to think that mn has gone mad with many posters assuming most woman are choosing to be subservient to men.

[tomhardyismydh]

It seems lately that on MN many posters are taking things to far with this attitude.

This is about many threads to many to mention but it riles me, just because a woman cant drive, might like a bit of kinky spanking, laugh at a joke made by a man or want to call an ambulance in an emergency that it is a slur and disservice to all of woman kind.

I feel this kind of attitude I have come across on does more damage to woman kind in assuming we are second class citizens to men and that we will never have an equal footing in society. I have lived with men, grown up with men, worked with men and socialized with men and have not felt any more put down degraded or second class to men any more than some woman I have lived with worked with or socialized with.

why do we need the constant reminder men are bad, sex is degrading and woman are so woe betided.

just a rant mostly and will accept the flaming

also whilst on the subject and never been brave enough to ask...but here goes,

anal sex!

what criteria is this with feminism, pro or anti??

Feminists never really talk about sex - it's almost taboo.
They remind me of my parents.

ah poor you and dc. up late because I have had a clean out and not long finished de cluttered my bedroom and only just opened the wine.

cheers >

Right, I'm gonna try and grab an hours sleep.

Night night x

Primalscream I'd like to know the sort of feminists you know because most are obsessed with sex.

As for anal, there are differing reactions to it amongst feminist writings. The salient point has been made that actually there is strong evidence to suggest that just talking physically (i.e. taking headspace out of it) men have more capacity to enjoy being penetrated- the prostate gland isn't something that women have, and men and women have exactly the same level of sensitivity and nerve structuring around it. Yet most heterosexual men are anti anal play for the very simple reason that it's a very dominant/ male thing to do to someone.

So while I can understand people saying it's anal sex! Stop analysing it (to make a really bad pun) there's a strong school of feminist thought that points out that it's the one overtly potentially sexual organ that men and women share in common (apart from the nipples- and they're not directly analogous) and yet the reactions to it are so different. It's something to think about- if men don't want to be penetrated because of the mindset associated with being submissive/the taker, then what does it mean when they do it to women? Is there subconscious contempt at putting us in a position that they wouldn't want to be in themselves?

None of this is necessarily true or right, but it opens up a can of worms that most people just prefer not to think about. Hope that helped answer your question tomhardyismydh

Well with me I can drive but dont see the point in it. I can walk everywhere I need to go or get public transport. I am in to fitness and want to keep my body in good shape. My mum doesnt drive and she is the fit, healthiest and youngest looking 50 something year old I know cause she walks everywhere. I get lifts at weekend of my husband, dad sometimes but why would I want to drive when I can sleep in the car go out and get hammered night before etc?

I like spanking, men coming in my face etc so what? Doesnt mean /i am subservient in life, its just sex gte over it. My husband is really in to girls riding his face type of thing which is known as a girl being dominant, again just sex and whatever floats your boat. Would be boringif everyone liked the same.

Tambern: - you weren't joking were you - after reading your post I'm almost a gynaecologist!

( sex obsessed feminists - tut tut )

sorry I ment woman having anal sex. but wow, that answered another question.

Totally agree with the OP, 100% Im a feminist, i like anal sex, i love being sexually submissive, im a SAHM and I CAN'T DRIVE!! Subservient to men? fuck right off!

OP - it infuriates me too. I don't have a problem with men at all and am certainly not subservient to my dh in any aspect of our relationship. There seems to be people who are able to find sexism everywhere including CBeebies etc.; perhaps it's just me and I'm not that tuned into it. If I have ever encountered overt sexism then I quickly correct people - I'm an independent woman in a predominantly female profession but don't have a problem with any aspect of gender. My dh admires women even more after seeing our dd being born, and he's planning to work part time to do the majority of child care if I have to return to work full time. I was also brought up in an home where there was a fair division of labour between my parents and times when dad stayed at home whilst my mom worked so guess I've never really seen gender as an issue. And my dd wears pink at times!

What gets me is that it seems as if I have two choices here - I can either be subservient to a man, or I can be subservient to the activists who say that I must use the title Ms, or I am letting down the sisterhood, or I must stop shaving my fanjo because I can only be doing it for a man's pleasure and I've fallen under the influence of the porn industry (also male dominated).

Surely, if it is bad for me to be subservient to a man, it is bad for me to be subservient to anyone? And no person should seek to dominate the choices of another adult in the way that some women seek to do?

There appears to be no third choice that says that I, as a mature, intelligent, thoughtful woman, can make the choices that I am happy with, and that suit me.

I'm not knuckling under to anyone. I make my own choices - and will continue to do so. I respect those who wish to be called Ms or who don't want to shave their bushes - and I deserve the same respect in return.

I heard some hilarious harpie on the radio phone in this morning on the topic of Lapdancing/Bunny/Mens Clubs

She agreed that watching naked men was fun and enjoyable, but then went on to rant that men watching women dancing for money was exploitative, degrading and should be banned

you couldnt have made it up really

Good post stayingdavidtennantsgirl

It's the difference between the individual level and the societal level.
To take Shirley's point - on an individual level it is clearly bizarre (and hypocritical) to think that men dancing naked for women is fine but that women reciprocating is qualitatively different. On a societal level, however, it is arguable that men dancing naked is fundamentally different to women doing the same because of the social construct that we all live in.

In short - yes, consenting adults should do whatever they want with each other. Nevertheless, when different genders do the same thing, one's actions may be perceived as representing and reinforcing the social status quo (or "patriarchy" for those that like the term) and the other may be seen as undermining it.

It's problematic. Personally I think that, ultimately, the individual is more important than the societal. I can understand the other point of view, though.

Nailed it SDTG - that's my issue with (some) feminists - they're so damn controlling - but they never admit it.
At least men are honest.

There is also the option of considering that actually, maybe the choices we make are not completely unaffected by the society in which we live. That in fact the structures and attitudes of society have an impact on us, whether consciously or unconsciously. The driving licence thread for example is packed with women saying it is their choice not to drive, which I'm sure is true. But it is interesting isn't it to consider why it is apparently a choice more women make than men? Ditto SAH parenting. Ditto family friendly jobs. Ditto changing name and title on marriage. I mean, I have done some of the above, but I still find it interesting to think about why I might have done something my DH would never consider doing. Exploring the issues isn't denigrating my choices. It's just examining the context in which I made them.

I don't think the individual can be separated from society, can they Island Moose? Everything happens in context.

& I'm sure there's an element of 'we can't control men so we'll try and control other women'

& I'm sure there's an element of 'we can't control men so we'll try and control other women

Totally agree...that's what I was trying to say in my post last night. Some feminists try to intimidate other women and control their thoughts etc...

Have told dh that according to some on MN I am classed as "subservient" to him.

Oh, how he laughed

I hope he asked permission to laugh first!

basingstoke - the individual and society are separated at the moment the individual makes a choice. (S)he has to decide whether to do action x because s(he) wants to do it or whether not to do action x because it perpetuates social constructs that s(he) objects to.

Oh Good Lord. I was a bit worried when I read that it was "damaging to be analytical" further down the thread.

I would argue that the decision is going to be influenced by those constructs whether you like it or not, and whether you know it or not. Don't see how it can't be.

worra Do you know, he didnt ask permission!!!!

Off now to tell him he is repressing me......