Interesting Heather Brunskell-Evans interview

I haven't read this thread - sorry. But I wanted to drop in to say I thought it was a great interview. Heather is a thinker/philosopher and a scholar of Foucault so really interesting to hear her talk. She seems to me to have people's interests at heart. I really enjoyed this - thanks.

I listened to this earlier this year. She covers some interesting ground:
savageminds.substack.com/p/misunderstanding-michel-foucault

I don't know if it is just me but I didn't find the interview to be very accessible or illuminating. I have noticed with a few of Boyce's interviews, there seems to be talking around the point but not really directly on the point.

If between a quarter and a third of women have experienced DV, the vast majority of men are not non-violent.

We need to do something about male violence too, obviously, but we also need to make it clear to the vast majority of men, who are not violent, that co-parenting is their responsibility too.

Yes, of course we benefit from work opportunities, but there is an additional benefit to women getting to the top in professions where they can improve services for women.

But women benefit as a whole from having a range of occupations open to us all.

Plus, we also work for individual fulfilment - just like men are allowed to.

Why should women have to parent with men? Loads of men are dangerous to women and children and should be nowhere near their kids.

Spartacus, there is a distinction between roles when it comes to the well-being of women more broadly.

Far more women benefit from being able to see a female GP than benefit from a female train driver.

Or encourage men to take on equal parenting duties.

‘Or, think about it another way, how to organise life so that care is shared and there is no such thing as ‘the’ primary caregiver?’

It depends who it is shared between. I am against promoting solutions that make women’s rights a private negotiation between heterosexual couples, because that has a very high abuse rate for women.

The model to start with is how do we give decent work and life opportunities to a single mother.

You have misunderstood. I mean there is no distinction between roles -i.e. ones that it is important that women ascend in and others where it is not.

That is a good point Scene, and there are definitely class issues. I will have to think more about it.

But iirc, the UN has put together studies showing there are better outcomes for women and children, and women’s and children’s issues are given more importance when women occupy political positions and participate in peace processes.

I agree - but until men take on these roles they will remain precarious and low paid. Or, think about it another way, how to organise life so that care is shared and there is no such thing as ‘the’ primary caregiver?

That isn’t so much a factor in the everyday sexism I face though. As said, this is about men’s entitlement and a range of aggressions and micro-aggressions such as being talked over, down to or it simply being expected that men are more entitled to seniority, promotion and resources.

I don’t think anyone mentioned occupations vs professions.

Of course women shouldn’t face discrimination or sexism.

‘Also, I’d like to see choices not be gendered in the same way they are now - so men taking up the part time and lower paid jobs so they can do the school run.’

This doesn’t solve the problem though. It just puts different people in a precarious position. The point is to make life less precarious for people who take on primary caring responsibilities, not to make it difficult for them to have well paid jobs.

I don’t agree there is a distinction between occupations or professions. Women should not face discrimination or sexism in any field whether this be train driving or politics. We should have a chance to get to the top in all.

‘I don’t want to ‘get to the top’. This is a straw person.’

It isn’t a straw man. There are many professions where it is important for feminism that women get to the top- law, politics, medicine for a start.

I’m not sure that ‘choice’ is as simple as that. Structural sexism works in many different ways and often these are invisible. Maybe, on the other hand, the gender equity in India is the result of choice and not poverty? And, in any case, combatting institutional sexism in different ways, including by having employment quotas for women, is an inherent good.

Also - as a point of clarification - my career has always come first for me and I have not taken on marginal roles but I still face men’s entitlement, mansplaining and sexist putdowns weekly at least - aggressions and micro-aggressions.

I don’t want to ‘get to the top’. This is a straw person. I would like a meaningful career though and every workplace I have been in has been one where it is easier for men to progress than women. And if I did have this ambition I’d see this as something that feminism should support too.

Also, I’d like to see choices not be gendered in the same way they are now - so men taking up the part time and lower paid jobs so they can do the school run.