To wonder why so many women are in denial about misogyny?

[seeker]

What do they get out of insisting that men are subject to exactly the same level of discrimination and abuse as women? That Mary Beard, for example, would have been treated in the same way if she had been a man?

I just don't get it.

Good god, Anonymous!

Just because you're not aware of women's achievements, it doesn't mean there haven't been any.

I think that, while these topics are all connected, the main one her7e is the fact that women are sexually humiliated publicly and repeatedly when they try and engage in a topic which had nothing whatever to do with looks, sex or gender. This happens anonymously on the internet, and the internet seems to encourage posters to go far further than they would in real life.

I think seeker can handle you being confrontational, delboy. Don't worry about that part.

Why not just explain what you meant by "Yep thats it- just trying to derail an argument rather than pointing out that maybe just maybe someone might be wrong about part of their argument." for a start? You could do that before you went back to work, surely?

I did a Google Images search on Mary Beard - and the third picture that came up was AA Gill, FFS.

After reading this thread I have come to the conclusion that some women don't believe in Misogyny because they aren't all that bright.

"Woo-hoo! A woman invented the dishwasher. Well, that's all right then. Men can go to Hell - who needs 'em?! "

You said women haven't invented anything. We pointed out that they had. A bit of a jump from that to "Men can go to hell"!!

In fairness, women have achieved less than men. That tends to happen when you have always had less access to education, jobs and research opportunities. It's starting to shift as that process opens up, but the notion feminism is so powerful it can overcome entrenched attitudes overnight is just ridiculous. It's an uphill battle, and as attitudes mentioned here show, it's one many people are opposed to even being fought.

Frankly it isn't a surprise women have achieved less than men have. It's astonishing they've achieved so much, given the obstacles in their way. I will never understand how someone can on the one hand say feminism isn't necessary, and on the other call out the greater academic, technological and social achievements of men. Women weren't allowed to vote, attend university in equal numbers (or at all, until the late 19th century), work when married or be in a senior role until extremely recently. They still form only 19% of all MPs. How in the world can the holding back of women from their fullest potential be a supporting argument when claiming feminism has succeeded? That makes no sense at all. And how could feminism succeed in a matter of decades, when it has the attitudes of millennia to work against?

It just seems so obvious. I don't see how anyone can deny it.

WhitegoldWielder

I'm not meaning to weigh in on the other side of the argument here, but David Cameron has typically been depicted as a literal "dickhead" in political cartoons.

The difference being, of course, that it's satire, rather than abuse.

Though delboy might want to do some reading first before venturing to tell a bunch of feminists how they are doing feminism all wrong.

I suggest

This as the absolute starting point

This also may help

A history of the issue

And this may be of use when you are floundering

'And now tell me why the ancient roots of the word 'hysterical' actually have any significance to modern life whatsoever?'

Although it is no longer used as a name for a medical condition, there are many doctors who still consider it to be such a thing. Some use the term 'conversion disorder', which is what hysteria morphed into over the years (in part) and recently the DSM IV has added a new disorder, see here (somatic symptom disorder - basically do you go on about being in pain, or feel anxious about your health - well you might have SSD, nothing to do with the fact that you might be legitamately very unwell or misdiagnosed.) If you have chronic pain or M.E you might be treated as hysterical in the medical sense of the word, particularly if you are female. There is a book published in the 1990s on chronic back pain by a hugely respected medical professional which talks about how women are more likely to feel more pain if they have big hips, being essentially hysterical in nature. Which is such utter unscientific bullshit it is laughable. There is a psychiatrist who treats M.E who in the last 10 years has written that M.E is an illness created by females who wish to have the status of an invalid, get out of housework and avoid sex and that such a person feels no guilt about their (fake) condition and claiming benefits in the way that someone with (legitimate) depression does. This charmer has just been knighted, incidentally, it's a mainstream view.

It might not be immediately obvious to most people how the word hysterical is still used and how deeply misogynist it is, but it is. It is mostly used in everyday conversation relating to women, usually a woman who is being a bit emotional. It is a misogynistic term designed to shut someone up in the way that people are attempting to shut Mary Beard up. To dismiss their thoughts. Emotional, female thoughts are clearly in the eyes of many, not the same as rational, male thoughts.

