To wonder why so many women are in denial about misogyny?(807 Posts)
What do they get out of insisting that men are subject to exactly the same level of discrimination and abuse as women? That Mary Beard, for example, would have been treated in the same way if she had been a man?
I just don't get it.
It's wishful thinking, or sometimes just being a bit dim, I think.
Some get quite angry about it too
I can never tell if they are being blind to it, or I am a paranoid man-hating old hag!
Some women do rather well out of supporting misogyny, it seems to me
Because to face up to the truth is painful and perhaps unbearable
The older I get, the more angry it makes me. Millennia of abuse, repression and humiliation
Where? I cannot believe that anyone would even think this ....
Yes, your cock does look lie a finger.
next question ?
that took less than 20 minutes < sigh >
The way Mary Beard has been treated is shameful.
According to some DM readers, you can't say anything any more. You can't even write horrible things about an ugly bluestocking on the internet without the feminists moaning about misogyny. It's PC gone mad.
By all means disagree with her politics. But what has the way she looks got to do with anything? Fucking unbelievable.
Agree with Ariel about Mary Beard . I never used to SEE it, the misogyny I mean. Had an education, a career etc. It was NORMAL (again the misogyny). I felt like i done well, been treated reasonably well. Feminism was not an issue to me.
And then the scales fell from my eyes. And it is horrible! And I have a daughter. And she won't suffer from the same ignorance that I grew up under I hope....
Her leash Original lady, if you're talking about mine!
I'm fucking off to bed now Ariel, to my happy world where I am not hated for my gender. I hope your torment doesn't tie you up in knots too late!
Well have a lovely sleep now. Perhaps before you go, you could explain what you meant?
Well that world is not the real world, ff
<wonders vaguely what fatfinger's point was. Decides it's not worth the effort>
Like I said, some women
think they do well out of misogyny
I'm fucking off to bed now Ariel, to my happy world where I am not hated for my gender. I hope your torment doesn't tie you up in knots too late!
Now replace the word gender with Race.
You sound like a bit of a knob now don't you?
There's a thread about a TV presenter who apparently wears very revealing , sexually provocative clothes, whilst her male co-hosts wear business attire.
The number of women on that thread saying, "who says you have to look boring to be taken seriously / she chooses her own clothes / who says feminists have to look ugly (sorry, "fugly") / feminism is about choices, doncha know........"
I had to hide the thread it was sooooooo frustrating.
Could someone explain the Mary Beard reference please ? What's happened to her ?
Is it tied into your upbringing? When I grew up my dad and brother did as much around the house as mum and I. Our parents encouraged us to achieve and supported our choices. I assumed most people grew up like that.
Watching my PILs has been a revelation. MIL does everything! My DH clearly had a different upbringing. But, I assumed we were equals getting into our relationship and he's never commented otherwise.
MN has been an eye opener for me. I have come to realise that my upbringing was unusual.
totally agree. I can think of two possible reasons:
1: some women make their way in the world by not seeing misogyny and therefore not being challenging to men who can't deal with being challenged
2: others are just closing their eyes to it because it is too horrible. You only have to look at any website - including really respectable ones - and to read the comments section to see what vileness lies underneath a veneer of normality for some men. You really do not see women posting like this about men - women will complain about men in general or about someone in particular but typically without the vile hatred for half the world. If you make yourself aware of it you can find it difficult to go about your business so sometimes it's better not to know.
Laurie, she was on programme making some comments about immigration, about which her views...well, it's not even remotely relevant what her views about it are. She was then abused on Twitter because of the way she looks (not because of the opinion she had expressed) the grey hair, lack of make up etc. She responded by saying it was misogyny and that no one would comment on her looks if she was a man. Apparently this is also a contemptible view, and she needs to sack her hairdresser and buy some make up.
FFS we are all judged by those around us. It's not new. Even men get judged. Lets all get on and try to make it better. The judgers of women tend to be other women in my experience though.
I think loads of people were taking the easy option of dissing Mary Beard on her looks but they should have been going for the the true thing of her weird lefty ivory towers view on life. Dons flame proof suit and waits...
To add to Ariel's synopsis of the abuse Beard was subjected to, the misogynist trolls superimposed Bear's face on to a photo of a vulva, the implication being that she looks, literally, like a cunt. Beard has blogged about how that felt here
Feel free to critique Beard on her ideas, her writing, her views, her opinions on Question Time.
Why would anyone flame you for that, Pessary?
Pessary - There is a fine line between being judged and being abused. MB was abused not judged. I somehow don't see a man saying an unpopular opinion having their sexuality, education and work muddied like this.
I think loads of people were taking the easy option of dissing Mary Beard on her looks but they should have been going for the the true thing of her weird lefty ivory towers view on life. Dons flame proof suit and waits...
Yes you should expect to be flamed. This thread isn't about her views it's about cowardly bullying by pathetic creeps. If all you can say about those people is that they were taking the easy option then you deserve to be flamed.
Only focusing on women seems to be a crime
domestic violence well men suffer too, rape well men get raped too, discrimination at work well men suffeer this too
no one is suggesting they do not but the vast majority of victims are women and if other women are not recognising this and not speaking out then only a few men will it has been because women raising awareness that things have changed
Because if they admit it happens then they have to admit that either they are vulnerable, or that they are part of a group that gets away with shite like that. Easier to just pretend it doens't happen.
Have discussed this on other forums and am usually called a feminazi and men suffer 20x worse in western society blah blah
It's not new. Even men get judged
no, that can't be right? Even men? MEN? But <whimpers>
Agree with drjohnson re how many men really detest women beneath a thin veneer of civility. I worked with a man who appeared to be a normal person, professional and polite, until I was promoted above him. Then I discovered he was a frightening misogynist with a serious anger control problem - he cornered me once and literally screamed in my face that I was a "stupid little bitch who would be responsible for people losing their jobs" for X, Y, Z reasons.
This same delightful creature and his immediate boss once conducted a conversation on a client entertainment evening where several senior female execs were present which centred around how women who were raped often became sexually aroused from the sheer physical 'pleasure'. And they really believed it
I had someone earnestly explaining
in really shit English that there was no need for feminism any more on my FB because, it's the poor men who have it so hard compared to women in this country. About 60-40, if he had to put a figure on it. This was in response to something I posted about the Church's attitude to gays and women.
My (12yr old) son recently got into a fight with a boy who had made a girl in his class cry by calling her a "Butt ugly arse crack".
DS made him apologise to her.
I have raised my lads to resist violence but a part of me was proud of him.
He got detention, other lad got off scot free.
DS says it was worth it.
<applauds serin's son> Well done, that lad.
What disgusting language
A minority of women ally themselves with such men, IMO
They do well out of it materially and sometimes socially (as long as they only mix with the same ilk). They also sometimes join in with the "othering" of certain groups of women such as sex workers, benefit claimants and single mothers to deflect attention away from themselves. They live in a constant state of fear and insecurity, It must be horrible, tbh.
A professor of classics.
Well the good news is that Don't Start Me Off, the vile website which posted all that filth about Mary Beard, has "decided" to close down as "it's job is done" which I suspect is code for "because we are in deep shit with the police for promoting gender/race/etc etc hatred"
Is there a point you are labouring towards, thebody ?
Thank you for posting the link to Mary Beards blog - what a shower of shites those fuckers were. Well done her for responding.
I do think her appearance is striking. Because of social conditioning that is the first thing I noticed about her on that brilliant History series I watched. The very first thing I thought was 'oh good, this will be a serious programme and not some fluff' because of how she looked. I caught myself in this depressing thought - that my first thoughts were about her appearance and how normal she looked (normal as in all the lecturers I saw at uni in the 80's) .
women have far more empathy for men, than men have for women.
Female behaviour is under far more scrutiny than men; while bad behaviour from men is always excused and this is expressed in thousands of ways from the seemingly trivial, to the most serious.
You can see it in every aspect of life from complaints that men don't pull their weight in the house (drudgery of routine and unseen tasks are beneath me dear, but not for you) to many poor relationships where there is a inbuilt power ratio biased towards the man; to the denial of widespread rape because women are in a state of perpetual consent and have to look sexy, young, attractive and up for it all the time.
And when women are deemed to be past their prime, that is around 40+ they are simply invisible and disappear from mainstream media, TV presenting / adverts etc as if subject to some invisible cull that just does not apply to men. There are no female David Attenboroughs or Steven Fry's celebrated as treasures of the nation for their knowledge over their appearance.
I don't think there is an innate imbalance of the sexes. It is cultural and therefore a culmination of many choices that, in effect favour a man; from the seemingly arbitrary valuation of people by how much they earn which on the whole tends to reward men more than women; not only by effectively penalising time taken away from work to raise children; but by deeming traditionally female occupations such as caring, catering, childcare as massively inferior by pay.
Our scrutiny of women starts from birth; from the masses more baby girl clothes than boys in shops (the message being that we have to judge the appearance of even baby girls in a way that doesn't apply to boys) to a culture that sells anxieties to pre-teens and women that we are not good enough without make-up, sexy clothes, lipstick, to attract that cute guy etc to sell products in a vicious cycle where profits end up generally in the pockets of rich men (most CEO's are male), serves to keep women in their place as playthings of men, and fuel more anxieties which sell more products etc.
I belive males in the public do get a back lash from what they wear.
Perhaps I am getting the wrong end of the stick, but males are getting more into fashion
I had to google Mary Beard (I knew the name but couldn't remember why) and realised I had watched her brilliant documentary on the Romans and thought "I wish my lecturers had been that passionate and interesting". I didn't see her on QT and hadn't realised she had been cyber-bullied since. Good on her to highlight what her experience means about the way many people (not just men) deal with being disagreed with.
She has been attacked for her looks in ways that are vile, because she suggested that immigration is not a problem for our public services. IMO she has won that arguement hands down as she hasn't got personal with anyone but complete strangers have tried to ridicule her (and I suppose her point of view) by vilely slating the way she looks.
I'm glad she isn't taking it sitting down, I'm glad she is publisicing the attacks she has had. YANBU OP, this attack on Mary Beard is completely unacceptable.
Mildly mocking and ribbing a rich, powerful man is not exactly the same as the utter onslaught of shit directed at women in the articles of the daily mail website every day
I'm not sure I've ever seen an article on the daily mail website that isn't critical of a woman or reference her appearance in some way.
It's almost a challenge.....
McNew you are right in the sense that DB does get some of the same abuse usually aimed at women- this is often remarked upon and he is rebuked for being 'feminine' or having a 'girls voice'
However your one example does not a trend make.
I think this is in a different league to the Beckham story NHPs.
I don't get it either.
I think MB is brilliant for standing up about this. She's on women's hour tomorrow about it, btw.
Mcnewpants- have a read of MB's blog- then see if you think the Beckham story is comparable.
Having your face superimposed onto a photo of female genitalia
An article which says your white socks are a style fail
I know which one I would choose.
mocking a very rich man's choice of footwear
superimposing a woman's face onto a vulva, intimidating threats about "knowing where she lives" and bringing her children into the vile attacks
don't be so fucking stupid
All in all I think it is wrong to make vile comments about how someone looks.
It's doesnt matter if its mild mocking or as in this case hardcore in comparison.
Ah. I do think you might be missing the point rather............
I'm glad Mary Beard has spoken out, it is horrifying the level of abusive rubbish that has been directed at her. I do feel that some people are trying to put her back in her place or more accurately in the place they think she should occupy. I think they find her threatening because she doesn't fit in to their very narrow and stereotyped view of women.
I think its the low level day to day misogyny that needs challenging: the focus on appearance; young female presenters paired with old male presenters; referring to male sports people as men and women as girls (yes you BBC in your Olympic coverage). It all serves to re-inforce the perception that its really a woman's role to be young, attractive and not too assertive.
I definitely don't like the idea of belittling men to try and improve the position of women but I don't think anyone (male or female) should be allowed to get away with belittling women to reinforce a stereotype.
What do they get out of insisting that men are subject to exactly the same level of discrimination and abuse as women? That Mary Beard, for example, would have been treated in the same way if she had been a man?
Wasn't it Germaine Greer who said that women couldn't afford to realise just how much men hated them?
We live in a patriarchy.
Beckham is being gently mocked for a fashion faux pas but he is still regarded as a national treasure and held in a fairly high degree of respect.
Mary Beard is a world expert in her field of study and is being subjected to crude sexually explicit abuse because she expressed an opinion some people disagreed with. If a male historian had made an identical comment I don't think people would have posted remarks on their appearence or sexually related insults to disagree with them. Mary Beard was subjected a particularly crude series of attacks because she was a woman who spoke her mind.
To be fair though there are men whose appearance is commented on- usually when people dont like their message; david starkey, nick griffin etc all have their appearance mentioned on internet sites.
In their case, and that of Mary's it seems to be as soon as someone disagrees with what they say they almost feel the need to back it up with a qualifier that they are ugly/look like some sort of animal to boot. Its unbelievably childish to attack someones physical attributes instead of their views but I think it happens to both sexes.
"Its unbelievably childish to attack someones physical attributes instead of their views but I think it happens to both sexes."
I'd love to see some examples of this happening to men, I really would.
Read the comments section of the guardian to see how Nick griffin and starkey are judged on their looks. Also john mckerrick.
Do they have their faces superimposed on a cock and balls? Has their pubic hair ever been a subject of debate?
It's too depressing not to be.
The same reason I'm in denial about who made my primark jumper and what sort of conditions the chickens whose eggs I had for tea lived in and how much the farmers who provide my non-fairtrade tea/chocolate get and just how many children worldwide are living in abject poverty and about a billion other things I'm in denial about.
To think about all the injustices in the world everyday is just too depressing.
@seeker. I dont know. But thats not what I was saying. It was said males dont get judged on their looks. They do.
If it's of any relevance we used to have fairly lengthy discussions about which boys did/did not have a 'wanker's tash' and whether we liked/did not like a wanker's tash on a boy when we were at school, but I've never seen it mentioned in the media.
I have never heard of a wanker's tash.
There's something qualitatively and quantitively different about the comments meted out on appearance for women and men.
If you can't see that, there is something wrong with your brain.
I think the trouble with feminist 'debate' is that feminists generally do not allow anyone to have a differing opinion without being told to fuck off or being accused of being in some conspiracy with men to further their own agenda.
I don't believe that misogyny is something I encounter much in day to day life, I have no problems with bringing up my daughter in the uk, I do not believe that she will be denied opportunities on the basis of her gender.
In answer to another comment, I don't think that I am hated for my race either, and I don't think that makes me a knob.
Well, I've seen enough slating of the Milliband brother, apparently looking like an effigy from Wallace and Grommit, and on this forum too! Thus showing that aesthetic attributes are valued by women - who can equally dish it out if someone isn't pleasing to the eye.
So is your contention that there is no difference between the language used to describe women and the language used to describe men? That had Mary Beard been a man exactly the same would have happened?
fat fingers are you saying misogyny and racism don't exist?
