To be utterly disgusted and depressed that women think its ok to make small penis gags?

Ok OP - you're allowed to be angry about one specific thing, but did you realise that your choice of language (the 'Can you imagine...') bit was sort of suggesting that women don't put up with similar? Can't you see that?

The war/famine stuff is irrelevant, because - well they're obviously irrelevant, but also you didn't imply a denial of them.

Merchant
Your take on the handmaiden controversy is perfectly valid of course. You're not the only one who's read the book though! And sometimes words and phrases gain/shed layers of meaning when they emerge from literature...

It's dubious whether anybody using 'handmaiden' as a derogatory term has bothered to read the book (or even the title).

Essentially, (sorry to prolong this element of the discussion), hasn't 'handmaid' become a way of naming female misogynists? So, instead of just going for the gender neutral 'misogynist' there's an added layer of "you're a woman so you should know better than to spout this misogyny". Can it still be a misogynistic term, simply because it's sex-specific?

Handmaid and Handmaiden are misogynist insults. They are used to dismiss the voices of other women by making out that they are too stupid and or brainwashed to be able to form any meaningful views of their own.
Clap as i can't use that emoticon on here!

It's ok op, no ofcourse you don't
I'm so sorry for how your son is feeling!
Any body shaming is wrong, no buts

Dione Yes, body shaming is wrong regardless etc - but we've sort of covered that.

What are your thoughts on the reasons I suggested for the unease on this thread?

Your take on the handmaiden controversy is perfectly valid of course. You're not the only one who's read the book though! And sometimes words and phrases gain/shed layers of meaning when they emerge from literature...

You should check it out Dixie, it's a brilliant book.

Well, she didn't have to mention her son. She did it fairly early on (before the thread 'went' a particular way), but, crucially, after the slightly anti-women tone had been set.

It would have been possible to start a sensitive thread about a sensitive issue without either mentioning her son OR starting from a 'women don't know suffering' stance.

Body shaming is wrong, regardless of the sex of the person being targeted.

Handmaid and Handmaiden are misogynist insults. They are used to dismiss the voices of other women by making out that they are too stupid and or brainwashed to be able to form any meaningful views of their own.

As PPs have pointed out, it refers to the book A Handmaid's Tale by Margaret Atwood. The Handmaid of the novel is a reproductive slave who has lost everything and become the property of an official in a totalitarian system. She is shunned by other classes of women in the system and is saddened that the women in different groups have lost the ability to empathise with each other. That is what I find ironic about the use of Handmaid as an insult from anyone who calls themselves feminist. Or claims to have read the book.

I've given this topic a lot of thought over the past few hours, and I've concluded a few things.

But first, I am so sorry your son is going through this OP. It sounds deeply traumatic, and of course anyone else's suffering doesn't make it better.

I was trying to work out why some of us were a bit piqued by the subject, from a feminist standpoint. And, with respect OP, I think it was due to the 'Can you imagine...' bit in your first post. What I'm saying is, if you'd simply explained your son's situation, or even that of a 'close male friend' I think the response would have been very different. The starting point, however, had a distinct aroma of 'those bloody feminists wouldn't put up with this the other way round.' Now, I know OP didn't say that, but what else was the significance of the 'Can you imagine..' bit? There is a sort of goadiness implicit here, I'm afraid, even if that wasn't the intention. And, of course, many women don't have to 'imagine' this sort of shaming! That's the point!

I get that you're angry and upset OP, and that you weren't trying to goad anyone. But that starting point has an anger against outraged women in it. Women are very often outraged by equivalent body-shaming behaviour - with great justification!

It's not possible within our culture to start a gendered body-shaming thread without acknowledging the climate in which we live. You can't start a thread in a vacuum. The fact is, women do put up with a hell of a lot more of this shit than men do. If OP had started with a tone of 'Look, I know women are often upset by body-shaming, but can we spare a thought for this issue...', I think the thread would have taken a different turn. As it was, we started with a) a reference to a man being an arsehole (just to remind us why women are often angry) and b) a suggestion that women would not put up with equivalent behaviour, when we all know that they do, on a massive scale!

I think the whole 'handmaiden' thing is beyond ridiculous, and has been used as a distraction by some.

Feminism isn't a hobby. People, including me, are still very, very upset by the large-scale sexism they see around them. I wish I didn't see it, but I do, all the time. So I'll see this sort of discussion through that prism. And I'll bite when a discussion starts from a misguided-sounding premise.

I don't think it's misogyny to disagree with other women is it?

That is rather the point of the argument. Chucking "handmaiden" adds about as much as "terf". It's not just disagreeing with other women, it's doing so in a way which seeks to shut down the argument.

And as for the "handmaiden" thing, it's a word with a very specific meaning. Are people saying that the sort of behaviour/attitudes don't exist?

It has a very specific meaning in one dystopian fantasy novel. Has it a universally accepted meaning or is it just like terf? Useful for those who want to use it?

It might apply to say Karen Straughn and her followers (the Honey Badgers I think they call themselves) Are posters on MN who disagree with some of the comments made by some feminists on here in her league? I don't think so.

I think I would be right in saying you would ignore the opinion of anyone who called you a TEEF or a SWERF? I would, and as far as I'm concerned handmaiden is in the same category.

for ops son.

"Not about a 'word'. About the attitude behind the word. It is about the inability of some very prolific mn feminists to accept they can be just as guilty of misogyny as men"

I don't think it's mysogeny to disagree with other women is it? And as for the "handmaiden" thing, it's a word with a very specific meaning. Are people saying that the sort of behaviour/attitudes don't exist?

Let's face it, the only person on this thread who is alienating people is Mercy. Everyone else has explained their stance fairly well, and whether the rest,of us agree with it or not, we can at least understand and accept it.

But lets not pretend that males are bodyshamed more often than females are

Nobody was doing that.

Not about a 'word'. About the attitude behind the word. It is about the inability of some very prolific mn feminists to accept they can be just as guilty of misogyny as men

And of "mensplaining" ; and telling women what they are really thinking.

All body shaming is horrible tbh. But lets not pretend that males are bodyshamed more often than females are. Its almost just a normal part of life to have females appearances commented on...be it they are toof at, too hairy, too pretty (therefore must be a bimbo) and so on.