Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

to totally fail to understand why Sexism is never seen as bad as racism??

305 replies

chemicalsister · 27/10/2013 01:18

Following on from the Saudi Olympics thread, I keep getting upset about Sexism thriving in the modern world when racism is quite correctly - seen by the fast majority as clearly wrong and abhorent.
Even educated professionals have wound me up recently asserting we sholud adapt schools, especially first few years of infants , to better suit boys and their poorer attention span,
AND poor boys now do less well at exams at 16 so we must reduce course work etc..
I am old and remember when boys did better than girls at 16-- There was no outrage and plans to change exams then! It was just seen as inevitable ..... Fume!

OP posts:
trish5000 · 27/10/2013 22:54

kim. I do think your post saying that Sigmund only posts on feminism is way off. As only a cursory glance of her history can see that that is blatantly untrue. I looked at about 1 weeks worth,from recently, and there were 5 threads from feminism and 5 from other boards. So 50% not 100% as you claimed.
Then I thought I would look at 2 months worth. And the stats were[of which I think you are rather fond of if I remember correctly], 5 threads on feminism and 16 on other threads.
So not sure quite what you looked at and thought you saw. Perhaps you owe Sigmund an apology.

trish5000 · 27/10/2013 22:57

You do say feminist stuff I suppose, rather than on the feminism board. I will have another look. But from what I can remember you are still wrong.

SigmundFraude · 27/10/2013 23:02

"Patriarchy – Literally means the rule of the father and is generally understood within feminist discourses in a dualistic sense as asserting the domination of all men over all women in equal terms. "

Too tired to look for more right now, but I can do if required, there's loads out there..

SigmundFraude · 27/10/2013 23:07

Thanks trish Smile Though I'm a little perturbed that one of my latest posts suggesting that I'd 'do' Lord Tumble came up!

SigmundFraude · 27/10/2013 23:11

DontPanic - plenty of feminists would suggest you weren't a feminist without the necessary theoretical knowledge. I had a spat with a feminist on disqus (or however you spell it), because she reckoned you couldn't be a feminist without major theoretical knowledge. I told her she was an arse, and I wasn't wrong.

Grennie · 27/10/2013 23:13

I don't understand why if MRA's really care about men, they aren't out setting up projects to help men in need e.g. homeless men, men in prison, etc. Instead MRA's seem to spend most of their time criticising feminists. I am not sure how this helps men Hmm

Technotropic · 27/10/2013 23:14

Patriarchy is the term used to describe the society in which we live today, characterised by current and historic unequal power relations between women and men whereby women are systematically disadvantaged and oppressed. This takes place across almost every sphere of life but is particularly noticeable in women’s under-representation in key state institutions, in decision-making positions and in employment and industry. Male violence against women is also a key feature of patriarchy. Women in minority groups face multiple oppressions in this society, as race, class and sexuality intersect with sexism for example.

It took me 2 mins on google to find this description from the London feminist network but is typical of almost every description on the web. I think the key word is 'systematic' which is, I believe what sigmund seems to be saying.

I have to say that I have noticed sigmund being called upon a fair bit for simply expressing her pov. I would tend to agree that men are often demonised and is why I have no time for it. I have 100% commitment to equality but no interest in feminism.

The trouble is, feminism is what you make of it and I've read umpteen variations on the theme. It is unsurprising that many feminists disagree about many aspects. Comment about a view you've read and you are told that you're talking bollocks and that you don't know what you're talking about. A classic response.

DontPanicMrMannering · 27/10/2013 23:15

Then they would be wrong. I can disagree with her due to all feminists not having to toe a party line Wink

trish5000 · 27/10/2013 23:17
Grin

I had a look at my own posting history while I was there. Thought I would see what others would see. Had no idea I posted so much in chat.

trish5000 · 27/10/2013 23:19

Sorry chemicalsister. I am wandering off topic.

Grennie · 27/10/2013 23:19

Men are often demonised? I wonder how you can possibly think that? Posters talk about their real negative issues with DP's. This is not demonising men.

Technotropic · 27/10/2013 23:29

Greenie

The word 'systematic' is one such example where a feminist network is attempting to educate people. I'd have thought that was a pretty solid example of demonising men right there.

Reading examples of posters on here is not the issue here. It's the message that the feminist movement puts out.

Pan · 27/10/2013 23:42

I'd need to question that Tech - that use of systematic doesn't mean men are demonised per se - the operation of patriarchy indicates there are advantages that men generally receive, quite passively sometimes, just because of who they are. And yes often without the sense that the patriarchal system is harming them too. So for example their female loved ones receive lesser treatment, which adversely affects them too.

Pan · 27/10/2013 23:44

and also lots of women contribute to ensuring other women are continually disadvantaged, so the 'culprits' as it were are certainly not to be solely identified as men.

Technotropic · 27/10/2013 23:49

Pan

Perhaps I'm reading the first paragraph of my cut/paste differently to you.

You only need google to find that men are often demonised.

Toadinthehole · 27/10/2013 23:49

DontPanicMrMannering

So which part of what I said is "bollocks", and why?