I wonder how many people will keep posting stories of David Beckhan's socks and Milliband's resemblance to a cartoon? It adds so much to the debate.
Sorry, 'debate'. Thanks for the inverted commas, fatfinger . Patronizing much?
I forgot. you just daredn't have an opinion that goes aginst the feministas on this board.
So much for free speech, entitlement to hold alternative views.
Some of you put back womens causes so much by being so right on radical.
Some women just don't experience it, so they don't think it happens. Because everything is normal. It's normal to only see men's sport on the tv, but to read in the tabloids about what the wives do. It's normal to only hear about women in history as wives or suffragettes, normal to talk about 'our boys' overseas, normal to see fairly elderly men on tv but no female newsreaders over the age of 50, it's normal to see women with nice clothes and makeup so then those that don't really stand out... I could go on and on. <sighs>
And some of you keep women from achieving equality in society by denying misogyny
David Beckham being teased for wearing white socks is not comparable to Mary Beard being threatened with having a penis pushed into her mouth to keep her quiet
In my personal experience, having a man deny misogyny is far worse than women denying it. I live with a man who just plain doesn't see it. We're about to have a daughter. When I found out, I was sad. Attitudes to women are not going to change in my lifetime, or my daughter's lifetime. It's depressing as fuck.
I think for the same reason people on quite low incomes, dependent on tax credits, say they hate "benefit scroungers". You don't want to think you are one of the marginalised, detested group. And when women say girls who've been raped are whores.
I don't know if everyone here has heard of the awful Steubenville rape case? Well, this is what a local 27 year old nurse, Deirdre Myers, had to say about the victim: http://bustedbitchesandinternetstalkers.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/DeidreMyers-1.png This is a woman who cares for ill people. Worrying, when she appears to lack a soul.
Incidentally, the victim had dated one of the friends of the charged boys for a year. He'd gone on and on on Twitter about how much in love with her he was. So not only is what she is saying nasty misogynist victim-blaming, because even if she were a "train whore" (prepared to sleep with all of them) that wouldn't make alleged rape of an unconscious victim okay - but it is obvious bullshit. No popular, high achieving athlete - he's on the football and baseball teams in a town that worships their players - would have dated a girl seen that way. His own reputation would rely on it. So as soon as rape charges are laid, her reputation was being trashed - by the football coaches, by the boys' lawyers (despite there being rape shield provisions in Ohio, that mean past sexual history is inadmissable) but by random local women, too. This over a case where some of the witnesses, as in they are now in court giving sworn testimony, made this video about the girl the same night she was raped: https://www.youtube.com/verify_controversy?next_url=/watch%3Fv%3D22UsHZXPi7Q WARNING - it's very. very disturbing. They are roaring with laughter about a rape, repeatedly calling it one, and going into some detail about how she didn't respond at all. They keep calling her "dead". If you have triggers then please, don't watch it. Yet women in that local area are still calling her a whore and still blaming her.
You know what the victim has done? Lots of people have offered money to her for legal fees, or a college fund. Her lawyer is acting on a pro bono basis and her parents say they can manage her college costs, so she has asked that donations be made to a refuge for abused women. http://ywcawheeling.org/madden-house-donations/ I made a small donation via Paypal in her name, because it seemed so important that she knows people care about what happened to her, and believe her. The YWCA who run that shelter are obviously a hugely reputable charity, and solely focused on helping young women (it's changed its name over here, to better reflect the diversity it now focuses on internationally) so it's also a good cause in and of itself.
I think, again, it's a way of making out that misogyny doesn't apply to them. That they play by the rules, are good girls, don't do risky things, and that they are therefore respected by men and exempt from the sexism we all live with. I also think that most prejudice is so entrenched and accepted that it's invisible. There was a thread on here where an Asian woman tried to explain the cultural background to a family issue, and poster after poster totally ignored her explanations that her culture was different and impatiently told her that she was being ridiculous, because her issue wouldn't be an issue in most households in this country, so to them it couldn't be an issue in another culture. There was this weird blindness to the notion that there even could be another culture. And no dominant group or culture like to be told that they're being prejudiced - they prefer to roll their eyes at the idea, and claim over-sensitivity. And a lot of women, I think, accept that idea unthinkingly, because they're constantly told it. In the same way that Americans made a huge fuss about Delhi, but ignored Steubenville until that awful video came out.
Sorry, corrrected links:
The facebook postings of a mid-20s nurse, about an underage rape victim she did not know, making (untrue, as it happens) claims about the victim's morals, as a way to justify her rape
The incredibly disturbing video some of the boys involved in the Steubenville case made on that night - warning: it's impossible to understate how disturbing their words are - which apparently don't deter women such as the one above from defending them
The Steubenville Jane Doe has requested that people who wanted to give her money instead donate to this charity, a refuge for abused women in her area
I know which of the above three links paint a picture of a person with grace and dignity. yet funnily enough, she's the one being called the whore. Not the boys, who got their dicks out in a group setting and were panting after sex with anything and anyone - conscious or not. Yet nobody has questioned their promiscuity or casual approach to sexuality. Funny, that.
Girls are at school with those boys. Why are their parents allowing it? I wouldn't let my daughter attend a school with kids who'd expressed views like that in the immediate aftermath of a rape - would you?
So initially it was a case of "this wouldnt happen to a man" and yet when other posters prove it can and does its quickly shifted to.."well its not the same its just so much worse for women"
one poster pointed out David Beckham being targetted for his looks- that apparently was just a mild ribbing and besides he's white and rich so thats ok
The political figures have been mentioned- well they dont count because the nature of the insults used toward Mary Beard were worse
Right on the money, perfectstorm
Can you really not see the difference dellboy?
Del, I hope for your sake your last facile post crossed with perfectstorms
Otherwise, it looks like you are doggedly sticking to your "it happens to men too" yapping in the face of something much much worse
If you can't see that, you have no place on a parenting website
And thanks for the links perfectstorm I followed the thread about the stubenville rape. That video is the most frightening thing I have ever seen. I will be making a donation
anyfucker- yes it did but the post perfectstorm put up has nothing to do with what was being debated.
It was said Mary Beard's appearance was slated because she's a woman and this wouldnt happen to a male. People have shown it does and now a poster links to an unrelated story
Please tell me who is threatening David Beckham with sexual violence because he wore the wrong colour socks?
If you really don't believe this happens, just look at the way the Sun treated Clare Short when she tried to get Page 3 banned. And the behaviour of some of the public then was shocking. She got comments like "you are too ugly to rape" sent to her. Think about the level of hatred of women that sort of reaction shows. Do you really think a man who talked about banning page 3 would have had that said to him?
No del the thread is about misogyny in society
Have you read the links? Watched the video? Lots of adults priminanr ion the town are complicity in the cover up of the gang rape of a girl...the school basket ball coach gave the boys on the team porn and alcohol as a reward. The sheriff is thoughts to have destroyed incriminating evidence. The boys mother, a lawyer tried to disuade the girl from pressing charges. Have the watched the boy in the video? That is the embodiment of 'mysogyny in society' right there
It's not just about her appearance, though, delboy. She has been threatened with sexual violence. They want to do her humiliating harm because of an opinion she expressed. Show me where that happened to David Starkey or David Beckham.
Has sexual violence been threatened against beckham etc- nope not from what I have seen but again that is moving the goal posts. the earlier thread was pretty much Mary Beard was judged on her appearance purely because she is a woman. Regardless of the nature of the insults that was the idea I was interested in discussing.
Now it appears the debate has moved on. Yep the threats of sexual violence towards these women was/is completely unacceptable. In my opinion a threat to rape/sexually assault someone should be a criminal offence.
But they are part and parcel. Can you honestly not see that?
Ok, I admit it. I have not to my knowledge anyway, been abused on Twitter. I have not, to my knowledge, had my career held back or called into question because of my gender. I have not been threatened with insertion of a penis into my mouth to shut me up when I am outspoken. I did have some a disparaging remark made to me once when I was discussing rugby on a sports forum, but others stuck up for me - granted it was a BBC forum.
But that doesnt mean I can't believe it doesn't happen to other people. Thankfully I have some empathy.
But what is part and parcel?
Is it only women who can be abused on twitter then? Is it only women who's career is held back because of their gender? Are men not told that someone would shut them up (granted usually not with a penis) physically when their opinions differ?
Just to add- i do believe it happens to other people, its there for all to see but rather than Mary Beard being attacked because she is a woman she was attacked for what she said.
How is calling her a lezzie and sticking a fanny on an image of her face 'attacking her for what she said'?
They weren't attacking her "for what she said"! Jesus! They were attacking her for daring to say it.
Can you honestly not understand?
because they were having a go at her because they didnt like her message but rather than taking her apart on that she was abused for the way she looks/dressed
Ariel- no. Your last message has genuinely confused me.
Right, and the obvious method for having a go at someone if you 'don't like their message' is to make vile remarks about sexually assaulting them, speculating on the state of their pubes, and calling them a 'lezzie' as though that plainly discredits everything they've said? And that happens when men have an opinion, does it?
WHat is it you're confused about, delboys?
I have just been thinking about this in the shower.
After also listening to Cuntface Dave give his ludicrous EU speech.
The vast majority of people are Panglossian, all is for the best in the best of all possible worlds.
It is comfortable to think that all is well, that we are governed by our betters for our own good, that pretty young gels are different to smart young young boys etc etc etc
Because if you thought about it properly, you might have to realise how many lies you live in and....god forbid, do something about it.
Look at that wine thread - no one cares that Blossom Hill has cynically come up with shite pink floral low alcohol wine cos the Ladies like a bit of sweet pink and can't get pissed with the kiddies, and trialled it on MN cos that's where the Mumsies hang out.
No one cares, they just want the free wine.
And EVEN THO IT'S SHITE
Some women are just so indoctrinated into it that they can't see it.
Some women are not intelligent enough to challenge it.
Some women benefit from it and so they are happy to buy into it.
We can only position ourselves in the available discourses and the discourses are gendered. Even our language is gendered in favour of men.
Tell me why you're confused. I am confused by your confusion, I must say.
To be fair though there are men whose appearance is commented on- usually when people dont like their message; david starkey, nick griffin etc all have their appearance mentioned on internet sites
Yes, let's be "fair" about this. Let's reduce men to flaccid uglified penises, and send them rape and murder threats, simply because they're men who give amn opinion in public.
THERE IS NO LEVEL PLAYING FIELD.
And yes, I was shouting.
I think that as you grow older, you become more aware???
kind of like portofino said
hate to say, but when I was a pretty lil 30 something, I did not care!
Now I am a breadwinning 40- year old mum of two, I do
and it REALLY fucks me off that looks are just that smidgen more important for women than men
thank god i am ok looking
This thread is now focusing on massive issues- Rape, Violence, obvious hate crimes. These things are shocking and I think, because of that people find ways to rationalize it, and it is easy enough to find examples of shocking things that have happened to men as well. It is not my view that these things are 'equal' but I can see why people want them to be.
If we go back to the casual, the small, the almost insignificant it is harder to rationalize in the same way I think.
This morning I was concentrating on something in the office at work, a man (who is senior to me, but is in no way my line manager), walked into the office said 'Whats the matter with you, I'm the old man, you are meant to be happy'. I was concentrating and writing down my work plan for the day- he was objecting because I hadn't greeted him when he came in. (its a small busy office with 5 staff walking in and out of it at that time of day). I told him I was busy and it wasn't my responsibility to smile and be happy for him, 'but I'm sad, I need cheering up' was his response. I replied that's a shame for you.
10 minutes later outside the office he deals with a teenage girl (he's her form teacher) and she is panicking because she has an exam at the same time as his catch-up session and she needs to miss his lesson, she is nervous talking to him and a bit hyper/fussy. He deals with her and sends her away, saying within earshot of me and and her, 'girls, honestly'. He then turns to me and says 'I suppose you're one of them as well aren't you'.
5 minutes after that it is time to leave for assembly, I've dismissed my form, go into the office to grab my coat- he stands at the office door saying loudly 'Girl!, come on girl, hurry up'. We have plenty of time to get there, we don't have to walk together, but because he wants to I should have known and should be ready.
The tone of all this was 'jokey' in such a way that it is impossible to complain about without appearing to be a miserable bitch. It is misogyny though. Just as it was misogyny yesterday when female students were turned away from the gym because there was noone to supervise them. But the male students of the same age were allowed to stay.
The sequence of events as I have described above what not have happened if I was a man.
and I was very snocked and upset when I saw the mary beard stuff
I am am PLEASED we are kicking off, its so important
The "they werent attacking her for what she said they were attacking her for daring to say it" thats the bit i dont follow.
And again; I was not talking about the sexual comments made about her. another poster stated they only talked about her APPEARANCE because she is a woman.
So Delboys do you not think it perhaps makes a difference to the willingness of women to speak up and to argue, when they know they will face this kind of onslaught - that what they say won't be engaged with, but what they look like will?
What do you not follow about that delboy?
Also I'm not sure you can just decide the sexual comments aren't important enough to engage with in this debate. That's like me saying: I want to be very clear, I am only referring to the comments about her hair, not her features, her clothes or her vagina.
If your teenage son came home from school and said some kids had had a go at him for wearing the wrong colour socks and then your teenage daughter came home from school and said someone had told her she was too ugly to rape, would you consider the bullying (and it is bullying, in both cases) to be of equal import?
Well said, Greythorne - especially if someone said that to the teenage daughter after she dared voice an opinion in a lesson in which she was asked for it....
Del, the ultimate insult for a woman is to call her an ugly bitch.
The ultimate insult for a man is to alter his name to the feminine form and call him a pussy.
I love ice hockey, and there's an online meme doing the rounds at the moment amongst women fans. Someone posted in irritation when some of their favourite players were being jeered at - called a pussy, called a pair of sisters, called Claudia when his name is Claude. They were then challenged on the fact that their post didn't actually address the misogyny inherent in those insults - when they're the most common insults in that, or any other mainstream sport. To do the woman credit, she immediately agreed and altered the meme to reflect that, and it's now spread way beyond the ice hockey circles where it began:
Ice hockey misogynist insults - scroll down to the second pictorial correction.
I follow hockey on women's blogs, because the mainstream outlets are casually misogynistic ALL the damn time. It's not an environment I would ever want to spend any time in at all - they casually insult one another using "fucking girl" "What are you, a woman?" "You on your fucking period, man?" and I promise you, any attempts to challenge that would mean you were called an ugly fucking lesbian bitch who should get back to the fucking kitchen, because no man would want to bone you anyway. And for you to say that cvenom and contempt for women has nothing to do with sexual assault and rape - I'm sorry, but you sound truly intellectually impaired by posting that way. You really think Ched Evans was called up by a teammate and invited to rape an unconscious woman, yet that had no correlation whatsoever to a culture that regards women as so lesser, so unworthy, that to imply someone is in any way feminine is the most degrading insult it's possible to make? You don't think there is any link at all? Really? Because if so, I have this bridge you might like to buy. PM me - we can fix a really good price.
