I don't agree with the MN feminists. AIBU?

[jennyvstheworld]

I consider myself an active proponent of equality of opportunity and a stern critic of discrimination... and yet I find that I can't identify with many of the viewpoints I encounter on the MN feminism page (and often say so). AIBU?

oh i think childcare/nursery can be a excellent thing.
i feel women should have a proper choice.

Yes, but Chickens - what you describe is less about having it all and more about doing it all. Since the bulk of the house/'wife' work and childcare usually falls to the, well, wife.

These are not issues which men, by and large, have to face and choose between.

Who, genuinely, wants to do it all?

Well, my grandmother it seems. She liked being in control. And playing the martyr

OP that will be because in any movement/church/political group you will find a small inner circle of total loons. Like animal rights activists who want to liberate goldfish to roam free in the woods.

It tends to look like they are all like that because the loons get the attention. They stand around blaming everyone and coming up with extreme plans while the real people get on with making things better.

I think it's a pertinent distinction, though - since we're told that we (women) can 'have' it all - it's sold to us as a highly desirable concept, but what actually transpires is that instead of doing one full-time job; either working at OR out of the home, many women end up doing both.

I am, unashamedly, trying to force my DD to want to become a GP....all my friends in this profession seem to have the best work/life balance!! The most terrible thing that happened to my generation is the lie that we could have it all./

"I get very frustrated that I'm at home with the DC because childcare is so expensive/I have no well paid career to go back to. But at the same time I don't want to leave the DC in childcare anyway"

But if childcare wasn't expensive, and you had a career, and if both you and your dh had flexible working hours, maybe you would feel slightly differently about it?

I'm bad, Porto. I like to moan about my lack of career, while actually not having any real ambition. I like the idea of a kick-ass job, but fear the reality would be far too much work. I suffer from 'the grass is greener' syndrome tbh. DH is ambitious, works his bollocks off and deserves his success. I chose to stay at home, so I can't really blame anyone else for my choices

"Violence against women is nothing to do with the pay gap."

Yes it is. They are both a function of women's inequality.

FN asserted that we now have equality. I just chose a random number of facts which demonstrate that that is simply not true. I could have chosen a different random selection of facts.

Viz the fear that work might be too much ... well... work, Chickens, I think we need to consider how differently men and women are conditioned about this. Men are conditioned to believe that they have the right to get promotions, to be in charge, to earn loads, to be successful. Women are condiitioned to see themselves as not having the right to do that, not having the capabilities. When men look at a job description, they see the things they can do and they ignore the things they can't do and they apply for the job. When women look at that JD, they see the things they can't do and they don't apply for the job because they don't feel they have the right to do so. And even if they can overcome that conditioning and go ahead and apply, employers take the same approach - they look at a male candidate and see the things he can do, and they look at a female candidate and see the things she can't do, so she's less likely to get an interview and less likely to get the job if she does get an interview.

We're all influenced by our social conditioning. And obviously, this is generalised stuff and there are always exceptions, but the exceptions don't make the generalisations untrue. It's an interesting area, social conditioning and probably deserves a thread of its own.

Can you eradicate the ''maternal instinct' - could you bring in legislation?
I've know women with fantastic careers who never go back once they have children - they'd rather be at home ( and they could afford the best nursery in town ) -
I personally feel more in control being at home, I'd hate trying to juggle Childcare/work/the home and can't imagin how that would empower me at all - I'd be bloody knackered.

Feminism's not about trying to eradicate maternal instinct - why would we want to eradicate something so intrinisic to some women?

It's about valuing it and making sure that exercising it, doesn't result in disadvantage compared to those who don't have it or don't exercise it.

I'm so confused -

Interesting, HerBeX. Although I have to say in my case, it's not that I feel unable, it's that I'm more, er, unwilling. At heart, I'm a lazy caaaaaaah. I don't even keep the house show home clean or make cordon bleu dinners for my poor working husband

On another tack, I found that I got less interested in Feminism when I had DSs and started to think about the world from their pov and what I wanted for them.

Anyone else go through that shift?

Capitalism is not set up to cushion women who choose to have babies, whilst I'm sure many of us enjoy the perks of capitalism we can't have both. Money is king......

I have two DSs. I do find myself feeling defensive.

I have a DS and a DD, which does sometimes make me question what I read on the feminist boards. But the questioning is good, no?
And if I find I'm attempting to discuss something that is not considered capable of being questioned, I withdraw from the thread.

Not only a DS, but a teenager.

whatme interesting point. I think that is one of the main resons I was so uncomfortable with the "Romeo and Juliet" thread which was referred to earlier. If I examine how I want the world to be for my DD's it is not actually the same as the way I want the world to be for my DS - and sometimes it is hard to accept the middle ground IYSWIM

Society is even less set up to cushion men who choose to have babies. It is impossible to transfer the role of primary carer to a man without a drop in income far in excess of the equivalent situation with the sexes reversed.

Only women's choices to stay at home are valued financially by the state (and even then, it's a bit of a joke, yes Osborne, with your stupid ideas about 'negotiating' maternity pay, I'm looking at you). Of course, we then wonder why women 'want' to stay at home, and why fathers don't 'want' to take a more central role at home, when actually the state makes that decision for almost every hetero dual-parent set up. It's got bugger all to do with what we want.

Then, of course, up pops some politician (Tories are slightly worse for it but both other parties contain members guilty of this) whinging about how maternity leave is an impossible drain on small businesses. I swear, I want to take out billboards, wear t-shirts, brand it on their foreheads THAT EVERY BUSINESS CAN CLAIM BACK A MINIMUM OF 92% OF STATUTORY MATERNITY LEAVE. It is nothing short of offensive that our politicians seek to blame mothers (some of which have only taken the fucking maternity leave cos they're the only ones who can) for the failure of small businesses?! Arrrrrrgh!

Capitalism is not set up to cushion women who choose to have babies, whilst I'm sure many of us enjoy the perks of capitalism we can't have both

Pure capitalism has been replaced with various forms of social capitalism in most countries though, and a large percentage of cash is siphoned away from taxpayers.

Right now it is not spent on making it easier to have pre-school kids, the vast bulk tends to be spent on schooling, health, and welfare of the old/ unemployed etc. One can increase taxes to pay for preschool childcare ( or even make using it tax deductible would be a start but yiu soon hit the decision about what else you need to cut.