to hide the feminism topic?

[CerealOffender]

the thread titles are all so serious and worthy and make me feel frivolous and unsisterly.

Crazycat: I think the key is that men and women suffer from discrimination and oppression in different ways. And perhaps on the subject of each area in particular, the workplace say, they should be considered together by people who are interested in workplace relations (management/business studies for example.

But to understand how men and women suffer from oppression or exploition it is also very useful to study each in isolation. That way those who study the workplace for example can make use of the ideas thrown up by those who have examined women's or men's issues in particular.

I don't think it is a question of either/or.

I agree with CIAH. It is important to discuss the education of NT children and SN children, and often the issues between the two will overlap. But if I wanted to talk about an issue that was about an NT child, I wouldn't talk about it in the SN section, I would talk about it in the education section.

I get what you're saying Milly and Cat. For some reason I don't think the comparisons hold true, perhaps because issues relating to women relate to half the population rather than a minority group, so there is likely to be a broader spectrum of viewpoints than say SN vs education.

Using that analogy, if the SN board is equivalent to the feminism board say, where is the education equivalent? i.e. the mainstream? is it Chat? AIBU? Doesn't quite follow in my mind.

Ah but crazycatlady, you are trying to bring in shades of grey

I agree with you completely; I don't think we can assert in a blanket fashion that men are in a position of privilege and women are oppressed but prepare to be told we are wrong!

Crazycat: I would argue that the feminism board is where all issues can be discussed (education, special needs, workplace, relationships etc. etc.) as they relate to women in particular. The boards in themselves can and do discuss all this and more, relating to both sexes and in what tend to be more general terms.

This is why I sugges that a mens studies board could be very useful. I know there is a place called dadsnet, but I am not talking about dads, but rather men: sons, dads all. It would be a compliment to the boards in the same way that the feminist board compliments the main sections.

That's a fair point CAIH. I disagree with it for reasons already posted, but also because the feminism board here does not welcome views from all women on those or other issues, only those that chime with an approved or agreed feminist viewpoint. Anything seen as antifeminist or questioning whether the feminist viewpoint is the right one, isn't welcome for debate.

I think it depends upon the issue CCl. Fortunately there are lots of different areas of MN, so if you wanted to talk about gender in relationships, you could do so on the relationship boards. If you wanted to talk about gender in mental health, you could do so on the mental health board. But if you wanted to talk about any issue in terms of a feminist perspective, you could do so on the feminist board. So you always have both options - gender or feminism.

I don't think the proportion of people who make up a disadvantaged group makes a difference to whether or not that group's issues should be discussed in isolation.

People with a special need in the UK are a minority in numbers and in amount of power.

People who are black in South Africa are a majority in numbers and a minority in amount of power.

Women in the UK and worldwide are neither a majority or a minority in numbers but are a minority in amount of power.

I really don't see how the number of people involved one way or another makes a difference to whether or not the needs of the specific group should be looked at as individual issue, at least some of the time.

For example, having reproductive health centres for women and having planning groups that deal solely with those centres doesn't stop another group discussing those centres as part of wider planning, or prevent another specialist group setting up facilities for gay men. It doesn't mean the group talking about women's health don't care about gay men -it just means it isn't their focus right now, in that group.

I can't comment on your last point Crazycat, as you know, for lack of information.

But I am heading over there now to see for myself.

CCL, feminists have never welcomed the viewpoints of all women or claimed to represent the viewpoints of all women. Some women were opposed to women getting the vote- feminists never claimed to represent such women.

What should matter though is that all feminist women feel welcome on the feminist board, and I think the issue that has come up on this thread is that liberal feminists don't feel welcome on the feminist board. I would really like to see liberal feminists set up a thread on there and people who consider themselves radfems read but do not comment. It would be interesting to see how such a thread developed and if some women could get some support from it that could then grow.

No probs kittywise.

I'm not telling anyone they are wrong - I just want to explain what I think.

I agree with feminists that men as a group are privileged because of their sex and that women as a group are oppressed because of their sex.

This of course does not mean that all individual women are overtly oppressed, that all men are oppressors or that all men are privileged in every walk of life.

It just means that historically men (as a group) hold more positions of political and economic power and than women.

Why are there so few women prime ministers or great writers or CEOs or famous painters? It is not because we are less able but because the deck has been stacked against us and we have fewer opportunities. (It is only fairly recently that women have been able to have bank accounts, vote and no longer be considered the property of their husbands or fathers).

That's an interesting idea with regards to a liberal feminist thread MillyR.

I definitely consider myself as a radfem but would keep my beak out of a libfem thread if asked to.

Ooh, I like that idea

I like the idea of a liberal feminism thread, and a multi-choice quiz. I wonder if there are a lot of us who have no real idea where we sit on the spectrum in terms of viewpoint. Both would be helpful I think, as it seems from this thread that is is the predominance of the radical viewpoint that is putting a lot of people off.

Beachcomber that is an interesting and long running question with regard to fewer female vs male CEOs or famous painters. Your points are all very valid of course, but I also wonder whether such a proportion of women have wanted these things vs proportion of men? That must form part of it? Don't know, but I'd be worried about raising that as a question on the feminism board.

" Someone else on the thread was talking about how they had a right to shout about their child getting in to mainstream education, but these feminists had no reason to shout."

I think you have quoted me very selectively there MillyR

"Some of us are fighting other battles in RL, and are up for debates but don't relish a shouting match with strangers on the interweb.
Come over to SN and tell me my son shouldn't be in mainstream, and you'll hear me shout.
Or tell me that Feminist principles don't belong in a classroom to my face.
But yelling at other women because their views of how the world should be and how to achieve it aren't mine?
I save my anger for those I perceive as blocking the way, not those travelling a different path to the same destination."

I intended to explain why I don't choose to engage in vigorous and assertive debates on the Feminism board. I had no intention at all of implying or stating overtly that 'these feminists have no reason to shout
Debate whatever you choose to and at whatever volume and level of engagement you wish. As I said, I don't see us in competition.

Butterfly, that test has some very leading and some confusing questions, doesn't it? It's actually quite a poor questionnaire, because it requires simple multiple-choice answers to complex questions (even yes/no answers to questions which are not yes/no questions).

Take this one about porn: "some porn even depicts empowered women." Well, yes, in a sense. It goes on "men in porn are depicted as mere disembodied cocks, which is far worse." Well, perhaps, but not always, and maybe if they were it might be bad, in a different way, although not necessarily worse.

And that's all part of one option!

Just to add I would tentatively support a men's discussion board on here, but with the proviso that contributions from women would be welcome.

I was a Revisionist, Lenin .

Did you notice my poncetastic linkage for you up the thread?