Something that's been bothering me

I've been around a while sm, and you and I have blethered on occasion.
Only I've namechanged a few times because I don't want to be easily identified IRL.
Somehow if I give out all my previous names and so am able to be pigeonholed correctly, that would make Nyac happier. But I don't want to.
So I'll just wait until someone else comes along who can think of a better way of changing the current status quo of our society than asking men to change and leaving it at that.
I don't mind who I talk to, perhaps SAF or KRITIQ will have some ideas.

good grief,what a strange outburst
do you often feel got at or attacked?

OK.

I pointed out a few sly attacks you made on me. Definitely a chip.

Conversation over until you say who you are.

Nyac, I don't have a chip on my shoulder about anyone on this site, why would I?
I don't know you as a person, and I sometimes disagree with your arguments, that is as far as it goes.
In the same way that if you do choose to ignore me, I won't mind either. I'll just ask the question again and someone else will answer.

but you're avowedly one sided nyac
given your view of men as oppressive etc and sweeping generalizations you make.you have a one world view,and don't reckon women capable of challenging patriarchy.as that's the men's remit to challenge?

"you won't tell me who you are"

What an odd thing to say. Is she supposed to send you a fax of her passport?

Feminism hasn't just been asking. But you know that don't you.

What would you suggest?

Actually I don't know why I'm talking to you. You've got a chip on your shoulder about me and you won't tell me who you are. Not really into one-sided BS like that.

Is that why you are so angry?

are you really so defeatist?only men can initiate change?
patriarchy is multifaceted and benefits some women who actively participate in it.it's not as straight cut as it's menz rules,they need to fix it

Why would an individual choose to change a system that benefits them, especially if they don't believe it is an unequal system?
You truly believe that all women can do is ask men to change
And keep asking for the next century? Or three?

Feminism has worked pretty well doing that.

What would you suggest?

The only people who can change patriarchy are men. It's their system. They run it.

Do you believe that pointing out men's sexist behaviour to them is the most efficient way of changing things? Seems to be a slow process, we've been saying it for over a century and things still aren't right.

Women act, and men benefit do they?

I think it's men who act actually. They created sexism, they perpetuate it. Handy to have the women "acting up" to blame though.

We need to stop their sexist behaviour. Pointing it out and acknowledging it is the first step. Like I did on this thread. Which I got a really hard time for.

'The workplace, perhaps with a few exceptions, is institutionally sexist. The reason that is, is the men who hold the power in most workplaces don't want that to change and systematically discriminate against women in a variety of ways.'

So how to effect change? How to enable women to refuse to act up to the expected stereotype? How do we stop men from benefiting from a patriarchal structure designed to support them?

Presumably we could wait for men to wake up and say
'Hang on, I'm in a position of great privilege and the world is exactly how I like it, and I can get away with all sorts of discriminatory behaviour, and be paid more and own the world. Well, that's not fair...'
A few men might indeed become individuals who see things from a feminist perspective, but I doubt the majority would.
Or is there a better way than to wait for the oppressor to lift his boot?
Instead of yelling 'It's not fair' and getting a shrug in return, or indifference because it doesn't affect them in the same way.

you have a monomaniacal view of men as oppressors nyac
and I fear you won't be open to any debate or dialogue that doesn't adhere to your view. no doubt you dismiss other views as what about da menz or too deluded by patriarchy to see what you patently see

it does feminism discussion a disservice all your sweeping generalisations and ire

Let's talk about these men making up their own version of reality, which doesn't actually reflect what women as a group experience in the workplace.

The workplace, perhaps with a few exceptions, is institutionally sexist. The reason that is, is the men who hold the power in most workplaces don't want that to change and systematically discriminate against women in a variety of ways.

"Male privilege allows men to make up these penis rules, and penis rules trump anything that women have to say."

Is that the reason why you only concentrate on what the male posters said (or have been reported to have said), and don't care about what women report about their workplace experiences?

One of the things that is clear from this thread is that there are plenty of men who like to make up "penis rules" whenever reality doesn't quite suit them.

So Neanderthal makes up a penis rule that women who aren't interested in learning about IT or need a bit of help are apparently letting down feminism and don't deserve his respect. The fact that feminism has zero to do with women being able to unzip a zip file is neither here nor there. Penis rules trump feminism.

Or Sanjeev makes up a penis rule that manifestations of sexism must happen because workplaces are backwaters. Of course he has to use the penis rule to also change the meaning of the word backwater to include hi tech trading floors or new industries like advertising or TV.

But when you're denying women's experience, what's does a little reality matter. It can safely be ignored.

Male privilege allows men to make up these penis rules, and penis rules trump anything that women have to say.

There are quite a few studies about female behaviour in the workplace and the dynamic of women putting other women down. Most of it hinges on the principle of critical mass. Until that point is reached, it benefits women at the top to behave more like men and, in effect, to deny their femaleness. It's the opposite end of the spectrum to the so-called breathy stereotype we started this thread with.

Both are simply using adaptive behaviours to get by in a sexist workforce and are mostly powerless to do anything else. But it nicely detracts the attention away from the men at the top, who, if the really cared about women's rights and equality, could always create a non-sexist environment and give the "ball breaking bitch" no option but to be more supportive of her female colleagues. But the men don't do that, do they.

In my experience the worst perpetrators of sexism in the work place/sexual discrimination were childless women.

My pet theory is that that's based in them trying hard to fit in with a macho work hard play hard, don't have any distractions from work such as dependants.

The least sexist and therefore best managers I had were men who shared parenting equally with their WOHM partners and therefore had experience in the difficulty that set-up sometimes brings and know that this doesn't mean that an employee can still perform brilliantly if accomodated.

my worst sexist shitty colleague was female
made much digs and jip about pg, precious moments.had some ghastly combative modus operandi