Anonymumous I thought you were bored, not in denial? Seems neither were true.

Takingthehobbit, yes and not only is it satire but most of the people drawing such cartoons or writing the articles are also male.

Incidentally, one of the arguments in favour of feminism is economic. A modern economy can't afford to suppress the talents and intelligence of half its population, especially in an advanced social democracy, where someone not working to their fullest ability will therefore not contribute to their fullest extent to the tax take, and to economic growth. Feminism should help ensure that the most competent people fill the most demanding positions, rather than the applicant pool being diminished by unreasoning prejudice.

Would you be counting your blessings if you were drugged, gang raped, and then an entire town conspired in a cover up and then to blacken your name?

Sorry but would you?

*The tone of all this was 'jokey' in such a way that it is impossible to complain about without appearing to be a miserable bitch. It is misogyny though. Just as it was misogyny yesterday when female students were turned away from the gym because there was noone to supervise them. But the male students of the same age were allowed to stay.

The sequence of events as I have described above what not have happened if I was a man*

Brilliant illustration of everyday misogyny and sexism. The little ways in which many men assume that women are there to serve them.

Male privilege.

Your last sentence there is staggeringly, staggeringly ignorant, Anonymous. No, porn is not just a first world problem.

I do not believe women have achieved less than men.

How are we going to score it? Do we subtract all the things like wars, that men have 'achieved'? Because I would suggest that perhaps the deaths of tens of millions of young men in the trenches in WWI is not quite the sort of 'achievement' that looks positive on a resume.

Yes, men have been 'in power' while women haven't, but the results are not entirely positive.

Without women, centuries of children would never have learned to read. Women held the keys to written culture for centuries. That absolutely fascinates me, that centuries before women were allowed into university, you would struggle to find a man who didn't owe the fact he could read to a woman who taught him.

I would set that sort of fact against, say, WWI.

Incidentally, a really interesting book (which is totally male-centric) that got me thinking about how we ought to value supposed 'achievements' of men down the centuries is this one: www.amazon.co.uk/Into-The-Silence-Mallory-Conquest/dp/0099563835

The author explains how many decisions by men during the war were stupid and resulted in huge death tolls - and then the survivors ended up going off to climb Everest, risking their own lives, killing quite a lot of 'native' porters because they didn't really treat them as humans, and leaving their wives bringing up children on their own. It just shocked me how much selfishness and ego went into things we now think are 'achievements'.

Porn a first world problem? You think it's a first world problem that vulnerable women who have often been abused since a young age and have drug addictions end up in such an industry?

Because in looking at the porn industry you can't just look at it in terms of the users.

Have you read this?
www.wrongingrights.com/2013/01/what-if-we-responded-to-sexual-assault-by-limiting-mens-freedom-like-we-limit-womens.html

A brilliant bit of satire, followed by a bunch of men totally failing to get the point. Their view is so skewed by society's favouritism that they don't even understand what the original piece is trying to do.

A woman invented the circular saw....that is damn significant

I consider myself incredibly fortunate to be alive now. I count my blessings every day.

So do I

Believe me, it?s much more healthy and conducive to a nice life than constantly getting steamed up about imagined slights on one?s gender.

are you really saying that what's happened to Mary Beard and other women "are imagined slights"?

I can understand why you would campaign for women?s rights in other parts of the world where they really do have a terrible time. But all this clutching at our foreheads and muttering about the evils of porn? If ever there was a First World problem..

It is impossible to even think, never mind campaign, for women's rights in other parts of the world without also thinking about porn-sadly the two are often inextricably linked.

Yes, working class men were also oppressed. What is your point? One oppression doesn't trump another and the working classes are still held back.

First world problem is a bit of a non-argument. So is "steamed up" "imagined slights" and so on. You are making the problems out to be emotive where they are not. It is not a fair way to argue.

Do you have daughters? Would you be happy to see them in porn, to see them being smacked around the face/strangled/prolapse for the enjoyment of others?

Also with regard to the matter of the economy, it has just struck me how much consternation there has been in education in recent years, that girls had started outperforming boys in KS2 and 3. Having been given equal access to education, but then achieving more with it, was not part of the deal surely?

That is to Anonymous btw.