in 2013.

Relative presence by year

Peak year indexed to 100

2 2006

16 2007

2 2008

3 2009

2 2010

7 2011

9 2012

94 2013

44 2014

21 2015

21 2016

43 2017

7 2018

3 2019

3 2020

3 2021

1 2024

1 2025

Presence by member publication

Frequently co-occurring concepts

Academic framings in this topic

Policy framings in this topic

Values measure relative presence in the registered Collective corpus, not public search interest or public opinion.

Inbound-link and citation evidence

Documented circulation and reception

1 source-held reference records an early link or citation; the documented sources span 1 domain. The dated evidence currently falls in 2007. These observations describe circulation and reuse; they do not assign cultural worth or evaluate the communities, arguments, or people discussed.

1distinct source records documented

1distinct referring domains

0best available scholarly cited-by count

0books or volumes documented

1references retained by the source publication

2007observed years in dated evidence

Evidence by channel

Independent counts; bars are not additive

Source-held references1

Coverage of the evidence search

Shows what has actually been checked

Publisher-held referencesChecked · August 24, 2026

Scholarly indexesChecked · August 24, 2026

Book and volume searchNotchecked

Public-web searchNotconfigured

Collective corpus linksIndexed · August 31, 2026

Review scholarly results Review book results Review public-web results

Documented references over time

Dated source evidence currently stored by the Collective

1 2007

Reference retained by the source publicationSource-publication recordProvider-confirmed

Sick of This Yet? at Transadvocate Blog

Sick of This Yet? at Transadvocate Blog · transadvocate.com · January 12, 2007

[...] It was New Years Eve when I got the but when I learned of this post, and I’ve spent the last 13 days digging around the radfem blogosphere reading all the posts that sprouted from that initial post. One post in particular caught my…

Counts describe documented circulation and reception in the sources currently available to the Collective. They are not a score of quality, merit, popularity, or social value, and provider totals can overlap.

Article authors

Author profiles and related researchers

Marti Abernathey

369 publications · 249 inbound sources/citations