Proponents of 'equality feminism'- convince me that men will play fair!

Equal and interchangeable are not the same thing.

I'm not losing sight of that. It's incredibly rare. I don't know of another Mumsnetter whose husband does substantial childcare - they must be out there, but they don't post about it - and this is a big site.

But you ARE undermining him when you say that "We can do it better than men". Although, for the nth time, you haven't told me what we do better. Because if he, or I, believed that ahead of time we would never have tried to find out if it was true. It's a sexist belief and it reinforces divisive gender roles.

You appear to be saying 'well okay in this example it works, but we still shouldn't allow men to become part of this example'.

Sakura, what do you mean when you say that you are "shocked to learn on this topic that some women seriously believe that men and women are equal". Are you suggesting that as feminists we should believe we are better than men, or alternately perhaps are you saying that we should acknowledge that we are worse than men?

I fundamentally believe/know that I am the equal of most men (of course some individuals will be better than me at doing all sorts of things, regardless of their gender). I would be incredibly worried if my daughter didn't grow up feeling the same way - or my son for that matter.

Society may not treat me as equal all the time, but surely that is artefactual?

I think that parenting is a privilege and a choice. It is something that dh and I share. I have no wish to claim any superiority, my children love and need us both (and the other significant people in their lives too).

Oh, cross post.

"If it becomes generally accepted that a man has equal rights to a baby or child that a mother has carried inside her womb and birthed and breastfed we are on very rocky ground. It doesn't matter to me whether he had done half or most of the childcare: it does not make him a mother."

Well, my questions above are very relevant then.

Are you defining 'mother' as someone who as birthed and breastfed, then? Irrespective of her behaviour after the birth, and irrespective of the time spent wit the child? Are you seriously arguing that a woman who has carried the baby, given birth to it, and then gone back to work fulltime leaving it in the fulltime care of its own father should be awarded primary custody in a split?

As for my first ever 'jumping on you' you said this:
"because men are stronger and wired differently there are other things that men can do better than us. "
I asked what they were and how they were relevant to a discussion about societal power.

Quattro, Sakura is not 'voting to be devalued'. On the contrary, the gist of her argument is challenging that very assumption that only economic power should be valued. Which raises the question: who does all this 'valuing' anyway? Why, those who are in a position to dictate what is 'valuable' or not, i.e. men and 'the system'. How is it valued? In the only way, under that 'system?, that currently records, rewards and recognises that value, i.e. paying for it. Which immediately excludes child-rearing. This is the very thing that should be challenged, not subscribed and yielded to. Otherwise, approximately half the world population, and guess which half, is doing work to which no value is ascribed and without which we could not exist, let alone survive.
One might as well say, "What is valued in our society is men", therefore to be valued, women must become men. Surely this is not what feminism is all about.

Happysmiley is right, Sakura is arguing that women are intrinsically better at parenting than men;

"But do not tell me that men and women are the same or that men know what it is to be a mother"

Sakura, I AM telling you that a man who is allowed to (and chooses to) spend quantity time with his children "knows what it is to be a mother", although I note that you, like everyone else agreeing with your view that women are exalted in this sphere, have completely failed to define mother.

I have already said that my husband is as closely and intuitively linked with my daughter as I am, and I am a fucking fantastic parent. He can tell when she's about to come down with an illness, he is as likely as I am to wake at night if she whimpers, he can snap her out of a tantrum or comfort her when she gets hurt or persuade her to eat something she's wary of. He picks up on her proto-words and he winces when she gets a scratch.

And I am sick of people undermining his skills and sacrifices. He is passionately committed to equality, and our daughter benefits out the wazoo because of it.

I know more about this than you do. Sorry, but I do. Your husband does not practice equal parenting (I'm sure he's a great father, that's not a criticism at all), and mine does. So I am in a better position to argue about the ability of a man to be a primary carer than you are.

I'll refine my earlier point; I believe that being a biological mother in the first weeks is completely different from being a biological father. But if both partners share the childcare load as early as possible, they grow equal. After the first year, I would argue that any remaining difference is socially imposed and not intrinsic.

What do you think women bring to the relationship that men can't? Is it a hormonal link? What's your position on adoptive parents, then?

I think ...you think too much.

I am an equality-freak. I work lots because I love my work. I do a lot of parenting because I love my children. My DH works rather less enthusiastically than I do, because he is less keen on his work. He does as much if not more parenting than I do. He does more housework because he is at home more.

