Something that's been bothering me

People get challenged all over Mumsnet. It's only the feminism section that gets a hard time for it generally.

Mumsnet is a robust place, that's its culture - it's not limited to the feminist section.

I didn't see this question as deliberately antagonistic. I saw it as sexist, which it was.

If feminists don't get annoyed at sexism and challenge it, who will?

Hi Purple. I am a man, fairly new to here, and I was pointed in the direction of here;

finallyfeminism101.wordpress.com/

I know you asked for a thread on here specifically, but I wouldn't feel qualified to start one. Some of the antagonism on here is because, as this blog says, basic questions can sometimes be perceived as deliberately antagonistic rather than just a lack of knowledge. However, many of the posters on here - the large majority - are pretty fair if you have shown that at least you have done a bit of prior research. A bit like attempting schoolkid French when on holiday - it charms the native speakers . Anyway, good luck. I hope it helps.

Thanks InAny :) I will be reading through those. I wish we could have a sticky thread.

I have no idea why anyone would think it patronising to have such a thread. We all have to start somewhere.

Sorry, very much off topic there but I didn't want to start a thread about a thread.

Would any of you be interested in starting some sort of "Feminism For Beginners" thread? Somewhere that people like mumwithdice can come on and ask a question with the admission that she isn't sure about something and would like to talk about it?

I understand we all need to do our own research and that no one pandered the more experienced of you but I think this board is a real resource and has many lurkers who want to get in there to talk and debate with you guys but don't want to come across as foolish.

All feminists start off somewhere and it would be great if we beginners could ask our (painfully obvious but necessary! :o) questions and be pointed in the right direction by you guys without worrying.

Just a thought!

Well certainly I'm another one who thinks that being blunt on the internet is in no way comparable to excluding people and discriminating against them by employing the constructions of an oppressive society. That strikes me as a pretty outrageous thing to say TBH.

I really really don't like it when people do that to a feminist who is speaking out against sexism.

I'm also cautious about thinking that women have never had it better. That seems like a naive thing to say considering the current pornification of society, the flourishing sex industry, the ostracising of radical feminism, single mothers and lesbian women. Plus the feminization of poverty, gendercide and the situation of women of colour and women outwith the west.

In the west we have made some gains but we sure as hell are being made to pay for it.

Thanks for posting Lorde's whole piece IAOS.

This is the last paragraph:

"Racism and homophobia are real conditions of all our lives in this place and
time. I urge each one of us here to reach down into that deep place of
knowledge inside herself and touch that terror and loathing of any
difference that lives there. See whose face it wears. Then the personal as
the political can begin to illuminate all our choices."

She was talking about racism and homophobia. I don't think her words should be taken and used for other agendas. It's wrong.

The man with the sexist views from the OP came and posted here. My reaction to what the OP said was not incorrect.

Rather than talking about that, we've taken this into the realms of abstract.

It's still about women, not how men behave. We have direct examples here of male sexism, it would be better to deal with them.

Totally agree with Beachcomber and Nyac. Beachcomber's last post really resonates for me. Sorry I can't contribute anything more insightful!

I think we are making progress, just not enough. Has there ever been a better time to be born a woman?

one of the key next battles is to get sexism taken as seriously as racism.

And just look at how many women criticise Harriet Harman. No doubt those women think women should be sorting out patriarchy's issues, and not waiting around for a man to do it, but when a woman does actually try to do that they crucify her.

Such is the nature of oppression unfortunately. It is a powerful thing and not to be underestimated.

I agree with you sAf. It is not feminists who put women's issues in a box. Society puts women's issues in a box marked 'back of the queue' and feminists are the ones who try to do something about those issues.

Often whilst being criticised and snarked at by the very people those issues concern.

As has been said before on this thread - if you want to know what happens when a woman asks society to give some real attention to women's rights just look at how Harriet Harman has been treated.

If HH had been a man bringing those issues to the fore he would have been applauded by all and sundry and probably be running the god-damn party. Harriet is vilified and has to sit quietly whilst a man with less experience than her takes lead.

Asking women to sort out the problems of patriarchy is like asking black people to dismantle apartheid. We will only be allowed to have that happen if those who hold the power decide so.

It is naive to the extreme to suggest otherwise. Just look at the current backlash. Just look at how gains we thought were secured are under attack currently.

This thread has made me despair TBH.

oh i missed a page somehow

agree with you sunshine on it being society that minimises problems as 'women's' when in fact they are societal problems, especially given how funnily enough we ARE society not some ghetto land outside of it. i think it's weird to accuse feminists of being the ones who do that when they clearly, imo, do the opposite.

it's not feminists who put our problems into a little box rather than see it as a problem for society.

it is patriarchy that does that - re: childcare=woman's problem stick it in a little box marked women and children, not real citizens.

or violent assaults - a problem for society surely? not if it happens in your home and it's a man doing it to his partner then we get a special little box label called 'domestic violence'.

feminists try to take awful injustices swept under the rug as just a 'woman's problem' and put them in the light and reframe them as societal problems.

so i'm afraid your points there are utter shite hmm.

dust - i think this is where sunshine's critical mass point comes in because you can't do it on your own. i reckon we're back to (and will need to be again and again) needing consciousness raising. backlash has hit young women hard imo.

Sorry, got to go and collect a child from a party.
Goodnight, it has been very interesting.

And I agree with your last post sunshine, it's hard to see the atrophy sometimes.
To walk into a toy shop and see banks of pink and blue, to turn on the TV and catch a flash of reality tv or the emaciated bodies of those that set the fashion.

Yes ... I meant your post made perfect sense, sunshine ... oh, lord, I'm digging a hole deeper aren't I?!

dust - sorry, possibly I am missing something, but I don't understand why you're responding to me and talking about women waiting for men to end the patriarchy?

On the subject of 'liberation' (or 'empowerment' for that matter): I think it is crucial to recognize that not all women can 'liberate' or 'empower' themselves.

The way I look at it is this: any time any woman makes a step against the patriarchy (however small or personal), that is a thing to celebrate and I do believe it is an achievement for all women. But that doesn't mean women who don't do those things are to blame for the patriarchy continuing to exist, or that in celebrating one woman's achievements against the patriarchy, we're necessarily denigrating everyone else.

Me saying 'I haven't given up' was a response to Doomcats:

'That doesn't mean the premise is wrong, though. I think we all agree it's depressing when feminism doesn't make as much headway as we'd like, but that's no reason to give up.'

Apologies for the terrible mixing of metaphors there.

Where have I said women have given up? The first and second paragraphs of my 23.49 post was all about how women are actively fighting this.

I agree that many of feminism's problems are society's problems. Perhaps we're approaching this from opposite sides of the fence. I think one of patriarchy's greatest tricks is to paint women's problems as something that affects a minority, when in fact women make up just over half the population and therefore women are society.

I'm also the sort of person who supports co-operation and carrot before stick, but sometimes it is necessary to remove the gloves. I'm pretty sure that long before the term feminism was even coined there were women who were more than a little pissed off at their lot in life because they were women. We've had millennia with very little change if you really think about it. Which isn't defeatist, nor does it fail to celebrate the wonderful advances that have already been made; it simply acknowledges that given the timescale a lot more should have been achieved and would have been if it wasn't actively being fought against in many areas.

I actually meant my post made no sense because I didn't refresh before I posted.

I think what I'd like to see is more pressure put on those in leading positions to lead by example. But as long as governments don't see the value in ensuring a certain proportion of their politicians are female I can't see how other male-dominated environments can be expected to follow suit. What bothers me is that not only do I think this is perfectly possible, I suspect that they are aware of it and have just chosen not to do it.