Oh get over the just focussing on appearance! You seem to be incapable of realising that a) her appearance is being abused because she is a WOMAN b) her views, while some people disagreed with them, were not the focus of the abuse, which came about because she was a WOMAN (quite what would have occurred if she had been more conventional looking I don't know. It appears to offend some people even more that she has grey hair and wears no make up. It's like they think she doesn't care enough about their opinion of her to bother trying to look attractive to them) and c) she was threatened with sexual violence for voicing these outspoken views because she is a WOMAN.
Someone more eloquant than me apparently needs to come along and explain it in language that you'll understand. Unless you are being deliberately obtuse in the ever so clever hope of tripping someone up.
I do not generally venture onto the feminist boards because mainly, I don't have the time and the discussions get so very in depth. Silly I know. This particular issue however seems like such a total no brainer. Even so, it is apparently open to denial.
Now I'm confused. I thought this thread was about misogyny, using Mary Beard as an example of how it manifests in society, and the women who deny it.
But it appears to had turned into a "well, men get judged on their appearance too so that's all right" thread.
I don't actually think men are judged on their appearance the way women are anyway- is a men's opinion on anything completely discredited by the media because of his looks? Nobody surely thinks teasing Beckham about his socks is the same as a critical close up of an inch of cellulite on a film star's bottom a week after she's had a baby?
But that's not what this thread is about. It's about the undercurrent of hostility to women, particularly those women who put their heads above the parapet, that runs through our society, and why some women choose not to see it, or if they can't help seeing it, to minimise it.
The responses to her Beard were completely disproportionate and sickening.
The point is, if the blogosphere had lit up with people saying, "I fucking disagree with Beard, she knows nothing of economics, her arguments are shite, she refuses to accept that immigration is killing this country" etc etc. then that would have been engaging with her on what she was discussing.
But when the blogosphere goes mad with comments like "she looks like a cunt" / "she looks like a lesbian" / "she is too ugly to be raped" etc. that is no longer engaging with her discourse, it is a way of intimidating her, slapping her down, threatening her and refusing to treat her like a human being who deserves respect. If they disagreed with her points, they would have mentioned her arguments in their rant. But they don't. They attack her sexuality, appearance etc. which is why Ariel rightly pointed out that they are attacking her for daring to speak up. They want only pretty women who conform to sexual and appearance norms to have a role in society.
The following when said to a boy
"You run like a girl"
"You throw like a girl"
"You catch like a girl"
"You cry like a girl"
would be intended to be an insult.
The following when said to a girl
"You run like a boy"
"You throw like a boy"
"You catch like a boy"
"You take it like a boy"
would be intended as a compliment.
In the case of Mary Beard. Her appearance is irrelevant.
Her appearance was the focus of the insults because she is a woman and her looks are deemed to be the most valuable (or not) aspect of her as a woman. Criticising her looks is regarded as the greatest insult she can receive because that's pretty much the only thing women are valued on.
Oh, I forgot: women who follow ice hockey don't appreciate the phenomenal skill of playing a game at 30mph, on ice, when it's such a contact sport that they are meant to crash into one another hard enough to fall over, so they can take control of the puck, and such a delicate sport they can score a goal by tapping it in as they go behind the goal area, and such a team sport that you get a point for an "assist" - passing the puck to the person who scores the actual goal is valued so much it's counted and weighted alongside actual goal scoring itself. It's an extraordinary game to watch, and so fast it's hard at first to work out what the hell is happening. Nothing beats it in adrenaline terms.
But we couldn't be interested in all that. No woman could - no, they're just "puck bunnies" and faking interest because they want to sleep with the players. That's the name commonly used for the female fans. The nice one. The insulting, and actually even more common one? "Puck sluts".
Sorry if this thread was started because of my "ranty" thread in which I was labelled a misogynist, I'd like to say that I didn't realise what I was writing in the heat of the moment would offend so many of you. I think saying something with a clear mind shows more contempt and truth than something said when feeling angry. So for that reason I believe that some women are ignorant of misogyny and have been conditioned into thinking some words are acceptable to use to describe women.
And nobody says David Starkey should STFU talking about history, or David Cameron shouldn't be in charge of the government, because they're so fucking ugly you'd need to be drunk to screw them, and even then you'd probably throw up afterwards.
When you find that is common parlance as soon as they say something people don't like, then you have a case. As it is, you're just wrong.
"Nonswearyname- no it wasn't! I'll have to "search"!
I started it because I asked on another thread for a link to vile abuse similar to that MB got which was targeted at men, and was told that was a stupid thing to say.
Which puzzled me somewhat.
Read this delboys Read it all, not just the first page. Note that there are messages from men but look at the sheer overwhelming weight of stories. This site has been running for less than 6 months.
This is what we mean by the pornified, sexualised culture that lets men feel free to reduce women to a piece of mean wrapped around a vagina.
It's amazingly depressing how much some men (and women) hate women.
I think men deny misogyny because
A) it suits them
Or B) they can't face the horrible truth of it
I think the same is true for women. Cognitive dissonance is a concept I was introduced to on here and it answers this question for me I think.
As to what to do about the level of misogyny? Raise children (sons in my case) who are not misogynists, who are used to seeing the status quo challenged. Keep speaking out, even when you know you'll probably be attacked for it, quite likely about your looks, irrelevant as they are.
Be the change you want to see in the world and all that.
And this thread started off so well seeker! <head desk>
Yes some man somewhere got judged on his looks. It didn't affect his status or his respect, but yes he was judged <yawn>.
Mary Beard was threatened with sexual violence, her genitalia and looks were mocked, her children were threatened. She is not alone. Any woman who expresses an opinion, controversial or otherwise, in the public domain gets misogyny thrown at them. There will always be comments about their looks (and not the odd one either), their sexuality, ramping up to the experience that Mary had.
And the best people can come up with is David Beckham's socks. It is insulting and trivialising of women's experiences.
It is fantastic that she is (and others) are brave enough to speak about this. Keeping this problem in the public eye. Making people become aware of it.
Here is a great blog about it.
Just because you deny the misogyny is happening, doesn't mean it isn't.
I understand that she had sexualised comments made to her because she is a woman. I get that I really do.
Ariel- the reason i keep bringing it back to comments about her appearance is because in one of your very first posts on the subject you say Mary was upset because the comments on HER APPEARANCE were made because she was a woman and this would not have happened if male
Myself and other posters showed that it wasnt just women who get judged on their appearance and the responses were along the lines of; well it is worse for women so that doesnt matter.
Then rather than discussing how society shouldnt judge what people say rather than how they look- it was moved on very quickly because its far more important for a self interest group to keep describing how hard they have it above all others.
If I say yes, men are sometimes judged on their appearance too, can we move on?
You are right, Delboys, someone did say a thing about David Beckham's socks. David Beckham, who is as well as being a footballer, known for his clothes and his style, and is famous for looking quite nice as well as being good at football, did have his socks commented on.
Mary Beard is known for being a highly educated woman, not a clothes horse. She doesn't sell aftershave with her name on it. She's famous for her intellect and her opinions. And when she gave one of these, people responded by saying she was ugly and should get a hair cut. Also all the stuff about rape and vaginas, with which you seem to think is irrelevant.
Delboy, I apologise if you found my post misleading or confusing This isn't exactly a thread about society judging only on looks - it's more than that.
If you would like to create thread of your own about how appearances are judged, and leave further discussion out of it, I'm sure you would be very welcome.
why the obsession with beckham? he was named along with Milliband, Griffin and Starkey. But I suppose your point seems a little stronger if you stick with using Beckham
Sorry, a thread about women AND men's appearances are judged, I should say.
what is the problem just sometimes focusing on just women why is this so difficult when at times like what we have debated on this thread it is a much much bigger issue for women than it is for men. why can we not talk about the effect it has on women without having to constantly recognise that men suffer too. If we were discussing prostate cancer and the need for awareness would there be a load of posts saying well women suffer ovarian cancer they suffer too no
You're right, er.... I'm really sorry I posted that link to David Beckham's socks before
Yes, Milliband, Griffin and Starkey have doubtless had unkind remarks made about their looks. I especially didn't like it when all those people started saying they knew where David Starkey lived, and they bet his pubes were manky, and that he should have a better haircut.
Delboy- are you really saying that Griffin, Starkey and Milliband have been treated in a way that is own a par with the way Mary Beard was?
I talked about Beckham because he was the only example anyone provided a link to. Happy to do the same with any other links!
How about we focus on women being on the receiving end of misogyny for voicing an opinion delboys, after all that is what this thread was supposed to be about.
beckham is a great example he is caught with his pants down and who is the media backlash on his wife if only she has smiled more he would not have cheated
Although we have had a demonstration of the denial mentioned in the OP, if not an explanation that quite makes sense!
Oh, and obviously every time Ed Miliband stands up in the House somebody says that the best way to shut him up would be to stuff a dick in his mouth.........
Theoriginalsteamingnit- so you really think no one has stated on a forum they know where Griffins or Starkeys house was on the internet? Or that they knew where their kids were?
True SteamingNit! Illustrated nicely, in fact!
In the dim and distant past David Beckham wore some hideous socks. At no stage did anyone ever suggest that they would force a cock in his mouth as punishment, or rape him and then throw up afterwards.
Men are generally not judged on their looks, women are, all the fucking time. To suggest otherwise is ridiculous.
There's a gulf between commenting that you don't think someone is very attractive, and saying they should never speak at all and deserve to be raped because you think they are ugly. I have never seen the latter aimed at a man. For a woman in public life, or in fact with any media presence, it's almost normal. And if the woman in question is attractive, she's dismissed as having no value other than decorative - a no-win.
Did you hear about Felicia Day?
I think it was actually Nick Griffin who was the one who was interested in listing people's addresses on the Internet, wasn't he?
Still waiting for the picture of David Stqrkey's face superimposed on a vulva. Or a suggestion that Ed Milliband be shut up by shoving a dick in his mouth......
Men get threatened. Really we understand that. They tend to get threatened when voicing really controversial opinions. Women, not so much. It doesn't matter what opinion they voice misogyny will rear it's ugly head in the comments that follow. Just read the Guardian's CiF every time a woman writes an article.
I actually feel that MB has been treated horribly by some people, mostly men. I don't agree with her politically but these men attacked her looks and person rather than countered her political views. This is the lazy fall back position for many inarticulate men, and sadly many like AA Gill who should know far better.
So for the record I do not support the traducing of MB, it's pretty sickening.
Also: we're talking about casual, extreme sexism which involves threats of sexual violence, because that's common online. Any threads on a US site about a woman who has said or done anything someone doesn't like will attract sexually violent comments (protected free speech in the US means that isn't a crime - I'm not at all sure it is legal to say such things in this country, actually). So how is it not relevant to mention actual sexual violence, when the cultural norms such comments betray intrinsically validate such violence? They normalise it. They legitimate it. They let those men open to the notion believe that it is acceptable to talk and think that way about women. Do you really not see the parallels in Nazi Germany, when before the Holocaust the media all constantly portrayed Jews as evil, malign leeches on society? If you have an environment in which it's seen as in any way acceptable to talk and feel and think that way about women, you also have an environment in which some will act that way. How is that in any way controversial? It's all linked.
Just listened to the lovely Mary <fellow 50-something middle-aged girl crush here> on Women's Hour talking about this. She was as explicit as it is possible to be on Radio 4 at 10.00am about the exact nature of the abuse she received, and even I was shocked. And that's fucking difficult to do.
How very DARE any woman have the temerity to appear in her natural unadorned state on TV when she's obviously Past her Best and doesn't even try to hide it? Anyone would think she doesn't Give an Actual Shit about whether the Menz (or the stupid women) think she looks hot or not??
It's the blatant lack of approval-seeking behaviour that so deeply offends men, the flagrant breaching of codes of accepted female behaviour that terrifies women. Mary has stepped outside the boundaries and ironically enough, she is seen by other women as 'letting the side down' by being in her 50s and not scrubbing up like Nigella.
And FWIW, i don't see anything wrong at all with an historian putting forward her views on something like immigration, they are trained to take a Long View of the Bigger Picture after all! The fact that she's a middle class professional would equally rule out 99% of all other Meejah Pundits from having a valid opinion either.
It never ceases to amaze me that academics, (and female academics in particular ) who have made a career out of finding things out, analysing the facts and then presenting informed opinions are invariably dismissed as living in 'Ivory Towers', while the Bloke Down the Pub and the Man in the Street are deemed to be the founts of all wisdom and common sense.
Even our favourite handmaiden Samantha Brick gets her own share of the misogyny. And she upholds the patriarchy.
Yep thats it- just trying to derail an argument rather than pointing out that maybe just maybe someone might be wrong about part of their argument.
Sorry I haven't read all the way through, so not sure if Anita Sarkeesian has been mentioned.
Anyone who is unaware of what happened to here should watch this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GZAxwsg9J9Q
Then come back and tell us women should just get on with it.
You haven't actually given any evidence supporting your argument, though, delboy -apart from David Beckham's choice of socks. Why would anyone agree with you?
What do you think others are wrong about? The fact that men get judged on appearance too? People HAVE agreed with that (poor old Nick Griffin )
I said before, you are very welcome to start your own thread about that issue, if you like?
Delboy I repeat, do you assert that misogyny doesn't exist?
Crackfox- this really isnt difficult. I wasnt the poster who first mentioned Beckham. I have only responded to other posters mentioning him.
Mary said there were picutes posted with her face superimposed on a vagina, with comments about it's appearance, size and what might be therein inserted.
I have yet to see a penis with a man's face superimosed on it.
But I suppose sock-choice is worse.
Oh wow Shamy. I had heard of her and what happened, I just hadn't realised the extent of the abuse. Horrific.
The stupid ironic thing about posts like these is that they make me think sympathetically about censorship.
delboys, what is your intereset in denying that this happens? The video that Shamy linked to. That is what happens when you are seen to threaten male privilege. But as Sam Brick and Mary Beard have shown women don't have to directly threaten male privilege to receive abuse. They get to receive it because they are women. And have opinions.
@hullygully. See every Guardian cartoon with David Cameron. Is he not always portrayed with a condom on his head?
The #silentnomore hashtag on twitter has women who have experienced this kind of misogyny detail there experiences. Men have come on to deny their experiences. What a surprise.
Delboy. I have said that I agree that men are sometimes judged on their appearance. If anybody has that never happens, they are wrong. Is that what you meant by maybe somebody being wrong about part of their argument? Or is there something else? If so, could you highlight it for me?
Yes, there is a Guardian cartoonist who caricatures David Cameron's shiny face in this way. Does said cartoonist draw cartoons in which, week after week, the idiotic David Cameron has johnny-faced exploits and is raped at the end of them? No, the cartoons satirise what he says and does.
abigailadams- I'm not denying it happens, not at all. But I dont think it is as common, or is as big a problem as feminism makes out. A lot of problems feminists talk of are not gender specific, as much as feminists would like them to be.
But then so women have a vested interest in misognyism (sp?) existing. If there wasnt some far off power keeping them down then they might have to start taking accountability for their own failings.