I'm not in any way oppressed by anyone. Lucky old me.

Think you are nuts to do the sahm thing. What is valued in our society is economic power. You're voting to be devalued. And you've most probably chosen to be supported by a man which is ipso facto dubious.

I agree with HappySmiley. The whole premise of men being less capable of caring for children undermines shared childcare arrangements within families. I think shared care is an idea we should be supporting by offering more flexible working opportunities.

I think she meant that men and women aren't equal in that they aren't given equal status in society, not that they aren't equal in terms of their intrinsic worth.

Well what is this thread about then, HB? It seems to me that the OP wants:

1. women to have more rights over children than men do.
2. SAHM to have a wage.
3. SAHM to be a job with 'prestige.'

I think she needs to come back and explain how that would work, and under what kind of political and economic system.

I don't think anyone is denying that looking after a baby is an essential task, or saying that task isn't important. Feminists have always argued that raising children is work. There seems to be a lot of arguing against straw men from the OP. It was Dittany who brought up the concept of 'choice feminism' and she made it clear she was not referring to SAHM.

Also, the whole concept of prestige is somewhat odd, because prestige really operates within an individual's work sphere.

But you've just attributed to the OP a whole load of stuff she didn't actually say.

I think she's made it quite clear that the struggle for equality in the workplace is also important.

No one reasonable doubts that Xenia.

You don't have to keep saying that mothers who work full time can be very good mothers. Everyone knows that.

I wasn't aware that this was a thread about ranking mothers.

But that assumes women don't work. In my society most women of under 5s are workers as well as parents just as men are and they have equal status as parent (ie it is an upaid role) and equal (ish) status as workers.

Capitalist societies put a value on services. Most women who gain power or money or status have always subcontracted out dull domestic stuff in Roman times and today because it's dull and low status to wield the broom or scrub the loo or change the baby for the 10th time that day but all of us know that being good parents is very important. It's simply that's it's not a job. It's something men and women do as part of their overall lives.

I don't want to live in a society where doctors are paid what street sweepers and parents who stay home or carers of OAPs are paid. It didn't work in Communist china and it won't work today precisely because those skills are ten a penny compared to the rarer more valued skills of the intelligent worker or indeed the good footballer or popular singer.

I suppose if we were going to rank mothers we could give me a hero of the mothers award because I have had 5 children which may be makes me a supermother whereas someone with 1 or 2 is a lesser mother? Would we do that? Laughing as I type although I am not too bad as a mother. Believe it or not you can be a good parent and work full time.

I think she meant that men and women aren't equal in that they aren't given equal status in society, not that they aren't equal in terms of their intrinsic worth.

i agree with xenia

But you've just attributed to the OP a whole load of stuff she didn't actually say.

I think she's made it quite clear that the struggle for equality in the workplace is also important.

Yes, as hs puts it is what is implied. The elevation of woman to madonna or whore in a sense - venerate her motherhood and keep her chained at home. Suggest men are not really parents in the same sense and you keep women out of the board room and in their pinny.

I am amazed any women would say men and women aren't equal but I think all that was meant wa sthey are not the same. they are definitely equal. Indeed all the major religions inculding Christianity and most country's laws state all people are equal and it's fundamental principle of many cultures it is what feminists fought for - equal rights under the law. It is extremely damaging to get the wrong words on this issue. We are all equal as human beings under the law, whether we have down's syndrome are female male or whatever we are equal.

However we often differ. My looks, IQ, weight, health, sex is different from that of others. There are more differences within the races and within the genders than there aer between different races and genders but I woiuld never stop discussion on PC grounds of differences between men and women and I expect most of us know there are indeed differences. The question is whether we should use the differences to justify who cleans the house and earns the pennies and I don't think so. I adored breastfeeding and men can't do that but aside from basic things like that my childen's father was as good as I was if not better at doing evrything to do with them as I was. Why should he not be? He has arms. He is their father. He has the physuical ability to change a nappy or clean a work surface.

Beatitude, If the OP was trying to differentiate between are equal and could be equal, I'd see where you are coming from. But the OP is clearly trying to claim that in some ways men and women aren't equal and shouldn't be treated as such. She also says

And motherhood (child-bearing and rearing) is the only thing that sets us apart from men. We can do it better than men

Are you under the impression that could be and are mean the same thing Happysmiley?

but I am shocked to learn on this topic that some women seriously believe that men and women are equal.