ZOMBIE THREAD ALERT: This thread hasn't been posted on for a while.
Mumsnet in the news(55 Posts)
There have been several articles in the news, lately (Thanks to Penis-Beaker, no doubt) about Mumsnet regarding members discussing sex and suggesting that it is a negative thing. Why the outrage?! There are hundreds (thousands? millions?) of sites dedicated to Porn, promoting the more misogynistic acts of sex, rating women on their performance in the sex industry. There is porn on the shelf in corner shops and lads mags in supermarkets.
As far as I can tell men of all ages, job descriptions and parental status are allowed to indulge in their base instincts but mum's are not. Bit of a Madonna-Whore complex by the media in general. It's ok to like sex if you are pretty and discussing it in the realm of men, for men, and in a way that men like. But it's not ok for women to discuss sex in a forum mainly frequented by women. Especially one mostly used by mothers.
I just don't get it. There are constant jokes and criticisms about how all mothers lose their libido after children and yet when an opportunity arises to dispel this myth people don't like it. We should all go back to just discussing child-rearing and the many uses of baking soda
So, men can divulge and indulge in deviant ideas but women shouldn't ask their friends if these things are normal...
One article said these things are private but their not really are they? We have sex aimed at us by the advertising industry and media in general but we're not allowed to discuss it? We are supposed to listen to what men and the media want - shave your armpits, wax your genitals, make them smell like flowers, have a skinny waist and massive boobs, make sure they're pushed up and in etc. without checking with other women if they think this is all normal.
The reason all this bugs me so much is because I grew up in this world and my DD is going to have to as well.
I grew up seeing lads mags (and the Sun) on coffee tables read my the fathers of my friends, my brother, all my boyfriends and their friends. Objectification of women was normalised and I suffered for it.
The thing is I look like I turned out ok and I'm sure I did for the most part so people will say "ah well, it didn't do you any harm" but I think it did.
The DM and the Torygraph feel their main readership is the sort of person, who in an ideal world would still live in the perfect village and go to their local CofE church.
Of course the industrial revolution happened and there readers are stuck in suburbia.
But they are still trying to perpetrate the myth that nice people don't talk about the sex they are having. It's OK to speculate about other people's sex lives, but not your own.
Because if everyone talked openly about their own sex lives, if all DCs got decent sex education and sex was just an ordinary part of life, we'd not care about the sex lives of celebs. Teens wouldn't have to seek out porn to answer simple questions (and much of the teen, young people's media is soft porn) and the church wouldn't be able to convinces us sex is dirty.
This makes the media, the church and the establishment in general twitch.
Some EXCELLENT points on this thread. I have talked about my marriage quite a bit on MN.
I was talking to a female friend about my situ yesterday and a bloke friend of hers was earwigging.
He said to me, a. sex isnt everything.
b. Why dont you become an escort if you like sex so much
So what he really meant was.... Sex isnt everything
for women cos they shouldnt like it anyway
And why dont you become an escort
because the mens needs have to be fullfilled
So that is a good example of how womens needs are seen by society.
I was incredibly upset about these comments yesterday but your comments Basil and Starballs put it into even deeper context.
We have a massive Madonna/whore complex in society Its fucking HUGE. And the DM and their ilk are only too happy to feed on it and emphasize it at every turn and every chance they get.
Why is it so wrong for women to talk about our needs. Im so sick of some ppl as seeing women as either virgins or whores. I had a cry about it because its so bloody depressing.
Thanks for these posts Basil and Starballs You have articulated it so well
It's all very interesting isn't it ?
Several recent articles, the DM with Jenni Murray, The Independent (lost innocence of journalist ), and The Observer (most balanced, "And you're shocked ?" - also on Guardian website)
I was most shocked by the lack of integrity of Jenni Murray. I thought she'd stick up for women and mothers, and was disappointed that she sold out to the DM.
At the risk of being picky and a rule-breaker, I notice that the INdy whine cites a poster who has been banned, so he's found quite an old thread to moan about. (No, nothing to do with Anyfucker).
picking on the conception thread is insensitive and pathetic.
that tosser should be ashamed of himself.
and for that Jenni woman - if she's wearing het eyebrows as a hairband over the weirdest places that people have sex she is probably in the wrong job.
anyway, 20 threads in a month with explicit content - MN is slow, we must do better!
I think (hope?) it's a silly 5 minute wonder during a slow news week.
After all 'adults are interested in all sorts of things, including sex, and can talk about them in whatever terms they like' isn't really incisive news, is it?
'Sold out' is right, Juggling. It seems that a number of female writers have done that...Samantha Brick, Liz Jones, of course are the two obvious woman haters (dressed up in the sheep's cloak of feminism). I like to think they are desperate for money and totally hard up...but really I know they are fame mongers who want to be talked about, and will sell their souls to the devil to achieve that.
Sad, sad, sad. And a huge betrayal of women.
One of the journalists is on MN now on the Chat thread.
and he is digging himself deeper into the pit of stupid
That was like a car crash. He just dismissed everything everyone said and finished by throwing in an insult from his ludicrous friend.
Hideous, insidious little man.
Digging himself deeper into the pit of stupid - Love it.
I thought this article on Mumsnet - someone mentioned it earlier - made some good points about the other coverage of Mumsnet recently in the media.
Yes, there is some sense of proportion in that article Ruby.
I was involved in the chat with the journalist who wrote the Indie article too and he said that it was intended as humorous. He also refutes that his article is in any way irresponsible, slap-dash or misogynistic. I think this tells me everything I need to know. I think he is genuinely ignorant to what he has done and of course it's my sense if humour failure that is at fault.
Hear hear Bear. I had a few things to say too. I grew very weary of yet another man-ostrich.
This is the problem. I'm sure if I met him in a normal situation in RL before the article I'd have thought he was a nice guy: funny, probably quite like a lot of my mates - educated, liberal, certainly not a woman-hater! And he can't understand why he writes a tongue-in-cheek lighthearted, fluffy article like this and a load of crazy loons who are professionally offended and take things too seriously all pile in on him. But all I see now is how normal it is to be casually sexist. Without meaning to be. Without meaning to cause offence. He is totally unable to accept that what he did was wrong, to think about it in any broader context. He wont learn anything from this - except not to cross the MN nutters again. Which I find supremely sad.
Sorry - MN nutters, fuckwits and tedious fools.
Message withdrawn at poster's request.
As ever, the comments below that Barbara Ellen article represent precisely the mindset she's describing. They can be summed up as:
- no-one cares about what mothers think, all they ever think about are daytime telly and their brats
- no-one cares about Mumsnet, they are all manhaters
- no-one cares about Mumsnet, they use abbreviations and therefore are all simple-minded
Oddly, the fact that they've all clicked on the article, read it and avidly commented on it makes the "no-one cares" line ring a little hollow.
The reaction by Tom Peck is a textbook reaction to being called on his words.
Agree. He's probably always thought of himself as a nice guy who likes feisty women, but has subconsciously fallen into a whole loads of sexist ways of thinking (pretty common for loads of men and women who live in a sexist society). Now that one of these ways of thinking has been pointed out to him, his head has exploded and he's decided to fight tooth & nail to retain his self-image.
Which means demonising hundreds (if not thousands) of women as professionally offended manhaters who couldn't POSSIBLY have a point.
Agreed on him probably being a fairly alright human being, but he's backed himself into a corner now just by being so defensive and arrogant that his position is the correct one and we are all hysterical wimmen.
A little bit of humility would go a long way.
Someone wants to write yet another article about this
Join the discussion
Please login first.