Please or to access all these features

Add post

Watch this thread

Save thread

Start a new thread

Unflip thread

Hide thread

My feed

Active Unanswered threads

Getting started FAQ's

Unanswered threads Acronyms Talk guidelines

Hide shortcut buttons

Talk

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Feminism: chat

Unflip

1 2 3 4

Original poster

To think men get a fantastic deal here?

86 replies

Bumpitybumper · 09/07/2018 09:35

I've previously started a thread on this board about the biological disadvantages of being a woman however I would love some thoughts on the below which is something I have been thinking about lately.

From puberty females are burdened by their reproductive system. Alongside mensturation and associated conditions, women are also usually pumping their bodies full of hormones to control fertility (or their periods). Then a woman falls pregnant and has to run the gauntlet of a whole array of nasty pregnancy symptoms and conditions before giving birth whilst adhering to the whole not drinking or eating restricted foods advice. Some women breeze through birth but many end up with horrendous experiences and complications that can leave long term or permanent mental and physical damage. In the aftermath most women will attempt to breastfeed and potentially struggle with associated pain and sleep deprivation, not to mention feelings of guilt/failure if it all doesn't work out. Finally at the end of women's reproductive years they then must go through the menopause which can wreak havoc of women's lives and health.

Men on the other hand will mostly have sex and then be in a (hopefully) supportive role for the rest.

Basically biology dictates that men have the far easier ride. If women moan about this they are usually met with responses of "well that's just the way it is" and of course that is ultimately true, but yet the assumption that any babies that are the result of such a biased biological process are equally the father's and mother's is surely questionable? Yes genetically the child is 50:50 but surely more acknowledgement should be given to who has actually sacrificed the most and had basically taken on responsibility for the whole process?

Why is it assumed men can benefit equally from the fruits of the elements women's reproductive biology that ultimately disadvantage us?

OP posts:

womanformallyknownaswoman · 09/07/2018 12:15

At some point, for women's liberation, we have to acknowledge that not every contribution to the economy comes in measurable GDP economic growth.

It's so fundamental that nobody even tries to address it.

I am :)

It's not rocket science - the solution has been implemented successfully in organisations but because we have small brains in positions of power (men who think with their penises mainly), who don't have the thinking nor the incentive to change the way things have operated historically.

The only way change will occur seems likely through a breakdown but we need to be in positions to provide answers when that occurs - because as we have seen, yet another trance of men will undoubtedly step up and promise solutions, get elected then deliver nothing new except to their own pockets

LangCleg · 09/07/2018 11:51

Conversely whilst women are battling lots of these biological issues, men are busy building careers (and pensions) without these distractions. The men get to have the children and the career progression at the same time, whilst most women are slowed by at least one element of their reproductive biology.

That's what I thought you were saying.

There needs to be a society-wide recognition of the care (and reproductive) economy and its effect on women's capacity to be equal economic actors as men. But instead we get a trope of single mothers being a drain on resources and women being objects of abusive social policy.

At some point, for women's liberation, we have to acknowledge that not every contribution to the economy comes in measurable GDP economic growth.

It's so fundamental that nobody even tries to address it.

Offred · 09/07/2018 11:41

No, no, I know sloth... I’m saying that’s the disadvantaging part, not physiological consequences of childbirth, the approach re accommodating them.

No-one is trying to say women don’t suffer physiological consequences, simply that they are disadvantaged by them not being recognised/accommodated.

SlothSlothSloth · 09/07/2018 11:38

Is it reasonable that women should not get adequate support to recover? That women should not get adequate healthcare? That women should be potentially disadvantaged for the rest of their lives re having the resources they need to live/have a good standard of living?

Yes, of course I think all that is reasonable. That’s exactly what I was saying 🙄

womanformallyknownaswoman · 09/07/2018 11:34

there is a huge number of men who get to middle age and are sad about not being close to their children having bought the lie that financial contribution = parenting

or cynically they realise they don't have any potential carers for their old age

Offred · 09/07/2018 11:28

More women should be aware re the physical risks of childbearing TBH but I think this is a slight tangent...

I’m pretty sure I’m preaching to the converted here TBH but we don’t need to pretend that childbirth has zero effects, it’s just the needs that it creates need to be acknowledged and provided for to prevent women being materially disadvantaged for unnecessary ideological reasons.

SlothSlothSloth · 09/07/2018 11:25

Raising a child should not disadvantage women more than men, and this is where government and changes in social attitudes can help. But actually bearing a child does disadvantage women, of course it does, no matter what rules we put in place or attitudes we try to foster...