I think feminism is very important in terms of trying to get justice/ support for women who are victims of sex crimes- the rest of it seems a desperate search to find problems which dont exist. Tje same as most of identity group political movements I suppose
delboy - er, yes. a condom because he is "shiny Dave"
Not a real life photo of a penis with his face on it and comments about it's size shape and what might be stuck up it.
Are you being deliberately obtuse?
del, the point is that they very clearly aren't wrong. Men are not slut-shamed and threatened with extreme sexual violence as the go-to response when they say something people dislike. Men are not told that their gender is in itself a huge insult.
I really, really don't understand how you can even begin to pretend otherwise. You've not offered any evidence so far - Cameron shown as an idiot with a condom on his head, and Beckham's sock choices mocked, and you think that's the same? And when people say, errrr..... no. It isn't. That's them in denial?
I agree on the denial. I just think you're pointing in the wrong direction.
The original steaming nit- i was responding to another poster who said that they were yet to see a mans faced super imposed onto genitalia. I gave an example straight away of something very simple and straight away it is changed again to well he wasnt raped at the end of it!
neither was Mary Bell in the picture of her as far as I was aware?
"It's the blatant lack of approval-seeking behaviour that so deeply offends men, the flagrant breaching of codes of accepted female behaviour that terrifies women.2 Oh I had missed that from LapsedPacifist. Yes that is exactly what is happening. I hope you don't mind but I quoted it on the thread in FWR too.
delboy - you know, I'm sure you don't mean to come across the way you do, but your posts make you sound like someone both horribly thick and an utter wanker.
Del, do you imagine sexual and domestic violence occur in a societal vacuum?
And are you male?
what because I dont agree with you hullygully?
<sigh> I'll use small words
people get judged on their looks
all the time
but - men get judged on looks less than women
attacks against men are not as vicious as those against women.
E.g. saying someone has made a fashion mistake wearing white socks - not so serious
saying someone looks like a cartoon character - not so serious
saying someone looks like genitalia, making an image to illustrate the point, threatening rape - serious
If someone was going to insult you, would you prefer AND THESE ARE THE TWO OPTIONS
a) you look like Wallace or
b) you look like female genitalia and are too ugly to rape.
what are these problems that do not exists that us feminists make up. Sexual harassment at work, sexual harassment in public, over looked for promotion because we have a vagina, our opinions not taken seriously because we have a vagina, not being taken seriously because we do not look a certain way
yes we should up about those and just be thankful that rape is against the law and a husband can no longer rape his wife what are we thinking wanting to be treated equally and with respect
what are these problems that do not exists that us feminists make up. Sexual harassment at work, sexual harassment in public, over looked for promotion because we have a vagina, our opinions not taken seriously because we have a vagina, not being taken seriously because we do not look a certain way
yes we should shut up about those and just be thankful that rape is against the law and a husband can no longer rape his wife what are we thinking wanting to be treated equally and with respect
Hully - there is absolutely no need to insult wankers like that.
No, because you have ignored a huge wealth of supported evidence in favour of, "well, I don't think so, and you all just want to believe this because it suits you." That's not an argument. It's an insult instead.
Repeatedly stating a blanket belief, without any evidence, is not an argument at all. Your failure to get your head around that does come across as being dense, I'm sorry, but yes it does. And the cavalier dismissal of some pretty horrible facts and examples comes across as unpleasant, too.
abigail I know, it's absolutely vile. According to some though, that is not misogyny.
Delboy. Go back. Read the Everyday Sexism Project site I linked to earlier. Actually read it this time, all 47 pages currently active. Then come back and tell us that women are "desperately searching for problems that don't exist"
Have you ever read the comments on CiF, delboys. Really, not common? Dee Nile.
And this isn't reserved for famous women either.
I used to post on a sport's forum until the misogyny got too bad. Any woman who didn't match up to the Patriarchal Fuckability Test (Trademark SGM!) was pilloried and any woman who did match up was subjected to disgusting comments about how she liked to have sex, who she did it with, she was a slag/slut/whore etc. The women's side of the sport was denigrated regularly and put your head above the parapet, about anything and the kitchen sink comments (and worse) would roll in. I had someone suggest that I take it up the arse for a completely non-controversial remark I made.
And it is Mary Beard. Please get her name right. The lack of disrespect in your posts is evident.
del so you dont think its a problem that women have their intellectual and political arguements disregarded because they look like a cunt?
You don't think its a problem that a school/town cover-up a gang rape of a comatose girl because the rapists are star football players with promising careers and that's all the town has going for it
Eveyday Sexism Project is a really good at highlighting how this happens everyday to women everywhere.
There was also a small sexual assaults thread which mushroomed a couple of years ago in FWR. They weren't small sexual assaults either.
This is all from the same place. Male privilege and ownership of public spaces - the internet, the street, the night club etc.
the lack of disrespect? surely thats a good thing?
Yeah yeah whatever delboys. Lack of respect, obviously!
Which does highlight one of the problems Delboy has understanding this thread. If you don't know who the person in question actually is, then how can you make informed comment on the topic?
Abigail - I mentioned the issue with sport before. I love ice hockey, but women have largely retreated to tumblr accounts with other women to follow it, because the misogyny on the more mainstream sites is so horrible.
Men are fans. Women are puck sluts. And any player doing badly is a pussy. The insults thrown at fans from other teams are all gendered. It's horrible and depressing, and most female fans avoid it by clustering together. Funnily enough, we manage to do that without insulting anyone - even misogynist fans.
It's actually a problem for the mainstream sites, if they only knew it, because they're losing revenue in losing visitors. But as the staffers are all male, they won't be aware it's an issue, either.
Incidentally, in Steubenville there's a big, mainstream fan site for the local high school sports teams, as they're a huge deal in that town. And not one women's team is included. Not one. It's all boys.
That sounded awfully lofty <isn't sorry>
I want to know what these problems are that feminists make up. what are these problems that do not really exist ? Are you going to answer that?
I used to work as a waitress in a greasy spoon when I was 14, 14 years ago. The type of comments I would receive regularly:
Old enough to bleed, old enough to butcher
I always shag my waitresses.
There were many more that I've forgotten over time. Also, men seemed to think it was ok to pat my bum, put their arms around me etc. Being young and naive, I thought nothing of it, but now I can recognise it was disgusting and intrusive and, despite my age, I was just an object to them.
Men like that are revolting to me now, and I would be ashamed if my boys went around behaving like that. Young women need to be educated that this is not acceptable behavior.
Yep perfectstorm, totally agree (and that is awful about Steubenville). Jessica Ennis was subjected to remarks about her weight by someone within British Athletics FFS. She hadn't even had the temerity to voice an opinion, but her looks are open season, apparently.
Young men need to be educated that it isn't acceptable behaviour fattybum. The women aren't doing anything wrong!
But I dont think it is as common, or is as big a problem as feminism makes out
IMO it is as common. I read & contribute to the Everyday sexism project. Depressingly I contribute a fair amount. Your arguments are poor and not backed up by evidence.
Domestic violence? Or does it only count if there is sexualised violence?
Gender pay gap?
delboysfileofax I note you have not responded when I asked if you were a man.
Please do so. Given your consistent dismissal of misogyny as an issue, it is extremely pertinent.
Please also tell me if you have at any time been in paid employment within the sex industry.
Well read something else then. It is a big site. I am sure you can find something else that suits you to moan about. (Moaning is pretty sexist as words go as well - generally directed at women who have legitimate grievances).
This always happens. Might I suggest we ignore delboy and move on? She obviously has her own agenda or she would not be ignoring my direct question about what she means by "Yep thats it- just trying to derail an argument rather than pointing out that maybe just maybe someone might be wrong about part of their argument." and picking up typos instead.
I'm not suggesting the women are doing anything wrong, but that if nobody tells them being treated like that is wrong, they accept it, thereby men get away with it. They pick on young innocents because they know they'll get away with it. I never objected to this treatment because at 14 I didn't realise it was wrong. It was the norm to me.
so you can make a typo abigail but I cant?
Del, are you a man? Yes or no?
And have you ever worked in the sex industry? Do you have a personal motive in denying a link between the objectifying of women, and sexual violence, basically?
I agree seeker let's move on.
I tried about an hour and a half ago but everyone ignored my post
Why do people ignore misogyny? Generally I think because the alternative is bloody depressing AND apparently you get labelled a hysterical butter if you see it.
I agree with Seeker and we should move this debate forward.
I think some women don't believe that their is Misogyny because they have an "I'm allright Jack" attitude.
Actually anonymous how often do you hear of a man being called 'hysterical' when reacting against something?
wouldn't mind being called butter quite as much
look up hysteria you are very close to being right
Am I male- yes
Have I ever worked in the sex industry? According to a previous thread working at a strip club in a previous job then yes I have
hysterical (adj.) 1610s, from Latin hystericus "of the womb," from Greek hysterikos "of the womb, suffering in the womb," from hystera "womb" (see uterus). Originally defined as a neurotic condition peculiar to women and thought to be caused by a dysfunction of the uterus.
Del, please answer my questions.
Yes, basically, delboys. Because my typo wasn't the main person we were talking about.
"I'm not suggesting the women are doing anything wrong, but that if nobody tells them being treated like that is wrong, they accept it, thereby men get away with it. They pick on young innocents because they know they'll get away with it." So the men's behaviour is what is at fault, but we should educate the victims? Leave the men to behave as they like. They can get away with it because society backs them up, not because individual women don't object.
and I believe the etymology is something like 'of the womb'.
I've not encountered you on MN before, actually. Though I'll be sure to avoid you in future. I don't like associating with misogynists, you see. We all have our own little foibles.
Del are you going to ignore my question what are these made issues feminists make up that do not exist? I am interested in what you think they are
Of course hysterical is sexist. Really, do we have to explain everything in words of no more than one syllable? And I am not hysterical. I am angry that women are subjected to this shit and people insist on denying their experience.
Here you go Delboy, here is a handy checklist on male privilege
Actually anonymous hysterical is a sexist term. It's root is from the Greek meaning "of the womb", the same as hysterectomy.
It used to be considered that it was the womb, the very essence of woman-ness that meant women were unstable. So yes, hysterical is a very sexist word and one that is not applied to men. Them not having wombs and all that.
Freudian, you're wasting your time. He's just said he's worked in the sex industry.
Let's move on.
Mm, I see I was a bit late to the hysteria party!
Fgs. I wish someone had educated me that the behavior I experienced was wrong. If I knew, I would have spoken up an these men would think twice in future. I'm not saying therefore men don't have to learn. It can come from different angles, it's not black and white.
Just as a matter of interest, delboy- and obviously, there is no reason at all why you shouldn't be- why are you posting on this site? Do you have a particular political agenda? And if so, what is it? I'm happy to declare mine- I am an old fashioned 70s feminist who feels that women are in severe danger of losing much of the ground we gained over the years because we either think the battles are all fought and won, or because we are too scared of offending or because some of us feel we have more to gain by siding with the "patriarchy". (Please note ironic quotation marks"
yes just read that
do not remember seeing his posts before larry always pops up on any sex workers related threads
So because I worked at a strip club im a misogynist? What would you prefer, should I have signed on? Personally I would prefer to support my family then refuse a job because it might upset a political self interest group
Yeah, larry I remember. This one is new to me.
I really, really wish MN had an ignore button sometimes.
So because I worked at a strip club im a misogynist? What would you prefer, should I have signed on? Personally I would prefer to support my family then refuse a job because it might upset a political self interest group
Women are a political self interest group? There was me thinking we were half the world's population, not a political party.
And actually yes, instead you supported the trafficking & oppression of women.
(And now here comes the 'they all enjoy it' argument to derail us further)
seeker- was a reader of this site for ages as am father of young child and theres lots of parenting advice on here. Also because my partner read this quite a lot and in the main it agrees with my politics. I have deliberately kept off the feminist boards, mainly because I'm male and also the feminist movement is in no way open to being challenged at all- as proved in this thread.
I appreciate what you are saying fattybum, that women need to know this is wrong and I agree. But I think it is much more important to tackle the behaviour of the men because then women wouldn't need to be taught that it is wrong. They would know, because it would be rare and not normalised.
I also don't think that individual women objecting would make them think twice. Maybe for a few days but ultimately they get approval from their peers and from society that behaving like this is OK. So why change? This has to become unnacceptable behaviour, from an early age that isn't endorsed by parents, siblings, teachers, boss at work, judges in court, politicians etc etc etc
it's empowering for them don't you know
I am going to listen to Mary Beard on catch up later
no but feminism is a political self interest group. Trafficked women? at a strip club? Sorry to burst your bubble but they werent.
no but feminism is a political self interest group.
No it's not. Do you even understand the basic principles of feminism?
Did I miss the launch of the World Feminism Party, ready to launch their assault and remove the world president from power?
I wish David Cameron would shut up. I am going to shove my fanny in his mouth so he can't talk any more.
That Nick Clegg is such an ugly minger. You'd have to be drunk to have sex with him and as such he shouldn't be in parliament.
You shouldn't have ugly old bastards like David Attenborough on telly, it makes me feel physically sick.
Just an average selection of statements from the internet, really normal stuff, isn't it.
Trafficked women? at a strip club? Sorry to burst your bubble but they werent.
And the thread train is off the tracks.
Did I miss the launch of the World Feminism Party, ready to launch their assault and remove the world president from power?
Well, there are worryingly few men in parliament - and how many men are heads of state? And almost all the FTSE 100 companies are headed by women. You have to admit, it's an issue.
As to why women are blind to misogyny...I don't know. I know that none of the women I work with are in any way bothered by it, or even notice it.
I think part of it is that we are all so wrapped up in our selves and our own worth that we think the shit that men come out with about other women isn't being applied to us. So when they say "she is such a slag" they don't think they're also being judged.
Also I think feminism has a bad image, it's not very "cool" and people think it's anti-fun. Because porn and rape and stripping and all that jazz is fun.
who first mentioned trafficking shamy? me or you? so if anyone derailed the thread, who was it?
perfectstorm yes, it's really troubling, isn't it?
no delboy you just spectacularly refuse to engage in a proper debate.
Please clarify your political self-interest group.
I do worry what delboy is teaching his child. If it's a boy is he teaching him that women are just bits of meat there for the sole purpose of male entertainment? And if she's a girl is he teaching her by his words and deeds that she is not as important as boys, that's she's a second class citizen, human but not a actually a person, and that her worth as a human being is intrinsically locked into how fuckable she is to men?
*political self interest group statement
Ooh interesting slug
I wonder if Del could tell us if:
a) if he has a son, will he encourage his son to go to said strip clubs
b) if he has a daughter will he be happy if she works in one
Delboy. I am a feminist. Challenge me. What would you like to ask/say and what would you like me to answer/say? Happy to answer any questions you have, or respond to any arguments. Go for it!
And when delboy has done that, please can we move on?
