I'm a feminist-ask me anything.

[BertrandRussell]

and available for all.

I believe that sex work, porn and all the associated grid girl/page 3 stuff is very damaging to society at large. Very often women are not making free choices-and the existence of the "industry" perpetuates the idea of women as commodities to be bought and sold, and men as victims of their own sex drives.
Oops-must dash. Back later!

I think I’m best described as a part time feminist, as I find that I have to duck out every so often to protect my mental health. It’s so deeply disheartening and depressing, and as far as I can see things are getting worse for women. I need to put my head in the sand at regular intervals or I just couldn’t cope.
My question is how do you sustain the fight, and keep from getting sucked down?

I also feel frustrated that feminism doesn’t seem to really make room for the experience of mothers.
I’d go further and say that before feminism what women did was not respected or valued. So then women started doing what men do, and gained respect for that.
But there is still little respect for the nurturing and caring roles that traditionally fall to women - these are not just underpaid or unpaid but often the subject of immense derision here on mumsnet.
I’m not knocking the immense gains of the suffragette/women’s liberation and feminist movements but I do feel that we still haven’t got close to the core issues.

SAHMs. Obviously it's much better if a woman and her children are not financially dependent on a man-or anyone else. But pragmatically for many families (including, incidentally,mine) it is the least worst option. I think it is possible to make it quite close to equitable in terms of work/money but the elephant in the room is the dependency. I think one of the things feminism dropped the ball on was the raising on children. When I was a young woman back in the 1970s, children were barely mentioned. And when they were we just said hurriedly "oh, there will be 24 hour free nurseries" and moved on to more exciting topics. I worry about how many women don't seem to realise how dependent they are-both financially and on the goodwill of the father of their children. As with many things, awareness is all.

Snap, Alan! The child raising thing is a big issue.
Yes, it is depressing that we sometimes seem to be making so little progress- and depressing that we are simultaneously being told how far we've come. I don't know the answer, I'm afraid. Gather like minded people round you, and look after each other. The company of women is a very life affirming thing!

Bertrand - if there is a woman who feels happier in the family model where she looks after the children / home and the DH does the financial providing and she prefers that kind of quite distinct make /female dynamic in a relationship, do you think, as a feminist, that she is in a kind of false consciousness? That she should want more, but is kind of sleepwalking because of the patriarchy? Or can this be a credible choice?

It’s difficult. Not sure about the “false conscieness” thing, but I really don’t think it’s a position any woman should be in without having very open eyes to how vulnerable it makes her. Being in a position where you can’t leave, however crap things become is not good. I chose (and it was a genuine free choice) to make myself vulnerable. I was/am lucky that the man I chose to be with did not screw me over. But I put myself in a position where he could have done. And many women do not realize the potential consequences of the choice they are making.

Thanks Bertrand. There’s the financial risk yes, but supposing you knew that you would be financially ok in the event of a separation? Many feminists still seem to imply that a woman feeling that she is happy to be a wife and mother had been brainwashed by the patriarchy into thinking this is what she should be doing? This is what I meant by a false consciousness. They imply a woman should want “more” as a point of principle and is somehow letting other women down?

I think “brainwashed” is a strong word! But for me, being a mother is a job, being a wife isn’t. So you can, if the terms and conditions are set out clearly on both sides have equality while at home looking after children. I don’t think you can where there are no children. I don’t care for the “letting other women down” thing. But I do think that women who do this are not living a feminist life.

Somewhat delayed response, full on week.

What did I have in mind for the men’s version? I’m still not sure, precisely, ‘issues’ I guess, from men’s perspective, some of which are also issues feminism is concerned with from a womans’s perspective. So probably something around emotional life and mental health, maybe something about crime/violence/anti social behaviour/imprisonment, parenting, work-life balance, possibly educational achievement amongst certain groups of boys/young men, maybe something about the experience of being a man of a particular ethnicity, taking non-traditionally male roles. Not being a man, I’m not sure. I’m quite tempted to ask the three guys sitting opposite me on the train! But thinking about colleagues and friends and stuff I’ve read, these all sound like possible topics.

In terms of my hesitancy in declaring myself a feminist I think it comes down to looking at men as individuals and seeing them as people with issues influenced by society’s view of what their sex should and shouldn’t be doing.

Many of which are indeed a result of the patriarchy, being the flip side of what women experience. I don’t think they can be solved by only dismantling the patriarchy from the women’s side, some of the dismantling has to happen from the men’s side too.

I think I’d be more comfortable with the label feminist if I could see the men’s version working away at bringing down patriarchy from the other side.

I’m thinking out loud here so this may not make a lot of sense.

It’s not that I think feminism should centre men. I think it’s just that I feel like identifying as a feminist, without being able to simultaneously ally myself to something that approaches the problems from men’s perspectives is somehow tantamount to ignoring half the problem or saying that the struggles of men are not as important as the struggles of women.

I fully expect to be told that this is because I’ve been socialised to think men are terribly important. I don’t think that’s the case. I think partly I am really interested in experience at the level of the individual and so tend to think about men as people and how they experience the world just as much as women. Perhaps also it has something to do with having approached some aspects of my life in what could be seen as a typically male way and having seen how that has and hasn’t worked out for me.

