to think the term "menz" is bloody irritating?!

[Squtternutbaush]

Since we've had the recent influx of (anti)feminist threads appearing I've noticed that anytime an issue arises that might put males at a disadvantage they are dismissed with this bloody belittling term and its really starting to grate on me now.

I understand that in most peoples eyes feminism is about equality but it seems that some are intent on turning it into a war between women and men and being just as disrespectful to males as they complain that males are to females.

I'm not denying in anyway that feminism is a great thing or that women haven't been at a disadvantage forever but I don't see how this attitude helps the cause.

I have a son and a daughter and I want them both to have a respect for people regardless of gender!

"I've always jumped on those threads to be fair Hakylut.

Not the same thing at all!"

Why isn't it?

I think what Squtternutbaush is saying is that FGM and infant male circumcision aren't the same thing at all, ie she's agreeing with you, Hakluyt.

"It is very difficult to describe how infuriating and red mist producing the "but this happens to men too" line can be when you have been hearing it for 30 years!"

If something happens to men too and people have been pointing this out to you for 30 years, why on earth would you still be claiming it happens only to women?

FGM is different - men do not own the bit of anatomy in question, they cannot be affected. I'm not talking about analogies here, I'm talking about things which affect both genders but have a public perception of being unique to one of them, like the examples stated (DV and single parenthood).

Promoting equality only for women on certain issues that mostly affect women isn't promoting true equality.

And that's fine, feminism can be whatever it wants to be, but from what I have seen, I think feminism in general needs to recognise the difference between promoting women's rights and promoting equality, and admit that they are not the same thing.

"The whole bloody world is run by men for men, the patriarchy exists for the benefit of men. But when women try to find a little corner of Mumsnet to talk about feminism without male interference, it seems some men just can't stand being excluded."

Quite! and women need to know it's okay to discuss things without having to think about men all the flipping time.

Squtter posters on FWR tried to address this with you when you brought it up on another thread and you ignored it.

The "menz" attitude comes from the fact that "what about men" is used as a way of shutting women up. You know and understand that. Perhaps you were unfairly attacked on that particular thread, posters on MN aren't perfect. Hey ho, we're people. And I'm sick of being told I have to hit some impossible target of perfection before I can discuss anything to do with women.

Feminist's arguments aren't invalidated by the fact that they don't always address every point kindly and with infinite patience.

The Equality Illusion is a nice feminist starting point.

WooWoo, you do realise that that's exactly what feminism says, all of the time?

Skylark, no one have EVER ONCE EVER claimed it only happens to women!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

FFS! Why do we have to have these stupid arguments over and over and over. Why can't people read what is actually written down?

"Promoting equality only for women on certain issues that mostly affect women isn't promoting true equality."

Can you explain what you mean by this WooWooOwl?

It's a bit like having that one friend who comes along while you are talking about something who manages to turn the conversation into "what about MEEE" style bleating.
We've all probably encountered them, it's not that they don't have a valid point sometimes but that they NEVER actually engage in the discussion you are having, they are waiting to bring it around to the 1% example and bang on about that.
It's annoying and distracting and does not accept that the other 99% is what everyone else is concentrating on right now.

And Hakulyt makes a good point - what makes FGM so much worse than male circumcision. Thinking about that isn't saying "You're not agreeing with me", it's about thinking "Well, I think this issue is different for different genders, but that one isn't. Why is that?" and really examining it rather than going for a knee jerk reaction of "Because it's obviously worse!"

It is obviously worse, but why? What is it about FGM that makes it so much worse and more horrifying than male circumcision? That will then give you an insight into why feminists might campaign or raise awareness about issues (which affect both sexes) pertaining to one gender but not the other.

^How would you feel if you read a discussion about something which is traditionally / mostly male and was being described as a men's issue, you pointed out that women can be involved too, and you were told you were "derailing"? I'd be bloody furious. I'd hope that sort of discussion is derailed every single time.