Can we agree not to engage with delboy and particularly not start on the sex industry arguments? Arguing with a misogynist who works in a SEV is the online equivalent of bashing your head against a wall
To go back to the original premise, I still think many women deny misogyny because to acknowledge it consciously is genuinely painful. I look back at some of the abuse I have suffered from men I've worked with or had relationships and it actually makes me feel nauseous. I now run my own business and have more time to really engage with how I feel and what goes on, and it makes me angry - I feel as though I carry a knot of rage around inside me that never quite goes away.
You can't escape it - go into the news agent and there's racks and racks of sexualised images of women on magazines which have nothing to do with fashion, health etc. Watch TV and there's the old male presenter/young sexy female presenter dynamic or films featuring sexual violence. Open the sports section of any mainstream newspaper and you'll be lucky to find one story about female sportswoman.
It's depressing, so no wonder some people don't want to accept it
Can we just ignore him please as he bringing nothing to the debate and can't even support any of his tired arguments with any actual evidence.
Because being groped in public is normal, because I should accept comments about my body parts in public, because I should 'smile', because I should welcome the attention, because I am ugly/a lesbian/hysterical/moaning/have no sense of humour if I don't.
All in the last month Del - in a reasonable sized English town just going about my daily business and minding my own. All from men - I have not done the same to any man, nor witnessed another woman do it to any man. That's still the reality for women - please acknowledge it. And if you were to suffer such treatment you do know it would be most likely another man doing it to you?
Human trafficking as a whole is an industry worth $220bn per year, and this includes slavery, prositution, economic migration and child exploitation.
In 2008, 12.3 million individuals were classified as forced laborers, bonded laborers or sex-trafficking victims. Approximately 1.39 million worked as commercial sex slaves, with women and girls comprising 98%, or 1.36 million, of this population.
Yip, it's all in women's imaginations. NOTHING TO SEE HERE
Anon please show where there are pictures of all the men you posted about superimposed on a penis? Show the blogs that contain comments about the sexual violence people would like to do to those men.
Very difficult for me to engage in any debate when several people are trying to engage (read have a go) at me at once.
With regard to my child- how would i be teaching him that about women? he is very very young and I stopped working at that club in 2006. If when he is older and wants to go to a strip club it would not bother me. If i had a daughter I would prefer her not to work in one of those clubs but would not disown her if she did. If it was a question of not eating/ paying rent if she didnt do it then I would understand
One unpleasant women does not alter thousands of years of female oppression by men
Calling me a misogynist and asking people not to engage with me- what a great way to prove your point. Just because someone doesnt agree with some parts of feminism doesnt make them a misogynist you know!
hysteria was still used in medical journals until 30 odd years ago. I have never heatd a group of male football fans that are very excited being called hysterical or a man who is very upset
it's it men that faught for you to have the vote, is it men that faught for you to be paid an equal wage, is it mforth at faught for you to be allowed to divorce your husband if you so wished no it was women
Delboy- did you see my post? The offer is still there. You say feminists don't like being challenged- I am saying "I am a feminist- challenge me"
Fwiw - I'm glad that Mary is making it known about the comments made.
See delboy is be more inclined to support the dd, and have more of an issue with the ds that considered it ok to treat that as entertainment, knowing the girls have no other option if they are to pay the rent etc
and seeker providing that isnt a wind up then yes please, there is lots i would like to ask/learn about to do with feminism. Not sure if this thread is the most appropriate place though and am off to work in a bit. to everyone else out there it has been an interesting thread- i will bow out now. Good afternoon to you all
Hmm, delboy, your attitude on here is women should stop moaning about something that is not a real problem. You've spectacularly ignored all the evidence and the counter arguments from women who point out that it is a real and common issue.
All of the evidence is coming from women. What does this say about your attitude to women? Especially intelligent women? What, of these attitudes, are you passing onto your son? The fact that you dismiss every piece of evidence presented to you suggests that you don't take women seriously. Your son will be learning this from you.
You are also quite unapologetic about working in an industry whose sole purpose is to present women's bodies as entertainment for men. Not their brains mind you, you've already demonstrated how little you think of them. Your son will be picking up on this. Picking up on the opinion that women are bodies who should stop moaning.
It's not a wind up- you mean you can't think of a single thing you can ask off the top of your head? What about all the opinions you think are wrong on this thrqd- why not choose one of those? Or explain what you meant by
"Yep thats it- just trying to derail an argument rather than pointing out that maybe just maybe someone might be wrong about part of their argument." and see what I said about the "parts of their argument" you think are wrong?
I wouldn't deny misogyny, but I don't go round expecting it either. I tend to expect the best of people until I am proved wrong. I like people. But sure, there is plenty out there. And a fair degree of man hating too, but with usually less obvious/profound effects.
I'm idly wondering if delboy is not so much unreconstructed as constructed.
I'm married to the nicest person I've ever met. He's not remotely sexist - he isn't any ist at all, actually, he takes people as he finds them. That doesn't mean sexism isn't rampant or that women are very unequal in our society, why should it?
Women are under-represented at every level - politics, civil service, major corporations. They're over represented in areas that attract relatively low pay and status - childcare. nursing, cleaning, teaching. Women are paid less for work of the same value, and I could link to a dozen studies and court cases that illustrate that. Women are victims of domestic and sexual violence massively more often than men. Women are subject to nasty, vindictive spite on grounds of gender in a way men just aren't. Men are attacked on all kinds of grounds, absolutely, but not their gender itself. And the worst insult levelled at another man is that he is in some way feminine - whereas the worst insult leveled at a woman is that she is ugly, sexually a turnoff, and deserves to be raped.
That isn't a theory. It's, you know - factual. How is saying as much unacceptable special pleading? I'm white, but I pointed out when I thought people in another thread were being racist, too - another form of prejudice that should be undeniable to anyone with an ounce of grey matter. I don't like homophobia, either. I don't like it when anyone or any group is treated as less than human for an inherent trait that in no way affects their worth as a person. And that's all sexism is.
I genuinely don't understand why or how anyone can find that strange or controversial.
For the record, I think the family courts are disturbingly unfair to fathers whose exes want to block them from the kids' lives, and it isn't taken seriously enough as the abuse it is of the kids as well as the father. I think that is a genuine, thankfully statistically rare, case of sexism against fathers, and it's troubling. I've said so on many threads here over the years. It's just that sexism against men, in the scary, life-altering sense, is usually rare and generally quite trivial. Men have more power in our society - in every society, in fact. Attitudes towards men and women's sexuality is completely different. And I am baffled by the double-think and mental gymnastics required when people try to deny it. It's not like there's no evidence, is there?
I guess most women, like men are ambivalent about it. Throughout history, most men didn't go around purposefully oppressing women, (though a sizeable minority did, as now) they just didn't challenge the status quo, as most women didn't.
I don't want men to hate their own gender, just to realise what other people go through as as result of a sizeable minority of shitclowns (of both genders) and also to value women as individuals not just "Women are like x, y and z so I will treat you accordingly".
I dont know why I read these threads, some people are so obtuse it's ridiculous.
Anonymumous, why did your husband have no choice but to go out to work? You chose to stay at home, so therfore he chose to go to work yes? It's accepted/expected that men will work and women will stay at home, but there is a choice. What a bizarre combination of opinions. On the one hand it's all a level playing field, but on the other hand your husband HAD to go to work while you stay home
Also not to have double standards with male/female behaviour. "Slut shaming" makes me fucking livid.
well it might have been women if we had been given the chance to advance in engineering not constantly held back because they are women and sadly they still are this is why we are fighting and will continue to do so and so that other women can live a more independent life if they prefer to do so
Anonymous, where do I start? Read "A Room of One's Own" by Virginia Woolf. Will give you an idea of why it's largely men who invented/created things.
Can I also say, just while I'm a bit confused anyway, that everytime there's a discussion about women being raped/threatend with rape, there is always someone saying 'but men are raped too'. And I dont understand why it doesnt occur to these people that men are raped by other men, not women.
Sorry for tangent. I made the mistake of reading comments on the Gaurdian yesterday.
Well there has only been 40,000 years of oppression, Anonymumous.
It might take more than 40 years of feminism to sort it out.
Namchan- I don't want to derail even further, but apparently men are frequently raped by women as well.
Anonmyous, a woman, Josephine Cochraine, invented the dishwasher. It might also interest you to know that the work that made computing possible was done by a woman, Ada Lovelace.
Just because you don't know about them does not mean that they did not exist.
Inventions by women since 1900. <<sigh>> Google is your friend.
A woman invented the windscreen wiper. Oh, and the machine that makes flat bottomed paper bags!
So do you feel your views aren't welcomed by feminists, Delboy? At what point did you feel certain about that - when they said they wanted to shut you up by ramming their vaginas in your face? When they said you were too ugly to be raped up the arse? When they said you must be a queer?
Actually I haven't noticed women inventing many things since the dawn of feminism either...
Absolutely, as has been repeatedly explained, women are still massively under-represented in almost all desirable/senior roles in society, and they are still disproportionately doing menial, unsung work. There is a huge gender gap in sciences, partly down to expectations (good single sex girls schools don't have the issue). That's why feminism is still needed, because there isn't equality yet. That's the whole point. On the one hand, you say feminism isn't necessary, and on the other you acknowledge that equality is nowhere near a reality. Can you not see how contradictory a position that is?
As an aside, Xrays and the structure of DNA are generally regarded as pretty useful. Maybe you could google Marie Curie and Rosalind Franklin. The latter's experiences are especially instructive, in this context. Crick disliked her because she didn't wear lipstick. Even though her crystallography was what led to the discovery of the structure of DNA.
Does it only count if it's hard science inventions? Is Kevlar good enough for you? You know, the stuff in bullet proof vests? Or are inventions only worth lauding if the person with their name on the patent also has a penis?
Woo-hoo! A woman invented the dishwasher. Well, that's all right then. Men can go to Hell - who needs 'em?!
Feminism is not about hating men. It's about respecting human beings.
Anon - read all the comments and even though its the mail I did not see a single comment about sticking a vulva in his face? One America poster did mention putting tape over his mouth, but the posting name is a bit ambiguous. No other comment was on sexual violence. There was a lot on appearance that was negative but then he was advertising his own brand of underwear and therefore modelling rather than giving his opinion on question time. Presumably you can now dig out a thread on William Hague?
Seeker- I can think of loads, its just getting the time to write them in a coherent and hopefully non too confrontational way. As I said its off to work for me in the next couple of mins so cant get them down at the mo. If its a genuine offer to discuss these questions then great. I will create a thread in feminism later, although this would probably be like signing my own death warrant!
Good god, Anonymous!
Just because you're not aware of women's achievements, it doesn't mean there haven't been any.
I think that, while these topics are all connected, the main one her7e is the fact that women are sexually humiliated publicly and repeatedly when they try and engage in a topic which had nothing whatever to do with looks, sex or gender. This happens anonymously on the internet, and the internet seems to encourage posters to go far further than they would in real life.
I think seeker can handle you being confrontational, delboy. Don't worry about that part.
Why not just explain what you meant by "Yep thats it- just trying to derail an argument rather than pointing out that maybe just maybe someone might be wrong about part of their argument." for a start? You could do that before you went back to work, surely?
I did a Google Images search on Mary Beard - and the third picture that came up was AA Gill, FFS.
After reading this thread I have come to the conclusion that some women don't believe in Misogyny because they aren't all that bright.
"Woo-hoo! A woman invented the dishwasher. Well, that's all right then. Men can go to Hell - who needs 'em?! "
You said women haven't invented anything. We pointed out that they had. A bit of a jump from that to "Men can go to hell"!!
In fairness, women have achieved less than men. That tends to happen when you have always had less access to education, jobs and research opportunities. It's starting to shift as that process opens up, but the notion feminism is so powerful it can overcome entrenched attitudes overnight is just ridiculous. It's an uphill battle, and as attitudes mentioned here show, it's one many people are opposed to even being fought.
Frankly it isn't a surprise women have achieved less than men have. It's astonishing they've achieved so much, given the obstacles in their way. I will never understand how someone can on the one hand say feminism isn't necessary, and on the other call out the greater academic, technological and social achievements of men. Women weren't allowed to vote, attend university in equal numbers (or at all, until the late 19th century), work when married or be in a senior role until extremely recently. They still form only 19% of all MPs. How in the world can the holding back of women from their fullest potential be a supporting argument when claiming feminism has succeeded? That makes no sense at all. And how could feminism succeed in a matter of decades, when it has the attitudes of millennia to work against?
It just seems so obvious. I don't see how anyone can deny it.
I'm not meaning to weigh in on the other side of the argument here, but David Cameron has typically been depicted as a literal "dickhead" in political cartoons.
The difference being, of course, that it's satire, rather than abuse.
'And now tell me why the ancient roots of the word 'hysterical' actually have any significance to modern life whatsoever?'
Although it is no longer used as a name for a medical condition, there are many doctors who still consider it to be such a thing. Some use the term 'conversion disorder', which is what hysteria morphed into over the years (in part) and recently the DSM IV has added a new disorder, see here (somatic symptom disorder - basically do you go on about being in pain, or feel anxious about your health - well you might have SSD, nothing to do with the fact that you might be legitamately very unwell or misdiagnosed.) If you have chronic pain or M.E you might be treated as hysterical in the medical sense of the word, particularly if you are female. There is a book published in the 1990s on chronic back pain by a hugely respected medical professional which talks about how women are more likely to feel more pain if they have big hips, being essentially hysterical in nature. Which is such utter unscientific bullshit it is laughable. There is a psychiatrist who treats M.E who in the last 10 years has written that M.E is an illness created by females who wish to have the status of an invalid, get out of housework and avoid sex and that such a person feels no guilt about their (fake) condition and claiming benefits in the way that someone with (legitimate) depression does. This charmer has just been knighted, incidentally, it's a mainstream view.
It might not be immediately obvious to most people how the word hysterical is still used and how deeply misogynist it is, but it is. It is mostly used in everyday conversation relating to women, usually a woman who is being a bit emotional. It is a misogynistic term designed to shut someone up in the way that people are attempting to shut Mary Beard up. To dismiss their thoughts. Emotional, female thoughts are clearly in the eyes of many, not the same as rational, male thoughts.
Anonymumous I thought you were bored, not in denial? Seems neither were true.
Takingthehobbit, yes and not only is it satire but most of the people drawing such cartoons or writing the articles are also male.
Incidentally, one of the arguments in favour of feminism is economic. A modern economy can't afford to suppress the talents and intelligence of half its population, especially in an advanced social democracy, where someone not working to their fullest ability will therefore not contribute to their fullest extent to the tax take, and to economic growth. Feminism should help ensure that the most competent people fill the most demanding positions, rather than the applicant pool being diminished by unreasoning prejudice.
Would you be counting your blessings if you were drugged, gang raped, and then an entire town conspired in a cover up and then to blacken your name?
Sorry but would you?
*The tone of all this was 'jokey' in such a way that it is impossible to complain about without appearing to be a miserable bitch. It is misogyny though. Just as it was misogyny yesterday when female students were turned away from the gym because there was noone to supervise them. But the male students of the same age were allowed to stay.