Oh, and also it’s a term that, for better or worse, is defined differently by different people. So in that sense I don’t find it a useful word.

I’m nodding along with a lot of what witchmountain says.,
I think that patriarchy or toxic masculinity (not sure if these are interchangeable) is extremely damaging to boys and men.
Tony Porter and Jackson Katz are both approaching the problem from the other side.
If feminism is about working towards equality for women, is there another term for dismantling the patriarchy?

I've been thinking about this, and maybe I have some sort of mental block, but I don't see why any of the things you mention are incompatible with feminism. Seeing men as people? Of course I do! And the patriarchy, which radical feminists want to demolish, is incredibly damaging to men-even (although they often don't realise it). I'm not clear why you believe that feminism has to take on men's battles directly though. One of the main complaints of men's rights activists is that men's needs are largely ignored-and it's feminists fault. I think that if men's needs are ignored (and I am not sure that they are) then men need to step up as do something about it. This is going to sound as if I'm tit for tat-ing, but menhave generally been (and still are) pretty obstructive in women's fight for equality- it seems a bit rich for them to expect feminists to put their needs front and centre now! For example, the need for refuges for male victims of domestic violence. Women fought and campaigned and volunteered to set up the women's refuges-it would not be hard for men to do the same now the ground has been broken, and I am sure women would share their hard won expertise. But there seems no appetite for that among male activists. You mentioned mental health- there are some fantastic initiatives- CALM for one- that men can get behind. There's nothing stopping them! I just don't think that it's the job of feminists to take the lead. I feel very strongly about racism and disabism too, but I don't think feminism should stop working for women's rights to focus on the needs of BAME or people with disabilities. In fact, nobody would ever say that, would they? "I feel uneasy about being anti racist because disabled people get shit too" It only seems to be women who are expected to take on everyone's causes before their own.

Blimey-I sorry about that walk of text-I'm on my phone and didn't see how long it was.
Alan, I'm not familiar with Toby Porter, but I am with Jackson Katz. I don't think he's approaching it from "the other side". I think he's on the same side, saying very clearly that men need to step up and be counted, and accept that "good men" have a vital role in making things better both for other men and for women. Which is what feminists say!

Oh, and I don't think feminism defined in different ways by different people-I think everyone agrees on the basic definition. There are different views on how we get there-but aren't there in every movement?

Oh and (and this is my last point, I promise) Jackson Katz isn't saying anything that feminists have not been saying for ages-but when a man says it...........

Bertrand
Seeing men as people? Of course I do!

Upthread you said:

I was/am lucky that the man I chose to be with did not screw me over.

One of the ideas I find objectional is the default idea that men are dangerous/not to be trusted (is this how people generally view their fathers/sons/brothers?). Terms used on this site ('penis bearers', 'be-penised' etc) - serve to alienate instead of engage. I agree with witchmountain and Alan that involving men is part of the solution. Male privilege is not all it's cracked up to be.

Do you think men have the right to call themselves feminists? Or should men who want equal rights call themselves "feminist allies"?

Fascicle- the problem is that women have to have in the back of their minds that men can be dangerous (I'm assuming that you mean physically dangerous?). And I think most men would understand that-because they are at risk from other men too. And of course I had to think carefullly before I made myself and my children completely financially dependent on my partner. I would have been irresponsible if I hadn't. I trusted my judgement and I was right. But many women, as can be seen on here, aren't so lucky. It's. It anti man to say these things-it's fact.
The be-penised thing. In my experience it's either used in relation to trans issues, which I really don't want to go into on this thread, or facetiously on threads about some men's frankly bizarre apparent inability to perform the most basic of household or childcare functions. I don't personally know any men like this so I can't really comment on that either!

When you say feminists should involve men more, can you say how? And why they haven't involved themselves already?

Racinsnail- I do actually think you have to be a woman to be a feminist. Feminist ally is great. I am an ally to many causes that I don't have the right to claim as my own.

Bertrand - can I ask why you’re not on the “Ex-prostitute AMA” thread?

Because I am pretty sure she didn't want a feminist diatribe! Also I assumed (maybe wrongly) that there would be a lot of "sex work is empowering" type posts, and I didn't feel like getting into that.

I don't think he's approaching it from "the other side". I think he's on the same side

By the other side I meant from men’s side rather than women’s but not that it was in opposition to feminism. Sorry if that was clumsily worded.

Jackson Katz isn't saying anything that feminists have not been saying for ages-but when a man says it

Yeah, I know. That’s something that bugs me too. But we need men stepping up, men speaking out, men being braver. The problem is that while we (all, not just feminists) frame issues as “women’s issues” and men guard the boundaries of masculinity so closely, it makes it hard for ordinary decent men to, well actually be, ordinary decent men.

And it’s why the current trans situation is so frustrating; they could stretch the boundaries of what it means to be a man and make it better for everyone. (I won’t go on. I posted about this yesterday on another thread but it was lost among the fighting). But you’ve made me realize that they’re just the latest in a long line of male activists whose agenda is skewed from the start because of an underlying misogyny.

Have you been targeted much by trolls because of your feminism?