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?

From what i have seen on here, it would be difficult to be a feminist without referring to men, but as there is a conflict of interests, the unintentional impression is feminist view men in a negative light and women can do no wrong.

I know it must be tedious for the experienced feminist to have to denounce this all the time, but i think it makes you come across as not so 'defensive', when it is explained to not so experienced.

Im not saying you should give a shit about what others think, just my thoughts on why some might come across as 'anti men'

Posie

I was never a teenager?

But in all honesty it's not the prevention of vaginal sex that should be addressed it's the abortion issue and the vilification of rutting teens.

I don't use the word because it's become sullied but to my mind all it means is you want everyone to be equal under the law and you want fairness at home.

I don't agree with all feminists although clearly I am one. There isn't one view point. I'm a capitalist feminist and want more women in positions of power (we have barely started in the UK) and I see ambition and success as something that many women love, whereas some feminist thinks that kind of thing is only for men and that we should reject capitalism and live in some kind of hippy commune set up without any businesses.

I also like men and thnks it is as important they have the right to dust the hous and be at home as women.

I also think too enhanced materity rights damage women and the reason I earn pretty well (very well) in my 40s is because I had few if any maternity rights with the 5 children.

There are lots of different views.

Yes - I remember being a teenager too and the fumbling that led to penetration ie with fingers to start with, and the peer pressure that virginity was a burden which must be offloaded asap. I hope to give my dd different messages.

yes feminism has many ideological nuances and stances
just as left wing/right wing does
there is no one size fits all

Stewie, ive never really given it much thought, i would have thought it would be the other way round too. The risks associated with kissing and touching for teenagers are far less than sex. Although i do remember my older boys, being shown how to put a condom on and being shown a video of how babies are made.

Perhaps the focus in schools at least, is how not to get pregnant or get a STD, rather than pleasure.

Chickens, just wanted to add that women can also be responsible for upholding patriarchy. It's a different dynamic with a different context, but patriarchy for sure does not mean individual men.

OG My thoughts on David McRae (general disclaimer - my legal qualifications are England & Wales not Canada)

1. The case of Robert Latimer sounds horrendous. With no further research on my part I would accept that a 10 year prison sentence for a father (who in agreement with the mother) who killed a child who functioned at the level of a 3 months old (not a vegetable ffs! who uses that language now! might be marginally more understandable if the child was actually in PVS/brain-stem death but DMcR says otherwise) is exceptionally harsh and lacking in compassion. I quote: " Well, advocates for the disabled may applaud the court decision, claiming that it demonstrates respect for their rights, but the fact remains that Tracy Latimer was not handicapped. As I said, she was a vegetable." I have no idea what kind of a medical diagnosis DMcR is referring to there. Despite that, I suspect DMcR is right that if the mother had killed the child she would have received greater leniency from the court.

1. Danielle Blais of Montreal who drowned her six-year-old son Charles-Antoine in a bathtub. Agreed that in contrast to the Latimer case the sentence is negligible (she was also lauded by the local Autism Society as demonstrating the pressures parents of autistic children face - not a decision I can comprehend either). However, Blais' sentence is comparable to that of Gabriel Britt (Age 6, died 3 March 2001) who was beaten and suffocated by his father, Terrence Britt. Britt pled guilty to manslaughter and received a 10 year sentence which was suspended and 4 years of probation - so no prison time for him either. Or looking at more severe (and in my view proportionate sentencing) case of Justin Malphus killed in 2000, aged 5 who was beaten, tortured and drowned by his mother, Joyce Malphus. Malphus was convicted of felony murder and two counts each of aggravated battery and cruelty to a child in the first degree. She was sentenced to life plus 60 years in prison ? the maximum sentence possible. Both Gabriel and Justin were also autistic. So I am not sure what point DMcR hopes to make by cherry-picking two cases and comparing them to one another when I can do the same in an attempt to extrapolate show fathers are treated as equally leniently or that mothers get harsher sentences. Just reminds me that the plural of anecodote does not equal data.

1. Cheryl Baker killed her 10 year old daughter Katie-Lynn (weighing just 20lbs when she died - just heartbreaking). DMcR states: "In [Cheryl's defence] Katie Lynn had Rett's Syndrome, a severe form of autism and one of the symptoms of this disorder is a lack of the desire to eat." No one's been charged. DMcR doesn't mention the child's father or whether he noticed his child literally disappear before his eyes? Shocking nonetheless that the mother was not charged. Same for Renee Heikamp.

What I did notice about the cases above was that apart from the Latimer case where both parents are mentioned, all the other cases do not mention another parent. There is no excuse but I cannot imagine how difficult it must be struggling alone with autism for any of those parents (both men and women) and how desperate they must be to act as they did after years of coping alone.

With regard to the rest of the statistics DMcR quotes - he doesn't provide a reference for them (apart from the GB hospital documentary which I am just trying to find) so it's difficult to discuss them. I did however read this which was very interesting in delving into the reasons mother murder from the World Psychiatry Journal: www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2174580/

OG If you read carefully I said you were taking offense as opposed to being offensive. Different uses of the same word. But I suspect once again like your 'offense' at SGM's "sex tips" you are having a giraffe! Whatever floats your boat...

yep-i agree SGM
i feel this comes from the jolly ol patriarchic idea where mens pleasure is more important than womens.

I should imagine in schools, much like everything else they only have the resources to cover the basics, rather than explore options in depth. At home perhaps sex is a taboo subject for some.

I have two teenage sons, one will be 18 in a few months and i know that peer pressure to have sex, especially the older they get is very high.

Sex is often defined as penetrative, but can naturally include a great deal of non-penetrative acts; try telling a lesbian that she doesn't have sex!

The reproductive urge is also an inherrent part of why the whole animal kingdom engages in sex.

These aren't two contradictory statements are they?

I agree too SGM. So much of my early sexual experience was about the boy/man getting his end away - not about ME getting something from it. The sad thing is I THOUGHT I was enjoying it at the time. But I was several bfs before I got an orgasm out of it.

Me too Porto....main reason I ended up with DH....he was the first of fucking loads many that was any good in bed.

I was searching for the FB "like" then Posie

Chickens, you can call me Narky. I shall call you ChickensHaveNoEyebrows or PooWellies

I think it's a joke that "Grown ups" are telling teenagers how to have sex.

It's like a Harry Enfield sketch poorly done.

No OG, ime, it's about girls doing stuff they are not really enjoying, because they feel they have to.

And maybe us mothers who lived through the 70s/80s/90s and hence the "permissive society" want MUCH better for our children.

Portofino Tue 16-Aug-11 21:39:22
No OG, ime, it's about girls doing stuff they are not really enjoying, because they feel they have to.

--------

If you don't like vaginal sex and reproduction then that's your opinion.

Stop thinking for the majority.

Jeez...is it that hard ?

nonetheless they need to take responsibility for enacting stereotypical roles.and not resort to menz and/or society made me do it.thats a cop out

I lived through the 60's Portfino.

Is it a competition?

Vaginal sex is normal and it's needed, if you don't agree you should at least be grateful because your here aren't you?

I'm rather fond of penetrative sex. And was considerably keener than my teenage male partner, as I recall. If you're reading this, G.C., I apologise if I caused you any long term trauma.