The sequence of events as I have described above what not have happened if I was a man*
Brilliant illustration of everyday misogyny and sexism. The little ways in which many men assume that women are there to serve them.
Your last sentence there is staggeringly, staggeringly ignorant, Anonymous. No, porn is not just a first world problem.
I do not believe women have achieved less than men.
How are we going to score it? Do we subtract all the things like wars, that men have 'achieved'? Because I would suggest that perhaps the deaths of tens of millions of young men in the trenches in WWI is not quite the sort of 'achievement' that looks positive on a resume.
Yes, men have been 'in power' while women haven't, but the results are not entirely positive.
Without women, centuries of children would never have learned to read. Women held the keys to written culture for centuries. That absolutely fascinates me, that centuries before women were allowed into university, you would struggle to find a man who didn't owe the fact he could read to a woman who taught him.
I would set that sort of fact against, say, WWI.
Incidentally, a really interesting book (which is totally male-centric) that got me thinking about how we ought to value supposed 'achievements' of men down the centuries is this one: www.amazon.co.uk/Into-The-Silence-Mallory-Conquest/dp/0099563835
The author explains how many decisions by men during the war were stupid and resulted in huge death tolls - and then the survivors ended up going off to climb Everest, risking their own lives, killing quite a lot of 'native' porters because they didn't really treat them as humans, and leaving their wives bringing up children on their own. It just shocked me how much selfishness and ego went into things we now think are 'achievements'.
Porn a first world problem? You think it's a first world problem that vulnerable women who have often been abused since a young age and have drug addictions end up in such an industry?
Because in looking at the porn industry you can't just look at it in terms of the users.
Have you read this?
A brilliant bit of satire, followed by a bunch of men totally failing to get the point. Their view is so skewed by society's favouritism that they don't even understand what the original piece is trying to do.
A woman invented the circular saw....that is damn significant
I consider myself incredibly fortunate to be alive now. I count my blessings every day.
So do I
Believe me, its much more healthy and conducive to a nice life than constantly getting steamed up about imagined slights on ones gender.
are you really saying that what's happened to Mary Beard and other women "are imagined slights"?
I can understand why you would campaign for womens rights in other parts of the world where they really do have a terrible time. But all this clutching at our foreheads and muttering about the evils of porn If ever there was a First World problem..
It is impossible to even think, never mind campaign, for women's rights in other parts of the world without also thinking about porn-sadly the two are often inextricably linked.
Yes, working class men were also oppressed. What is your point? One oppression doesn't trump another and the working classes are still held back.
First world problem is a bit of a non-argument. So is "steamed up" "imagined slights" and so on. You are making the problems out to be emotive where they are not. It is not a fair way to argue.
Do you have daughters? Would you be happy to see them in porn, to see them being smacked around the face/strangled/prolapse for the enjoyment of others?
Also with regard to the matter of the economy, it has just struck me how much consternation there has been in education in recent years, that girls had started outperforming boys in KS2 and 3. Having been given equal access to education, but then achieving more with it, was not part of the deal surely?
That is to Anonymous btw.
ruby, that is very funny and very well done.
Ruby that's really funny, love it.
Most men didn't have the vote either until a few years before women got it.
Not so. There was a property qualification, which was gradually whittled away at as the movement towards democracy progressed, but men were represented in the Commons for hundreds of years. You also don't appear to know that women could not hold any property at all in their own names until the late Victorian period, and that while men could divorce for adultery, women needed to be able to add desertion or cruelty to adultery in order to do so. And they would still lose their children and their property. And the other thing - poor women always worked. In factories, in houses, in the fields. It wa sjust that "their" money belonged to their husbands. They had all of the hardships and none of the control. And of course there will have been loving, tender and passionate relationships, with husbands who treated their wives like gold. That isn't relevant because what is being discussed is a societal framework that meant the way women were treated was at the whim of the man they married. Not a right to fair, decent or equal treatment.
You also don't seem to know that a woman lost all legal status when she married. It was known as "Coverture" and applied until the 20th century. In essence. when you married, legally you stopped being a person at all. You became a part of your husband. You couldn't enter into a contract or own anything at all. Your husband could do anything to you - rape you, beat you, abandon you, take your children - as long as he didn't kill you. Murder wasn't allowed. Pretty much anything else was okay, though. Including selling you, as it happens. The legal textbook setting out the framework said: By marriage, the husband and wife are one person in law: that is, the very being or legal existence of the woman is suspended during the marriage, or at least is incorporated and consolidated into that of the husband.
I don't mean to be rude, honestly I don't, but you fairly obviously don't know the history behind the feminist movement, or women's role in society. Maybe you could read up a bit on it, and see if it altered how you see things? Did you know, for example, that until the early 1990s it was legal for a man to rape his wife in this country? That's just 20 years ago. And one of my law lecturers at university disgreed with the ruling, because it was judge-led and not legislated by Parliament. He said, "A man who forces sex upon his wife is a cad and a brute, but he is not a rapist."
It's great your husband is lovely. My husband is lovely to. My son is lovely, and so are my little brothers and many male friends. But that's neither here nor there when discussing feminism.
I can understand why you would campaign for womens rights in other parts of the world where they really do have a terrible time. But all this clutching at our foreheads and muttering about the evils of porn
If ever there was a First World problem
The ignorance of that statement is oustanding. Genuinely I cannot believe you think that.
LRD I agree, but you do also need to factor in, when considering conventional measures of achievement (which are the ones most people regard as valid) the constraints and restraints women operated within, and still do. Because most of your audience aren't going to listen to the more complex and unconventional approaches.
I remember when we were being taught about the various approaches to equality law, and we were told, "symmetrical equality is one of the worst, really, in terms of honesty and validity, but it does have the huge advantage that you don't need to think far to understand it, nor have access to a great deal of data. It "feels fair" on its face. And as such, most people will support it."
Given the venom you face from some quarters when trying to support mere symmetrical equality, perhaps that's a factor worth considering.
Women have been denied access to education for centuries. In many parts of the world they still are. Gender constructs steer women away from areas where status might be achieved e.g. those areas where you might invent things, the sciences, engineering, architecture etc etc. Is it any wonder they haven't invented as much as men? As if that were a valid measure of success. It is a patriarchal measure of success, for sure.
Please feel free to leave if you are bored, Anonymumous. Really we won't mind. Close the door on the way out, there's a love.
Yeah anonymous. What a bunch of hypocrites we are - we think it's fine to talk about sex, and yet somehow reserve the right not to think it's fine to talk about rapes you'd do or not do to someone. Go figure....
And I think you'll find few feminists would think a builder wolf-whistling and shouting would be 'perfectly acceptable'.
Really Anon? What degree was this, and where did you do it? It does seem to have left some very big gaps in your understanding - perhaps that's why you found it dull?
I do appreciate, of course, that some people find having to think at all inherently boring. Shame, as personally I think it's one of the most fun things in the world. It's one of the reasons I love being a mum - challenges my ideas all the time, and the theories on child development are fascinating, too.
Oh well. Horse for courses.
perfect - oh, yes, I agree. I'm not dismissing it at all. It's just something I get really interested in. I do think it matters both to remember why women are sometimes less visible than men in terms of achievements, and that women's achievements are minimized.
It's a double layer of oppression. Women were less enabled to achieve, and also, we are still taught a male-centric version of history that ignores what they did achieve.
Why would you choose to do a dissertation in something which bored you? How strange!
'P.S. Did anyone notice this comment in that link? Oh my goodness, he looks absolutely HYSTERICAL! That proves a few of you wrong then'
Are you not embarrassed by how ignorant you're coming across?
'Hysterical' has 2 meanings.
Highly strung/extremely emotional.
Both are underpinned by an idea of losing control. Either through laughing, or in being overemotional.
It's where it leads anonymous. Don't suppose you saw the Dianne Abbott article earlier on in the week?
You know if ever there was an advert for feminism still being being necessary....
It's funny. It's not something I usually give a huge amount of thought to. But I damn well am, now.
Well, Anonymumous by that token, if someone is willing to buy someone's kidney, and the person is willing to sell it, what's the issue?
P.S. Did anyone notice this comment in that link? Oh my goodness, he looks absolutely HYSTERICAL! That proves a few of you wrong then!
How does that compare? Saying some looks hysterical (funny) and saying someone is being hysterical (over-reaction due to hormones) are massively different.
Good point about 'hysterical'.
It is so telling that the terminology is based in negative descriptions of women's bodies, yet it's so normalized, lots of people don't even recognize where it comes from and what it implies that we still use it.
You wouldn't find people saying it was ok to still use racist terminology simply because it's become associated with something not explicitly racist (eg., the story about 'little black sambo' tends, funnily enough, not to be read under the original title any more!).
That. Is. How. The. Word. Originated <slow and clear>
I don't think it's ok for a builder to shout and wolf-whistle at a woman walking down the street, no. If she doesn't mind, that's her business. I don't get your point about things women say themselves, I'm afraid. I'm not answerable for all women, obviously.
No. No one says a man reacts in an hysterical fashion to something. It's used against women in a similar fashion to '<obnoxious smirk> time of the month is it?'
Both are used to suggest a woman reacts solely based on her hormone levels and her argument/reason is not valid. Because she is a woman.
So you'd legalise the trading of human organs for money, Anonymumous ? Does the fact that it's illegal in every country in the world (except Iran) not suggest that there may be some issues with it?
People will be paid to do anything in the world. It doesn't mean it's ok or ethically sound.
Would you be counting your blessings if you were drugged, gang raped, and then an entire town conspired in a cover up and then to blacken your name?
Let's not forget that one of the boys who took photos of the rape in progress, by his own sworn testimony, was found to have photos of two other girls on the same phone, also naked, also facedown on the same distinctive carpet, and also apparently unconscious. He says he had no idea how they got there and they're nothing to do with him, and that was just... accepted.
The indications as to what that might mean are obvious, I would have thought.
But apparently no-one has ever heard the word 'hysterical' used in relation to a man, because it's all about women's bits and hysterectomies, don't you know...
It's used in a humour context with men. I have never heard anyone say a man became hysterical as a way of saying he was unreasonable and belittling him, no. Not once.
Would you think racist words with similarly dark origins were acceptable?
And it did. Thank you
You on the other hand, are an admirable person, full of enlightenment, understanding, enquiry and intelligence.
Have a lovely day.
Gosh Anonymumous what a well-reasoned argument! You've completely changed my views.
On the contrary Anonymumous, I think you are quite funny.
Just sidetracked by wondering how anyone with half a brain and any imagination at all could "possibly^ find the history of women's suffrage boring!
Oh God, you really are a bunch of humourless old farts aren't you?!
Racism isn't funny, either. And an ad hominem attack is widely regarded as the last resort of someone who has no actual arguments to make, so you aren't helping yourself there.
Yes Anonymumous so bored you stayed on the thread for 3 hours!
Oh for fuck's sake.
It's happened again- sock puppets and trolls. I don't know how we actually have a sensible discussion about things like this. Maybe we can't. Unless we learn not to engage. I know it's practically irresistible- but maybe we could try?
You quite clearly aren't bored, BTW. You're upset and embarrassed and angry, and I'm genuinely sorry about that, because you plainly meant no malice. But you really haven't thought any of your statements through, and when they effectively collude in attitudes that lead to some horrible wrongs, you are going to be challenged on it. It's just a shame that you are so obviously unwilling to even consider the counter-arguments. But such is life.
She's not a troll. She's a regular.
Gosh, was it a social experiment as well? That's the usual one people on younger threads use in your position.
And if you want me to pull up your posting history and illustrate my reasons for disbelieving that you are trolling, I can. Just saying.
Would you care to explain why? What do you get out of it?
Well, thanks for derailing what had the potential to be an interesting discussion for a lot of people, Anonymumous . I suggest a hobby to get you out of the house.
Sorry your thread was derailed seeker .
I wonder if it's too late to get it on track, and if she comes back, or that other idiot, I will try, at least, to ignore them. I really think I have a lot to learn about this stuff.
She has a consistent posting history. Not buying the trolling excuse at all, sorry.
for you trying to laugh it off as if you were trolling.
I think MNHQ should set up a misogynist section so all the arseholes can keep their bilge in one place.
Is there a uniform? Why wasn't I told?
Yes it is really really fucking militant to suggest that maybe, just maybe, it's not a good idea for men to threaten to shut up a woman they don't like by stuffing their dick in her mouth, isn't it?
And incredibly sanctimonious to think that rape is a bad thing to do?
And you typed all that crap with a baby in your arms? Jesus wept.
"I really can't be bothered debating the issues properly because I really, really am not interested"
So then why post at all? If you're bored there are about a million other things you can do on the internet beyond winding people up. I recommend www.sporcle.com
I don't always agree with some of the people on this thread, but at least I'm not such a huge arse to go and deliberately goad them to get a rise.
What about people like me? I am not sanctimonious or raging generally. I have very rarely posted in the feminists' section, but for some reason this thread struck a chord with me. Yet you appear to have put everyone in the same corner - you have labelled and categorised people according to previous prejudices. What about people like Mary Beard, who presumably, primarily wants to be a well known academic but has been forced by circumstance into taking a stand against this terrible and terrifying trend.
I am not making this thread about me, of course. I just want to know why you label people like this?
Why did you think that such an important topic was worth derailing just because you had nothing better to do.
Its not about life's little inequalities, its about how half the population are not seen as equal in contribution, ability and intellectual capacity as the other half. Lots and lots of little inequalities adding up to one bloody huge one.
I am not a militant feminist (just an ordinary one), I am married with children but I also happen to be the breadwinner whilst DH was a SAHD.
You are either an expert and clever stirrer, or just very dim.
Just very dim by all accounts.
Oh just leave her be now, she's not adding anything to the discussion, she's admitted she was trolling, and we're BORING her with our BORING MILITANT opinions.
She's previously chosen to comment from a rather, um, conservative perspective on sensitive threads about sex and abortion, if memory serves. And it's an unusual username, so I think it does. So I sincerely hope she's genuine in her postings, because if she isn't, some of them are at times actively cruel to others on the thread. Ishoos either way, IMO.
Now I shall go and collect the toddler from preschool. Like the good militant feminist I am.
Ariel - from my past observations, expert and clever are not adjectives that would immediately leap to mind, no.
Back to the op. How much of it is conditioning I wonder? Socially for example?
When I first read Zog to ds he laughed when we got to the part where the princess says she wants to be a doctor. I asked why and he said 'girls can't be doctors'.
I had no idea where this came from. Not me or my DH or any family member.
Now however, we've started reading Matilda and last night Mr Wormwood was nasty and said along the lines of 'you're a cheat and a liar, a girl could never get that right' about a sum, and ds shouted 'that's not true, girls are good at maths too!'
The point is, we (DH & I) have had to work at showing him why girls can do things boys do. He's 5 btw and I feel like we'll constantly have to do this against the stream of outside messages.
Hi just been taking time catching up on this thread.
To me it isn't about feminism but respect and many men and women feel the need to exert their power over people.