SlothSlothSloth · 09/07/2018 11:23

Disadvantaging

SlothSlothSloth · 09/07/2018 11:23

I do know what the OP means in theory, but I don’t see any practical way to acknowledge women’s disproportionate work in creating a child without actually disadvantage women

Offred · 09/07/2018 11:23

Not when it comes down to having children anyway...

Anything less is simply accepting the narrative that having children ‘just does’ disadvantage women...

SlothSlothSloth · 09/07/2018 11:21

Yes Offred but the OP is talking about biology. At this point it is inevitable that bearing a child involves harm of some kind to the mother. Even a healthy pregnancy involves discomfort, pain and likely a permanently changed body, at the very least.

Science may change this eventually, but we’re probably hundreds of years off that. If humanity lasts that long, which it currently appears unlikely to

Offred · 09/07/2018 11:21

Yes, that’s true but IMO that’s a bit of a non-solution...

If we were wanting to be really serious then why women have children would be utterly irrelevant.

Women should not be disadvantaged by rape, contraceptive failure, naivety or personal choices IMO.

SlothSlothSloth · 09/07/2018 11:18

Agree that women get a much, much tougher time with childbearing and rearing and some of this is inevitable due to biology, though we could do far as a society to mitigate the most damaging effects. On an individual level, I would encourage all women to think very, very carefully about whether having children will actually benefit their lives. Far too many seem to do it just because it’s the “next life stage” and then be utterly blindsided by all the negative effects you mention.

Offred · 09/07/2018 11:17

Compensation is usually given to right a wrong once a person has already been harmed or disadvantaged... it would be better if women were not harmed or disadvantaged in the first place.

Offred · 09/07/2018 11:16

I don’t think ‘compensation’ is the right term TBH... I think it is about ‘recognition’ and ‘accommodation of needs’ TBH...

SlothSlothSloth · 09/07/2018 11:15

I just don’t know what form the “compensation” you talk about would take, though? If it means giving women more time with the child by default - we’ll that already kind of happens, most men do not have 50:50 care of their child, and this actually holds many women back a lot. If you mean forcing the father to take the child the majority of the time to give the mother more free time, then this is not something all women want either.

In practical terms, what do you mean by compensation?

Original poster

Bumpitybumper · 09/07/2018 10:58

@Offred
Yes. I guess at the heart of the issue as I see it is due to necessity the man automatically gets the right to be an equal parent to the children should he choose, however the man is not required to truley compensate (as much as this is possible) the woman for the fact they are burdened with the biological elements and associated problems that make the children possible in the first place.

For example if an unmarried couple was to split shortly after a baby was born, the man could be eventually granted 50:50 custody whilst the woman would have no mechanism to get some compensation for the financial, physical and mental toll that she has paid in order to have the child in the first place.

OP posts:

Offred · 09/07/2018 10:55

Simply doing a reasonable amount of childcare is not enough IMO for a relationship to be considered ‘completely equitable’.

Offred · 09/07/2018 10:51

If a woman had a ‘completely equitable’ relationship then she would benefit from support re those burdens. That women don’t have a ‘completely equitable’ relationship with the state would still be a problem.

Original poster

Bumpitybumper · 09/07/2018 10:34

@MyRelationshipIsWeird
Oh undoubtedly the split of childcare responsibilities can definitely adversely impact women but I was getting more at the "mandatory" biological elements that even a mother in a completely equitable arrangement with her DP couldn't get around.

OP posts:

Offred · 09/07/2018 10:32

*meany

Offred · 09/07/2018 10:32

IMO the economy must be restructured to make it possible and men will need to be compelled to change their behaviour via certain changes to legislation... big authoritarian meant that I am...

Original poster

Bumpitybumper · 09/07/2018 10:29

@LangCleg
Yes partly. I guess what I was thinking is society and ultimately men should be more mindful of the imbalance that exists and seek ways to redress it rather than it being seen as "just one of those things". I think the assumption that men are equal parents to women is probably essential for a lot of reasons postera have mentioned above but I believe this makes men feel a sense of entitlement and lose any impetus to change things. They get all the benefits and very few pitfalls. Conversely whilst women are battling lots of these biological issues, men are busy building careers (and pensions) without these distractions. The men get to have the children and the career progression at the same time, whilst most women are slowed by at least one element of their reproductive biology.

Just for the record, I'm not saying that the father should be cut out off the children's lives or that the children should be the possession of the mother.

OP posts:

Offred · 09/07/2018 10:25

(Not saying this is in any way a fraction of the stuff endured by women BTW)

Offred · 09/07/2018 10:22

Lots of men don’t get a great deal either. Taking out the controlling abusive ones who use children as weapons there is a huge number of men who get to middle age and are sad about not being close to their children having bought the lie that financial contribution = parenting.

Unflip

1 2 3 4