Been out. It's not pretty out there. My feminist views are challenged tonight.

Is that a thing, Mini? I don't think men and women socialise less together than they used to and how can we possibly prove it.

It sounds to me like your friend is going to the wrong type of place. Go to a place with £1 vodka red bull and pounding RnB and yes, that's what you'll get, from men AND women. Go to a jazz club or a thoughtful indie person's night and you will find people who are a bit more you know...whatever.

I think the thing that I picked up on from the OP, was the fact that there was little interaction btw the men and women. When I was younger we just hung out in a big group of men and women. We talked, laughed, went to the pub, skating, cinema, beach, parties, clubs as a group. Some were paired up at different times but first their was friendship and fun. From what Op says and from SGB post, it's all about feather waving and displays. In men and women do not actually socialise together just because they like each other's company then that I think leads to a separation where women are only seen as something to drag home at the end of a night out for sex.

My friend is finding that all the men want is casual hook ups. They can't even be bothered to ask her anything beyond "you up for it then"

OP,I would say "nul points" but at 92 messages when you appear only to have arrived on mumsnet for the first time today, I'd say it was actually a fairly successful piece of coat-trailing. It's still nul points for content though, 'cos it reads like something thrown out by one of the "random daily mail article generator" websites you can find online.

Meantime, anyone want to talk about what they had for lunch?

Really, Mini? I don't think you can tell at all. I find a lot of people who dress in a supposed cool/don't care way deeply dull, grating and quite often judgemental about people (usually women) who dress up.

My two best friends could not be more different in how they dress: one is very glamourous, sparkly, big hair etc, the other is rarely out of hiking boots and ill-fitting jumpers. Both equally intelligent, lovely and interesting.

JustAHolyFool I agree, something all generations have engaged in.

I suppose for me though, I prefer non-conformists. You can usually tell by looking who might be more interesting to talk to. Although having said that one of my very best friends, recently single is doing the "Essex" look now. She is dismayed to find that the attitude is one of indifference unless sex is on offer.

it is narrowing though amillion. men are increasingly spending more time on their appearance.

I sometimes struggle with this. My daughters and sons are presumably of the same age as who dummad saw.
And the women take far more effort and time on their appearance, than the men.
Now, presumably, they both want to attract the other.
But women make an effort, men, not so much.
Why are the women trying harder than the men?
Because women judge other women harsher than women judge men?

Mini strutting about and preening feathers for BOTH sexes is a practice as old as time itself.

How can you tell someone looks interesting from looking at them? Some people dress in a certain way so you think they look really cool but in fact they are a bam. Likewise some people fade into the background but when you get to know them, they're great.

It is fun. It is fun to get dressed up, get a lot of admiring looks from people, dance...people like to have fun! You're not going to change that.

Did their father's tell them what to wear?

"Oh FFS, back to the same old slut-shaming misogyny that's always spoiled radfem thinking"

What a load of bollocks SGB. The OP barely seems to be a feminist let alone a radfem. Radical feminists don't "slut-shame" they put the blame firmly where it should be - at the feet of men.

I don't think there's any 'rad' in this thread SGB. Or indeed any feminism.

what's with the posing?

Dummad's posts ( and others) read remarkably like posts made by the MRA trolls and misogynists who sometimes frequent ths site.

It is very much a fashion "uniform" these days, there is a similar one for young men - exceedingly tight t-shirts and skinny, arse skimming jeans with Vans or Converse and a plaid shirt, the only thing that saddens me is that everyone looks the same, no individuality any more.
If anything, young womens' fashion is quite granny-like at the moment, all floaty chiffon blouses and shiny/sparkly stuff, a lot of them look like a grandma at a wedding - hardly "prostitute" like.

Oh FFS, back to the same old slut-shaming misogyny that's always spoiled radfem thinking. It's perfectly possible to campaign against domestic violence and for equal pay and reproductive rights during the week, and to want to go out on a Saturday night in deliberately sexy clothes and have a laugh and a pose with your mates. For women who are not model-thin or 'conventionally pretty', it's actually quite liberating to run around with a bit of flesh on display, with friends, having fun. And girls dressed up in groups are usually looking out for each other, sharing the joke, feeling safe in a crowd. You don't have to cover yourself up to be a feminist, or to show your 'intelligence'. Don't forget that a lot of the people who want women to cover themselves up are not feminist at all.

If that's Exeter Dromedary, all the students wear just underwear.

I just wonder though, why do we all strut about preening and showing off our pretty feathers. I would prefer someone want to approach me because I look interesting....not because I look like some plasticised princess. Who exactly benefits from pressuring women to look like plasticised dolls?

Why bother attempting any degree of political and structural analysis, when it's so much easier and more fun just to blame the women?

Dummad has no point to make. Women aren't going to be freed from oppression and gain equality because they dress modestly. We had centuries of us dressing modestly that didn't seem to make much difference. Nor are we going to gain equality by wearing less because this has nothing to do with women's behaviour and everything to do with men's.

The patriarchy are very good at pitting woman against woman, it seems. Making women police other women.

Has someone already asked you if you are Joanna Lumley, OP? Can't be arsed to read the whole thread. Tanya Gould's reply to Joanna Lumley was pretty good I thought.

FreyaSnow Sun 27-Jan-13 14:47:16

Very good post. I totally agree.

At our local university's annual ball the women all wore underwear (yes, just bras and pants). Women put on a pole dancing display. And a couple stripped off and had sex in the student bar. And these are supposedly the brightest and the best of their generation.

So women can only have feminist views/a personality/a degree of intelligence if they're wearing? What? Jeans and a jumper?

and men's shorts have become alot shorter again than the surfer type they were for a long time.

So, OP, you are saying that women who dress in skimpy clothing have no right to equality? Do you see the problems with that argument?