As the 'fairer' and 'weaker' sex it is easy to exert power over women by sexualising them this can be as simple as caller her a whore or as extreme as rape. Yes men can be raped and people can use power to demean men but it isn't as often and it isn't deemed as acceptable.
Another way men are put down is to feminise them if, it is this attitude and lack of respect that makes misogyny so socially acceptable. Of course their are extremes and exceptions as people have posted about.
I was brought up by a single mother who is not extreme but has feminist views, I never thought anything different about my worth as a woman or capabilities to be anything other than equal in any profession to any man. Yet even though my DH is very respectful of women his sisters seem to feel the need to be looked after and with that don't see themselves as being worthy of university even though one of them has a very scientific mind and is one of the most intelligent people I know. Yet her mother feels the womans place is in the home (not saying there is anything wrong with this as a choice) but to think only the males in the family are worthy of further education seems ridiculous to me, choosing to stay at home and raise a family is admirable but having no other option is restricting and a form of reinforcing that women are not good enough.
Misogyny has so many levels and don't think many people realise the implications of what they say. The man who called the poster 'girl' above this is another way of exerting power or dominance whether well intended or not because it is the norm people accept it and the more people accept these little bits the more boundaries are crossed and moved to include other things.
Internet trolls are keyboard warriors but you are right they use female genitalia as an insult whether the reason they attacked her was because she is a woman or not the imagery was misogynistic in itself. A penis (phallus) is considered a symbol of power, sometimes used for humour but female genitalia is an insult.
I do think women are more likely to get attacked for expressing opinion than men because deep down many people still think of women as second class citizens and less intelligent - or if they don't think this, the behaviour of others means this treatment of women is more acceptable and normal.
Men are bad for this but so are women, sometimes it is upbringing, social circumstances, naivety or lack of intelligence and in the worst cases it is purely to dominate and have power.
Op thank you for starting this thread, after reading alot today I would say appearance of women is just the tip of the iceberg.
I have been thinking of this thread today and how wrong was I to put that link up.
I still have alot to learn about this subject as I have been blind to it.
It's like contraception, there is alot of contraception out there but why is only 2 applys to men..... Why can't they be subjected to drugs that control the contraception.
I don't think I have ever heard of conversation where a male in his 50 have been questioned why he never decided to have children, yet I have heard women of a similar age ask why she didn't have children.
As I have said I still have alot to learn on this subject.
In answer to the original poster..... what do you get out of pretending they arent? The responce to Mary beard....... Have i ever seen a picture of a man with male genitals drawn on their face? Yes indeed I have frequently...as has anyone who went to school in fact drawings of male genitals are far more frequent than drawings of female... SO yes males are treated in a similar fashion. Have I seen elder male spokesmen described by women as 'out of touch decrepit yellow toothed foul smelling stanchions of male hierarchys' by similar people that post here. yes I have. The one thing that I havent seen happen to men is them being threatened with rape (often).... because of obvious reasons, I have seen them threatened with other violence...both threats are in fact crimes, they are treated equally.
But one is misogyny and the other is not, susan - and it is misogyny that the thread is about.
"Why can't they be subjected to drugs that control the contraception. " Ah actually? Because its a whole lot easier to produce a reliable drug based result with female physiology whereas male drug treatments have quite worrying fail rates. Also because as a woman id never actually trust a man to have taken the drugs! Incidentally women are not 'subjected' to the pill....its voluntary.
"But one is misogyny and the other is not, susan - and it is misogyny that the thread is about."
Actually the original poster said this "What do they get out of insisting that men are subject to exactly the same level of discrimination and abuse as women?" thats what I answered. BOth are sexist. You cant claim one is acceptable and the other is not. unless of course you have zero interest in equality.
This topic has deep routes and I think you could study it for years and never have a definite answer.
It goes back through history much like racism has deep routes in history and for both you will find it better and worse in certain social and ethnic pockets. I find this both interesting and horrifying as a mum to be to a DD (I already have a DS)
As with all things though burying your head to it being a problem just helps it spread.
As much as I wouldn't like to be called 'out of touch yellow toothed foul smelling' or a 'stanchion of male hierachy', I don't think that's sexist, is it? And threats of violence aren't sexist, unless the nature of the violence is explicitly sexual. Like rape, for example.
mmm, yes, of course misogyny doesn't exist. That's why woman's earnings are the same as men's. That's why the incredibly rare event of sexual violence is prosecuted so effectively and treated so seriously by the courts. That's why so many of our major companies are run by femal chief execs.
oh wait ....
25 years ago I was probably one of those women in denial, because misogyny was the norm for me. I just didn't see it, because enabling it allowed me to have a relationship of sorts with my family, I thought I had equality because I could vote and the world was my oyster, I didn't realise I was already scuppered by the complete lack of self confidence that 18 years of not being listened to and low expectations had created.
I'm older and hopefully wiser now so when my dp tells my sons not to cry like girls I will bloody well tell him it's not acceptable.
Men are not judged entirely based on whether they've had sex or not, except to decide on if they get issued with their 'man card'.
Women are virtuous, pure etc whilst a virgin.
After that we are 'used goods, sloppy seconds' etc etc.
Care to explain the difference?
"These are precisely the people who are incapable of actually discussing anything rationally. KarlosK Krinlebeim thats you."
I'm not the one issuing capitalised rants, me dear. Care to address the facts I raised? Or are they inconvenient for you?
<sigh> We don't deny that it happens to men Susan. It happens to women more. The vitriol is almost always sex based. It happens for doing very little at all.
Yes, point us to those, Susan, and point me to where the feminists are in favour of such posts. Nobody thinks cutting off balls is ok, you know.
Sorry to froth, obviously.
And I wonder why you really aren't seeing the power dynamic between men and women; opressorppressed; intimidator:reactionary;
<feels de ja vue coming on as if I have had this conversation with someone called Susan2kids recently>
God knows where that smiley came from. It was supposed to say oppressor : oppressed
What Abigail said at 1604.
"Actually the original poster said this "What do they get out of insisting that men are subject to exactly the same level of discrimination and abuse as women?" thats what I answered. BOth are sexist. You cant claim one is acceptable and the other is not. unless of course you have zero interest in equality."
Neither are acceptable. Aggression and hate is unacceptable, full stop. But we none of us are an island - nobody lives in a cultural vacuum. The reality is that we live in a world where women are judged and treated more harshly and less equitably than men. It's just a reality. And there are very few men indeed who have their balls cut off, so while it's a horrible thing to say, no, it does not have equivalence with threats to rape/assertions that someone should be, because rape is extremely common. It's a genuine fear, and a soundly based one. Fear of castration is not.
Nobody is saying men should be treated unpleasantly or badly, or that aggression or abuse is ever justified. It's a totally false dichotomy to raise. What people are saying is that we live in a culture where abuse is more commonly aimed at women, that judgemental attitudes to sexual activity are almost exclusively aimed at women, where women are paid less, represented less in positions of power and authority... and that when a woman asserts herself, as Mary Beard did, the reaction is extremely punitive, and based almost entirely on her gender. And that agressive, violent attacks on women by men are more common by a large margin than those on men by women. By the same token, a huge insult aimed by men at other men is to call them by female names. That's not something you see reversed. Homophobia is equal, agreed - a pansy/faggot is happily hurled in the same way lezzie is. So yes, homophobia is an equal-op hate. But even there, the insult to a man is to imply femininity, whereas to a woman, it's to attack her attractiveness. Which is back to what women and men are valued for, and what we regard as the ultimate insult.
And I can't actually bring to mind a case when a man has been the object of public vitriol without having done something more than expressing a reasonably mainstream opinion. And even then, the public vitriol is never of such an overtly violent and sexual nature.
It's definitely something that you become more aware of as you get older. I remember my first real taste of it was when I got married and didn't change my name. The vitriol with which a number of people commented on this was a real eye opener.
Since then I've noticed the little things a lot more. Read an article in the paper a few mornings ago, with a female psychologist claiming that children can thrive on quality attention just in the evenings, so working mothers don't need to feel guilty anymore. All presented as promoting equal rights, argh!!
Perfect Storm I entirely disagree that women are subject to more verbal abuse based around gender than men I say that's bollocks....a phrase used by women without thinking all the time, I also find it entirely disingenuous that the same posters have to claim Macho isnt insulting (despite that being pretty much the meaning) then claim that hysterical is sexually degrading because of its roots. You also seem to be entirely avoiding the point raised that calling a woman manly is seen as insulting by women. I have more than once heard women attacking other women for their masculine appearance or simply 'sitting like a man' This does not mean i disagree with the other areas you mention but their is a tendency for my own sex to scream 'oh poor me im so abused by language' when in fact its one of the few areas thats actually fairly equitable and the offence taken is our choice. (PLEASE NOTE THIS IN NO WAY CONDONES THE THREATS MADE TO MARY BEARD) Incidentally the terms Gay, and Faggot and Pansy have no implication about femininity. I find these arguments a bit silly when there are far more serious things to talk about...it reminds me of the women insisting that male chauvinists force women into high heels.....actually its a fashion we co-opted from men. Who also wore stockings before us. Its about female perception....why is cunt more offensive than prick? Because women choose to say it is.
I couldn't disagree more with your last sentence.
Incidentally, why did you use the word "scream"?
You think 'pansy' doesn't have an implication about femininity?
How did you work that one out then? It's an offensive term for an effeminate/homosexual man. It's offensive because it implies being gay is bad, and bad because it makes men like women.
Cunt isn't more offensive than prick because 'women choose to say it is'. I think you will find that both men and women use that term, and that women aren't solely responsible for the evolution of language.
Having a go at women for being 'manly' or 'sitting like a man' is slightly different to calling a man effeminate..
It's holding women to a standard of behaviour that is deemed wrong for men, and suggests women are not entitled to the same privileges as men- sitting comfortably, going without make up etc..
Also men who are effeminate are told to stop it because other men don't like it. Whereas unladylike women are told to stop it because men won't like it .
You don't seem to like women very much Susan.
Ariel, I think youll find the word scream has nothing to do with gender either. I use it in the same sense ill use it about a child having an illogical tantrum. Incidentally ive accused men of screaming too. Im so glad you disagree with the last sentence, perhaps you'd actually care to say why rather than just stating something? I had hoped to find some reasoned debate on this board.
LRD pansy is a flower, why would assume it has anything to do with women? Ah...its because you view flowers as effeminate......how incredibly sexist of you. ....note that the sexism in the assumption is yours and not mens. Again thats your decision. Ill take this further because i think you may actually be looking to debate.....I have never heard a man say that prick is less offensive than cunt. Offence is taken by someone it can't be 'given', YOU have to be offended, YOU said that cunt was more offensive YOU are a WOMAN, you have not otherwise justified your view that this is the case in any way you have simply started it as a false given. YOU have CHOSEN to find it more offensive than prick, cock or dick.....You a WOMAN are then telling ME also a WOMAN that i should find it more offensive...you then seem outraged that I disagree, I call both men and women cunts and dicks equality is the aim......do you have a single logical reasoned justification for your view? If we constantly seek out examples of how terribly unfair things are that blatantly are not we will always feel oppressed....
Felicity. SO let me get this straight its OK to call a woman butch as an insult but its abhorrent for men to call a man effeminate because.....erm.....youve decided that you know how men think and are therfore basing this around your assumption of a male mindset.........yes.......explanation of your point would be great.
Abigail, that is clearly the comment of someone who disagrees with me but cant express herself in any convincing way and is seeking a blanket slur on me as a poster instead. I do report deliberate personal attacks kindly engage properly with the discussion or cease posting.
Oh ... you're trying to be funny.
I can't be bothered. I tried, as did others more than I did actually, to have reasoned debate yesterday before the thread was derailed by morons. I shouldn't have commented again.
But you don't hear the word "scream" used about blacks, Jews, gays etc when they are discussing oppression. It would be incredibly offensive. Nor do you hear men described as screaming when they are debating something.
I agree with Abigail. You don't seem to like women much.
Incidentally, there is a bold and italics option if you'd like to emphasise something.
Oh don't be silly. Of course calling somebody a cunt is more offensive Han calling somebody a prick or a dick. Anybody with the slightest grasp of English swear words, or who has ever discussed appropriate use of language with a teenager knows that!
Another derail. I do so wonder why!
'And I can't actually bring to mind a case when a man has been the object of public vitriol without having done something more than expressing a reasonably mainstream opinion'
That would be because you don't look for it, however you look pretty hard for grievances against women. And men tend to not make a fuss generally.
Mary Beard was pretty dignified in her response, far more dignified than the responses of others.
I had hoped to find some reasoned debate on this board.
Rude and patently not true.
Felicity. SO let me get this straight its OK to call a woman butch as an insult but its abhorrent for men to call a man effeminate
Nope not what I think, or incidentally what I said.
because.....erm.....youve decided that you know how men think and are therfore basing this around your assumption of a male mindset
Constant ''....... '' Rude and patronising to boot.
No I have offered an explanation of the way I believe society thinks. Happy to accept different viewpoints on this, but it is my opinion of the way society functions in this respect. Based both on experience and reading on the subject.
.........yes.......explanation of your point would be great.
I will offer further explanation if you go back and read the original and post questions that demonstrate you have both read my post and have stopped deliberately misunderstanding me/being rude. HTH.
'men tend not to make a fuss'
That 'clunk' you're hearing is several million women falling off their chairs laughing.
"And I can't actually bring to mind a case when a man has been the object of public vitriol without having done something more than expressing a reasonably mainstream opinion. *And even then, the public vitriol is never of such an overtly violent and sexual nature.*"
If you're going to C&P me, sigmunde, at least do it properly. I've added the important sentence you left out.
Could you find me some examples, then?
'That 'clunk' you're hearing is several million women falling off their chairs laughing.'
Several feminists, leave the rest of us out of it.
I'm SICK of people derailing this thread! This thread was created to talk about misogyny and problems women face. If you are so concerned about "men's right and problems", create a separate thread! Can't we have a thread about misogyny without the 'men get it just as bad!' crowd getting involved?
No no...we are all on the floor...its just you, still sitting
Men tend not to make a fuss? Search for 'Men's rights' on Reddit and then speak to me.
"And men tend to not make a fuss generally."
yeah, that's a thing. Bloody fussy women.
You didn't need to add the rest of your post seeker, I'm sure people managed to read it in full the first time around.
'And even then, the public vitriol is never of such an overtly violent and sexual nature'
How would you know? Have you looked?
Isn't Pansy also a woman's name, therefore its logically associated with females rather than males. Unless, of course, you know several blokes with that name?
'Can't we have a thread about misogyny without the 'men get it just as bad!' crowd getting involved?'
This has been done to death, but just in case you missed it, this is a public forum. Public, not private. In other words, people can talk aboutanything, sorry.
We know that sig. We're wondering why they bother. HTH.
SigmundFraude Just because people can talk about anything, doesn't mean they should, sorry.
