AIBU to wonder why any woman would identify herself as [2]

[garlicnutter]

... not a feminist?

Since I killed the old one.

Oh look I am not going to start explaining to you why I think women are systematically disadvantaged, I think that has been done on the other thread, hasn't it?

If you're interested, I would recommend the Equality Illusion by Kat Banyard.

I also think it isn't about people being liars. Many of the issues that Empusa raised, which she said she didn't agree with, I also said that I didn't agree with. But if I looked at the context of the threads in which the points were originally raised, it could well be me who said the things she is complaining about. I just don't agree with them in the way that they have been phrased on this thread - I think they're taken out of context and lose the nuance of the original discussion.

Getting back to the main way these threads are going, if you wanted to commit to a form of activism or a way of thinking called equalism, then there is no reason why people on MN shouldn't go ahead and do that, and ask for their own section. I still don't really understand what equalism is, if it is just equality between men and women, or equality between other groups. If is it equality between other groups, then people from all different sections and interest groups who don't want to in say the SN threads, could all come and talk about equality in a new section.

But it wouldn't suit me. If I wanted to talk about DH's disability I don't feel a need to also talk at the same time about the needs of the able bodied. If I'm talking about women and pregnancy, I don't feel the need to spend an equal amount of time talking about the needs of men who are not pregnant. I prefer to focus on the particular issue. But I can certainly see that some people would prefer to talk about all groups at once.

I don't Want to read another book - I want to know in what ways women are being disadvantaged in 2011 UK.

Of course I'm not oblivious to how offensive it is to call someone a rape apologist HRH.

But I don't think I've ever seen it used unjustly on the feminist boards. Sometimes, people are rape apologists without realising they are. I was myself, once. I had no idea that I was repeating rape myths until I educated myself about rape. I've only ever seen people being accused of being rape apologists, if they asserted rape myths.

I agree it's probably not helpful to bandy the term around because if people are asserting rape myths without realising they are and only need educating, then you are going to turn them off by accusing them of rape apologia. But in many cases, they have only been called rape apologists, after they ahve posted several times and ignored links and so on which if they bothered to look at, would address their posts.

Viz MRA, I'm not sure so many people would consider that offensive would they? Some people think that's a perfectly respectable thing to be.

Also HRH I think you need to bear in mind that often with rape, people who have been raped reading offensive posts telling them that it was partly their fault, are probably going to get angry. It's a really sensitive subject and it isn't that surprising that people will sometimes snap, so I think you can cut people some slack on that one.

That's another think I love. The assumption that anyone who has anything to say against feminism is not educated ENOUGH on the subject. As if by reading an ever growing list of feminist thought is going to magically convert people over to feminism.
What about those of us who have spent most of their adult lives looking at the pro's and con's of feminism?

What about those who have read all the "required" reading material on many pro-feminist boards across the internet?
I have a problem with this precisely because feminism is supposed to be the idea "enlightened consciousness".
As for non-feminist women, they are oppressed by 'false consciousness.' You see, when women use their own minds to decide things for themselves, they are being manipulated by the patriarchy! But when they stop thinking for themselves, and defer to feminist consciousness without question, then their minds are 'liberated!' Do you see how this works?

Carmina I'm sorry, I'm not responsible for your education.

If you don't recognise that women are still disadvantaged in 2011 that's your choice.

TL we obviously disagree.

Yes why don't you just ask for an equalism section to discuss equalist issues?

It would be interesting.

(Am not entirely sure what equalism is tbh so it would be enlightening)

Why ask for anything of the sort? We don't need separate sections to talk about egalitarian ways reforming society. I'm just as happy to hash it out in front of everyone! It's certainly not a special club that needs pandering to have it's own section...especially when a growing number of people are beginning to make the move toward that kind of thought.

Suit yerself.

I'm sure a lot of parents would be interested to see where this all goes. It's going tho affect the type of society their children grow up in...and their grandchildren.

I suppose because this is AIBU; it isn't 'in front of everyone' because many MNers don't like AIBU and don't come on it. Also, many of the equality issues that equalists would want to talk about probably have nothing to do with wanting to know if they are being unreasonable or not.

If you just wanted to talk about politics and society in general, and think that pretty much everyone is already an equalist, there is a politics section.

MillyR,

Good point! Thank you.
I guess I have been a bit staunch in how I've put forward politics into the thread....but I guess I've thoroughly answered the question as to why I choose not to be a feminist.

LOL....you've effectively left me no choice but to accede that my purpose here is done.

Bye y'all!

I think as long as this thread stays where it is, then we can have some interesting discussions and read a wide range of viewpoints.

'The final straw came for me on the Irish Sex Law thread which discussed the fact that boys could be prosecuted for having consensual underage sex with their girlfriends'

Lenak you wrote this on the first thread I think. I remember that debate too, and I remember it being the closest to angry I've got on a discussion on MN. Another poster walked away from it with me. We were very uncomfortable with the inflexibility of the views shown, and the perception of girls as gullible victims of predatory boys of the same age made me feel that boys were being attacked purely on the grounds of their sex. I felt it took the cause of feminism back several steps and reinstated a once common view about teenage relationships. Yet held up as a modern feminist perspective with little room for any kind of intelligent debate.

So I suppose that might be an example of my being an equalist and a feminist.

TinaLeena "That's another thing I love. The assumption that anyone who has anything to say against feminism is not educated ENOUGH on the subject" - bang on the nose. Couldn't agree more.

The same can be said of religious radicals, race equality radicals, political radicals. I've received almost identical comments from all these groups "well you couldn't possibly know because you're not educated ENOUGH" - therefore my opinion is invalid. It's the automatic response of a closed mind.

Look anyone who asks me to explain why women are still disadvantaged in 2011 is going to get a book recommendation unless I think they genuinely are not familiar with the arguments. I'm not going to go through the list of why because I'm not willing to spend my time going through the arguments for people who aren't genuinely engaging.

Do you also assert that racism, anti-semitism and homphobia no longer exist and that there is no systemic disadvantage to being in one of those groups?

How are women disadvantaged in the UK in 2011?
In no particular order- and just for starters.

1. the number of women in Parliament/in the Cabinet is decreasing rather than increasing
2. abortion rights are constantly under threat
3. women continue to be objectified in the media
4. 2 women a week are killed by their partners in the UK. This hardly registers on the news - imagine if it was the other way round.
5. Only 3% of the CEOs of the top 500 companies are women - and that number has not increased for 3 years.
6. women outnumber men at University and as graduates - and have done for more than 10 years. But men still occupy the vast majority of higher echelon jobs.
7. Women working full time earn on average 16% less than men.

Thank you Seeker.