Elaborated by Susan Moller Okin in her book, "Justice, Gender and the family" where she discusses the core theme of personal is political.
She challenges the conventional view that separates the personal sphere from public sphere.
It was believed that politics belong to public sphere, since the time of Aristotle, in contrast, the radical feminist show that the personal sphere iss equally political in nature.
The state should intervene in the family to improve the situation of women, however, with non-patriarchal perspective.
Though, they admit that, state itself is an institution of patriarchy.
Yet, they expect the state to bring reforms to improve the status of women.
Catherine MacKinnon highlights how the state is also an institution of patriarchy and the state made laws are also patriarchal in nature and contains many loophole which can be used against the interest of women.
Kate Millet talks about - "Sexual Politics"
Shula Smith Firestone talks about the 'Dialectics of Sex' rather than just the dialectics of class.
Thus, the radical feminists emphasize on the need to change the conventional understanding of "Personal is Political"
Radical feminist argue that the gender division are most fundamental division in the sense that this gendered society is one of the biggest cause of violence and the exploitation of the women.
Politics being multi dimensional, has multiple other axes like division of caste, class, race, religion, language etc. also matters.
At, present we see feminist like Kimberle Williams Crenshaw talking about intersectionality, where she suggest that how, not just gender, rather class, race, caste, colour, etc, create the overlapping set of discrimination.