'No no...we are all on the floor'
Right, so during a public lecture about, say, space, would you stand there going "NO BUT THE SUN ISN'T MADE OF GAS, IT'S SOLID I KNOW BECAUSE IT JUST IS BECAUSE BECAUSE WAAAAAAH?"
You want a thread about men's rights, go right on and start one and the feminists promise to not go there. It can be all about how men have it way way harder and yet never make a fuss about it.
PS, if men never make a fuss, what about MLK? Bob Crow? Are they just making a fuss, or are their fights more important to you, Sigmund?
Is that the first time Bob Crow and MLK have been compared? Crow would be crowing with delight.
Even with the derailing and the Deletions this has been a very interesting thread, thanks Seeker
LRD - I know, it's terrible, all these misogynistic women talking about men's problems, it's not like they have any eh?
The thing is, Sigmund, you never come across as if you're arguing your corner. It's just defensive and reactive. It doesn't seem like you ever have any evidence or as if you've really thought about these issues, so it's really easy to dismiss you.
I'd far rather have it out with someone who actually has an opinion. I've clashed with WorraLiberty loads of times about breast-feeding/porn/shaving legs but I can actually be arsed with her, because she has her stance and she's prepared to defend it.
Not just "BIG MEAN FEMINISTS, BE QUIET."
Like I said, Mary Beard had dignity. The irony of all this is the absolute slating she got on FWR, you weren't so keen then. She serves a purpose now though, doesn't she.
SigmundFraude Sure, men have problems. Black men have problems to do with race, gay men have problems to do with sexuality. However, women have FAR FAR more problems exclusive to gender than men do and that's what this thread is about.
Yes, you clearly know me well Holy Fool.
You say it exists, sigmunde, you show it to me. I can't find any. I can't prove it doesn't exist, because you can't prove a negqtive. But with a few clicks of a mouse I can find loads of vile, violent, sexual anti woman stuff. Show me the same sort of thing directed at men, and I will be as outraged on their behalf as you are. But I need to see it first.
Trust me, Sigmund, I remember you well because you always do this. Argue and argue and argue and then in...ooooh, 37-odd minutes you'll do a massive flounce.
You'll probably even end up in flouncers' corner.
You know that you can dislike Mary Beard and yet still defend her, right? I hate Thatcher, but I'd still defend her against all misogynistic comments.
Good God, we don't agree with every single Mary Beard says
What hypocrites we must be.
every single thing, that should have been....
Do you know what, if you look for misogyny, you'll find it. If you devote your life to looking for misogyny, it's all you will ever see.
I don't have to say much at all to be jumped upon, I think that speaks volumes really.
'You know that you can dislike Mary Beard and yet still defend her, right?'
Of course, but don't pretend it's for her benefit, it's not, it's for yours.
So what, Sigmund? Some people will defend in a self-interested way, some for the good of women in general. Is that such a big deal? You're very rarely going to find anyone acting against self-interest.
Of COURSE I benefit when men don't post pictures of other women's faces on genitals. So does Mary Beard. It's all good, in my opinion.
And yeah, if you start looking for misogyny, you find it. Of course. That doesn't mean it's not there.
'Do you know what, if you look for misogyny, you'll find it.'
No shit, Sherlock.
What did you think, we were all unconvinced of the existence of misogyny but were going on a bear hunt to find it?
I do wonder why there's never any threads on MN about how racism doesn't exist and it's all in people's heads or how homophobia doesn't exist and the gays just want to stop making such a fuss.
It really saddens me, actually.
Er, it saddens me that people say misogyny doesn't exist, that is...not that there's no threads saying racism doesn't!
You know what I'm talking about LRD. It distorts a persons view until misogyny is ALL they see. It's all you see, and that's a real shame. Your glass isn't half empty, it's permanently empty.
I have achieved clairvoyance? How exciting!
But no, sorry, no idea what you're talking about.
I think perhaps your view is becoming distorted, until you think everyone sees what you see.
But misogyny ISN'T all I see. A lot of the time, I see no misogyny.
Not sure how that works if sometimes I see it and sometimes I don't.
It's almost as if every situation has to be taken on its own merits.
'I have achieved clairvoyance? How exciting!'
You see misogyny everywhere, it's pretty much all you ever talk about.
'Er, it saddens me that people say misogyny doesn't exist'
I don't think many people say it doesn't exist.
OK, seriously, that it's not in the things I see it in. Split hairs if you like.
This is a fascinating ( and worrying ) thread.
I do not need to be convinced about casual, 'throwaway' misogyny. DH worked most of his life in an all-male environment and the stuff he used to tell me about what the blokes talked about was quite horrifying - and he didn't tell me the worst stuff.
I met a lot of these guys and they appeared to be ordinary, not obviously sleazy or weird.They were mostly husbands and fathers BTW, not single and not young.
It made me realise that any random bloke you meet, however pleasant seeming could potentially talk about women in an unpleasant/sexist/demeaning way.
I do not mean to say that all men do this, just that you can't tell from talking to an individual man and it happens a lot more than ever I used to think.
Yes, it's pretty much all I talk about, sig. I never post about anything else, and my entire life is taken up with preparing for the revolution.
(I never thought I'd be glad to point out I can also bore for England about dyslexia, arcane etymologies, medieval women, history teaching, quilting, the West Wing, and languages.)
Sorry, JustA...that 'see misogyny in everything' post was for LRD.
'I do wonder why there's never any threads on MN about how racism doesn't exist and it's all in people's heads or how homophobia doesn't exist and the gays just want to stop making such a fuss.'
JustAHolyFool, I think if MN had existed 20 or 30 years ago there would have been such threads, about racism at any rate. I definitely remember hearing people insist it was mostly in people's minds.
LOL Sigmund I think it says more about the threads you read than what LRD talks about most of the time.
Pretty much all Sigmund ever talks about is how feminists are wrong. I wonder why that is. Never seen him in any of the other topics I frequent.
OK LRD. Whenever I see you on MN, misogyny is pretty much all you talk about.
Medieval women and quilting are quite interesting.
I think that's because you post such a lot in FWR, sig. Funnily enough, we do talk about misogyny in there.
Maybe if you tried out some of the other sections of the site more often, you'd discover other topics?
'Never seen him in any of the other topics I frequent'.
You are incredibly rude, not least because you are using the term 'he' as an insult. I have more than one username, along with many others on here who have different usernames, So it's not that unusual that you haven't seen me on any other topics.
I haven't posted in FWR for ages. Check my history.
Mary Beard was full of shit on QT, telling a woman in Lincolnshire she knew more about what was happening in the town she lived in because she had "read a report" by some academic. People like her really get up my nose, which isn't to say she deserves all the abuse she's getting but what does she expect when she treats people with contempt?
Crikey! 183 posts in FWR. And you're talking about feminism all over Dadsnet and AIBU and Chat too.
You do seem to have it on the brain, sig, for someone who claims it's all other people see.
Maybe you secretly want to join us?
No, I'm using it because I thought you were a man. Apologies if I was wrong.
that + my making the same assumption about you as you make about LRD = incredibly rude? How do you work that one out?
Harriet35 I don't think that's a great argument. She might spout shite (I don't know, I don't know anything about her) but that doesn't mean she deserves abuse.
If I talk crap, and I'm sure I do, I'd rather people just argued with me rather than saying they want to rape me/saying I look like a vagina.
No, you did not think I was a man. I have said enough times that I'm not. If you knew so much about me, as you claim to, you'd know that.
How many posts have you made in FWR LRD? Hardly comparable. Anyhow, as I said, I haven't posted there for ages.
sig, I'm a feminist. I know it's really cleverly hidden, but the clue is in my name.
Where did you expect me to post?
I did think you were a man, Sigmund, no matter how much you may rage about it. As I said, terribly sorry if I was wrong. It happens.
This is being seriously derailed. Who cares whether LRD posts exclusively in FWR or not? What difference does it make? I post exclusively on MN, is that not allowed?
I expect you to post in FWR.
I've only just seen this thread and it's been ruined as usual by the mass deletions and the usual derailments. Ages ago I was on a thread in Site Stuff supporting what I thought was a brilliant suggestion that if someone gets deleted three times on one thread they are barred from posting on it again. But nothing seems to have been done and for latecomers, this thread is impossible to read.
In answer to the OP, the reason some women collude with misogyny is a mixture of sheer selfishness, being hard of thinking, dislike of/competitiveness with women and also because they have fallen for all the propaganda about feminism equating to man-hating. But I often think that the views here are especially entrenched because of old grievances towards feminist posters and that these posters would be very different if they met a real-life feminist, instead of getting a very one-dimensional view of the world from one website they appear to be addicted to.
Excellent, glad we got that cleared up, now shall we get back to the subject?
By all means, but you're not in FWR.
Indeed. It's almost like you were wrong, isn't it?
This topic should be in FWR.
I just 'looked for misogyny' on a search engine. searchnu.com/
I typed 'women' and then I typed 'men'.
Seek and ye shall find.
It's an AIBU, sig.
You yourself talk about feminism all over MN, so I'm not sure why everyone else shouldn't.
army - that is really depressing.
No I don't talk about feminism, I talk about men's rights. Can I just say, Caitlin Moran is the closest to a funny feminist I've heard. I'd leave her to it.
And you not even a man. Well done.
No this should NOT be in FWR.
Why on earth should an important issue like this be compartmentalised like that?
Can't say I like Caitlin Moron to much, disagree with a lot of what she says, especially when she said "she couldn't give a shit" about the lack of WOC portrayed on television.
Sigmunde- had you considered asking MNHQ for a "men's rights" topic?
Yes, Caitlin Moran is funny (actually she's not, but let's say she is) so no-one else can be a funny feminist. Goddit?
Same way that like John Cleese is funny, so you can't have any other funny men. It's the rule. One of one thing and no more. It's like Noah's Ark, except one less.
It's taken me bloody ages to read the entire thread, which has been really interesting despite some rather unintelligent and old, clichéd derailments thrown in.
I think what depresses me is the devaluing of women that is perpetuated completely subconsciously by some actually very nice men. Not because they want to put women down (most would be horrified if this was pointed out to them), but simply because since the moment of their birth they have been socialised into viewing women as an extension, or derivative, of men.
An example from just this week from a lovely, lovely man commenting on long-term spinsterhood, "That would have been such a waste". When questioned as to why, the answer was "Because you have such a lot to give to someone" [i.e. a man]. This was meant as a compliment, and taken in the spirit in which it was given, but how bloody depressing. It isn't enough for a woman to be interesting and loving to friends and family - all that is wasted if she doesn't give it to a man.
Ok this is going to sound really weird, and I know I'll get some hate for this, but I got to where I am today (Fairly large home, good income, large family) using this "misogynistic" system. The whole trick to it is that some men DO think women are inferior and a bit ditzy and stupid, and then, they let their guard down about you, and you can do a massive power climb before they've even realized it. My current position is based on my old boss thinking I was in need of help from my male colleagues, who were all lazy and did none of the work. I then got promoted and I'm actually above the bastard now in the company And it's all because he underestimated what I could and would do, no doubt if he'd realized he would have taken the credit. Sometimes you can turn their prejudices around against them. It's not allways a bad thing.
I see your point, Dahlen but I think that would be said about men as well. Women do often say (grimly homophobically) that a hot gay guy is "a waste".
'And you not even a man. Well done.'
I have 2 young sons. I know the idea of women giving a toss about their children's future rights wouldn't cross your mind, due to the fact that they're male n' all, but I'm far from alone, despite of your assumptions that I am. I talk to other mothers of sons a fair bit.
Yes, seeker, I asked a quite a while ago. The answer was no.
Slippery yes, but it's hardly the point of feminism, is it? I have no desire to join their little boys' club because they actually think I'm dim but I sneak in through the back door. I want the world to be better for all women, whether they are able to play the system or not.
JustAHolyFool - exactly. No one has a problem accepting that a statement like that about gay men is homophobic. THe same said about a heterosexual woman is just accepted.
Sigmund, I really doubt that the women on here with sons "don't give a toss" about their futures.
Dahlen still, I think it would be a applied to hetero guys too. Leastways, I've heard it said often.
That's really disturbing, dahlen.
I do think there is more of an attitude that a single woman is a 'waste'. I've heard far more stuff about single men getting to live the good life, sleep around, etc. etc. It's bizarre that the terminology some people use about 'my wife, the old ball and chain' (yes, I've got a specific acquaintance in mind ) doesn't tally up at all with what people report about how they actually feel.
Married men report being the happiest, and married women the least happy.
One of the most misunderstood tenets of feminism is that men are massively disadvantaged by a patriarchical society too.
So yes, I do worry about my sons being brought up in a patriarchical society but I know what the enemy is and it's definitey not feminism.
I thought the whole point of being a feminist is to have equal rights to men.
So how can we have equal rights to men without male rights.
No that's not the point of feminism. Not sure how often that needs to be explained.
For anyone wondering the definition of feminism is to end the systematic oppression of women (well, most people's definition, there is not only one definition)
So it's about women rights not equality
So what do feminist want to happen, what is the agenda.
I am trying to learn about feminism. So this thread is helping my understanding.
McNewPants Fighting for women's right will contribute to equality (though i do believe men and women will never be "equal" in sense and equality will never be achieved, sadly)
I think men already have most of the rights.
"Mens Rights" section on MN? That's an entertaining prospect.
It would be quickest car crash in internet history. Once known of it would attract every on-line knuckle-dragger on the WWW ( and some 'FRA' to explain how women have it much worse), and HQ would have to invest in a much more robust Big Red Button. It wouldn't happen, and one can see why.
Besides we already have the over-exercised Dadsnet.
Rebecca West said "I have never been sure what a feminist is. I only know that I am called one when I express views that distinguish me from a doormat"
Or words to that effect.
OK, sigmunde, I'll bite.
What rights do you want to win for men?
That's an interesting question, because I can't think of any.
Perhaps for me to understand more I need to be told what women are fighting for.
I am not blaming my age (27) or my upbringing but my father has always encouraged me to follow my dreams and supported and encourage me.
McNewPants This might help http://whoneedsfeminism.tumblr.com/#
Thank you. Can someone do a clicky as I on my phone
There you go
I was smacked around the face are today by an atrocious act of misogyny by a work colleague.
If I try to challenge then I'll be told I'm too sensitive and I need to toughen up as I have been previously. It's wearing me down.
FFS when is it going to change?
Pessimistic - you mean actually physically assaulted today?
I think some women don't acknowledge misogyny because they have internalised the patriarchal bs so totally that they believe it to be good.
Also, and I know I shouldn't do this but hey, Sig, I have a son and I see no value in engaging with MRA stuff for him as all I would be doing is continuing to perpetrate the idea that his value resides in his maleness when actually it resides in his essential self, his behaviour, his kindness, and his respect of others. I want my son to be a man who is secure enough in his own value and respectful enough of women to be a Feminist
ediblewoman You sound like a fantastic mother
I started this thread, and now I can see why I started it.
It's normally only 1 brother that walks me home, I suppose it was because I was seen as the weaker sex.
I think the penny is dropping.