Why shouldn't they point it out? Because feminism is supposed to be about EQUALITY, not about building an equally sexist structure for "women's issues". It is not "derailing" to suggest that we talk about an issue as a problem for everyone who is affected, not as a problem only for women just because they're the majority affected. If you think a discussion about DV or single parenting is a discussion about women, then there is something very badly wrong.^

Feminism isn't at all about creating a space for general equality in the abstract. It's about equality in the context of an existing structural oppression. I think what you say about "if you think a discussion about DV is about women then there's something badly wrong" is itself wrong, and badly misguided. Because feminism is about those things that primarily affect women, about the real and undeniable harms done to women and an issue like DV is overwhelmingly about that, and it's entirely missing the point of feminism not to recognise that.

Discussions getting detailed by men is just another manifestation of the structural oppression that feminism aims to address. This is something that people entirely miss when claiming women-focused discussion is itself sexist. It isn't - because it isn't backed up by a set of pervasive structural oppressions in wider society.

What if I popped up in every discussion about racism or colonialism saying "but what about the white people? We suffer from discrimination too!" It would be nonsensical and insensitive. And ignore deep structural oppressions that mean that it isn't enough to say we just need to ignore race and treat everyone equally.

Completely agree with lovecat. And cailindana.

YANBU

It's patronising and belittling

I mostly think of it as being a bit of a piss-takey word used when a man starts to claim that all men are affected by something that is being discussed seriously by women, for women, about women.

But I guess all men just don't have that sense of humour

They come around with a depressing regularity - one starts, then another shedload spring up saying how awful those nasty FWR posters are and there's a pile on from anyone who's ever had their nose put out of joint/had their world-view challenged.

I used to think the FWR boards was an unfriendly place, I've had a look around and it's not really any different to anywhere else on mn. You stay away from threads you don't like and join in the ones that you're interested in.

Saying that, I blooming hate the word menz. I would hate for my ds to be lumped in like that, he's the sweetest most caring child you could meet and I'll be dammed if he grows up any different. mind you he might change. I hope not though

There is one poster on Mumsnet who calls her dp manshape, it's like aggggghh no no no

"Menz" on Mn arose from a thread eons ago. Can't remember the specifics, but like loads of MN words it had an origin and it stuck around.

The point many posters are making is one Mimsy made most eloquently - it is not the concept of an issue disproportionately affecting women, so that should be the focus of the discussion, that is the issue here. It is how you raise that point. Using the 'menz' phrase is patronising, cliquey and belittling and is used to put down a poster that isn't 'in the know'.

I mostly think of it as being a bit of a piss-takey word used when a man starts to claim that all men are affected by something that is being discussed seriously by women, for women, about women.

Most of the times that I have seen the phrase used it has been directed at women, I'm not sure I have ever seen it 'said' to a man on here.
Maybe it's just the threads that I have been on.

"If something happens to men too and people have been pointing this out to you for 30 years, why on earth would you still be claiming it happens only to women?"

I would never ever claim it only happens to women- that's what not what I said.
Right, let's take the example of domestic violence. Way back when I were a lass, domestic violence didn't exist. It was just men "giving women a smack" and it was condoned within society- women brought it on themselves, deserved it, they must have nagged, or not done the housework properly.. You know the sort of thing. Women started to make it an issue. Women campaigned and were abused as "marriage wreckers " and worse. Women took on local authorities, and the judiciary and the politicians and slowly, slowly brought it into the open, provided refuges and support and education..it was such a bloody hard struggle and it's still far from won. Can you see why it might be a bit exasperating when people say "Well, men are sometimes victims too- where, oh women, are their safe houses and refuges? Why aren't you doing something about that? And while you're about it, why aren't you demanding better services for male cancers? Oh, and boys aren't doing as well in school as they used to- they aren't doing better than girls any more- can women please address that one too?"

Of course the issues that effect men are serious and important. Of course men suffer under the patriarchy. But they are also privileged in society and benefit hugely from the patriarchy in a way that women just don't. Is it too much to expect them to do something about the issues that concern them themselves, rather than expecting women to take on their issues too?

Shit. Last para- that should be affect, not effect.

Aero tbf if it's the same poster I'm thinking about, the man shape thing is due to the death of her previous husband and this is how she copes. It's a well known story on the boards for years.

If it's the same poster I'm thinking about of course.