Pan · 27/10/2013 23:59

Tech, I'd think the 'demonising' bit is knocking us of course a tad too. Something nearer 'failing to intervene/act when differential treatment is occuring' catches more of what I mean. And indeed why would they? I'd probably demonise men, generally, for doing little.
And also the implication that feminists would demonise all men is wildly off beam.

Technotropic · 28/10/2013 00:11

Pan

Again that depends on what you read and by whom. There is much out there and many strands of feminism. Thus to say that it is off beam is as off as you believe my comments to be. Ok I'll be more specific. I've read many articles from feminists that cast 'men' as the problem. This may not be a feminist wide view but one that is held by many feminists.

It is not possible to have an oppressed without an oppressor and often 'men' are made out to be the problem. That is, men as a class.

It wasn't long ago that an article stated that even those men that chose not to speak out against sexism were part of the problem, irrespective of whether they treated everyone equally. Now men really can't win but I guess the response is typically 'what about the menz'

LadyBigtoes · 28/10/2013 00:19

"50 of women who claim to be feminists ('it's abaht equality innit')"

Sigmund... feminism is about equality. That is the gist of its general dictionary definition (while of course it is a broad church). I don't know what you're trying to achieve with the above – to suggest people who think this have an accent and are therefore a bit dim? – or what?

Equality is what I bring to issues that affect me in everyday life – am I / women in general being treated in an unfair, unequal way? What would I need to do / ask for to make it equal (for me or other women)? Whether that means not changing my name (because the traditional expectations are unequal and unfair), insisting DP does his share of housework and childcare, or supporting charity campaigns abroad financially to do things like support women's education and freedoms in other places.

But because I see equality as the central issue, I don't support sexism against men – for example I would defend any man's right to be a nursery nurse, midwife and so on and try hard to avoid imposing the kind of subtle pressures of disapproval etc. that might make that harder for him. I would support any man who was suffering DV and encourage him to report it just as I would a woman.

Living in a patriarchy does not mean all men conspire to oppress; it means that the existing structures and social norm support and perpetuate gender inequality – the p means it relates to fatherhood, in other words that power imbalance being passed down. As with things like caste in India, you can legally abolish something (like unequal pay or various forms of discrimination) but it will persist as it's transmitted through socialisation, deeply held traditional beliefs and the millions of little social forces we experience every day – from raised eyebrows, to who parents choose to educate better, to a little girls' t-shirt that says "gorgeous" – while the boys' one says "space explorer". And so on.

A very, very significant proportion of the forces that keep women down come from women. It is often well-meaning and intended to protect women from being disapproved of or coming to grief. An example would be the message that women need to dress modestly and not get drunk on a night out because of the risk of rape, without a) requiring the same modesty or soberness of men or b) blaming men for rape. Plenty of women think this and some will even proclaim it in the Daily Mail.

A more extreme example would be FGM – often forced upon girls by women, who are worried and scared about the disapproval they or their daughter will face if they don't continue the tradition.

Yet when I think of FGM, I also worry about male circumcision and feel quite strongly that it is not something that it is OK to do to a small child who has no choice, for reasons of religion or tradition. In the interests of equality, I believe everyone should only, other than for a pressing medical reason, be circumcised when they are of an age to make that decision for themselves.

Your "man-hating" version of feminism makes no sense to me at all. I try to bring an ideal of equality to everything and that means equality with men, not against them.

Also, I think you have riled people on this thread because your posts have a tone that is both aggressive and defensive. They make you sound quite scared and angry, in the same way that many MRA seem to fear and hate women. It is one thing to discuss what feminism means to different people and on MN we do do that, a lot. It is another to belittle and sneer as in the quote above.

Pan · 28/10/2013 00:20

Tech,"It wasn't long ago that an article stated that even those men that chose not to speak out against sexism were part of the problem, irrespective of whether they treated everyone equally."

which is quite the point I was making - I take that as utterly obvious, but you take it as an extreme position to hold.
Yes, men can 'really win' if we look beyond our noses.

Pan · 28/10/2013 00:25

Sorry Tech - I missed the 'treated everyone equally' bit. We don't do that because we are different, so having a one-approach-fits-all framework means some people will be treated in an unequal way. Equality is not about treating people the same, quite the opposite.

Grennie · 28/10/2013 00:28

When feminists talk about men, they mean the class of men. This is different from each individual men. Feminism is a political theory, and like all theories, it uses it's own jargon to explain things. You need to understand what is actually being said first before you can make any critique that might make sense.

Grennie · 28/10/2013 00:30

It is about justice or fairness. So a heavily pregnant women who is a passenger on a bus, should not be treated the same as a young fit man. She needs a seat, he doesnt. That is about fairness.

garlicvampire · 28/10/2013 00:41

Resisting the temptation to read all 11 pages of what looks like a very interesting thread, at least until tomorrow ... There are a couple of good posts on the first page about the fact that racism is far from dead, and intersects with sexism to the detriment of black women. I'll add to that with ageism and disableism (is a word?), both of which have begun affecting me in recent years. The less like a fit, white, man you are, the less privileged you are. For each 'non' you score, you become more invisible & inaudible where you want to be seen & heard, while simultaneously sticking out like a giraffe in a flock of sheep where folks are looking for someone to have a go at. Fact.

garlicvampire · 28/10/2013 00:44

YY, Pan & Grennie!