...to feel depressed that only 7% of UK identify as Feminist?

[DioneTheDiabolist]

www.fawcettsociety.org.uk/2016/01/we-are-a-nation-of-hidden-feminists/

7% of the population and just 9% of women in this country identify as feminist. I'm not saying that everyone should call themselves feminist, I care more about what people do, rather than the label they assign themselves. But I am that the number is so low.

Given that most people believe in sexual equality, why do so many people not feel comfortable to call themselves feminist? And what (if anything) can we do about it?

If everyone who says they are a feminist and who posts on FWR sticks to those rules from now on, does that mean you'd be happy to be referred to as a feminist?

I lurk a lot on the FWR threads and I haven't seen that daily. I HAVE seen a steady influx of posters who come on for a fight, shout bigot, hysterical wimmen etc and have their arses handed to them by means of logic, facts and reason. I don't suppose I can actually ask you to link to such a thread now can I, to see for myself? Is that unreasonable to ask?

Sorry, if people stick to those suggestions, will that recover the reputation of feminism, on MN at least?

I'd attempt an answer about mansplaining, but I fear I'd be told I'm being trivial or unreasonable.

Should the word "patronising" be avoided too, given its meaning and roots?

Itsmine - mansplaining is a very particular thing. It's not just a man explaining something, it's a man making an assumption that a woman doesn't know something and explaining it to them (often in a patronising way, often talking over the woman).

Oh ok.

My attempt at explaining that is that "screams like a girl" (or "throws / runs / cries") is used as a derogatory term in relation to a boy or man - because there's nothing worse than being "like a girl", obviously.

Whereas "mansplaining" is used as a short hand descriptor of what is happening, and is only used for a man. By definition, a woman can't "mansplain".

See also "you're so gay" or "that shirt is so gay". Only used as an insult, not a descriptor - again, because being gay is obviously so completely terrible

Mansplaining isn't a derogatory term, it's a description of a type of behaviour. It's fairly synonymous with patronising I think.

But women also try to explain things to people patronising like they don't know something. It's the same as moaning about a woman being called a slut or a bitch etc, it's unacceptable but using men only descriptors seems wrong and if a pointed attack at just men I've seen often used to try to just shut a man down from his viewpoint on a discussion.

How is it used in a derogatory manner? It's a behaviour that can be discussed, not an abusive term, unless I'm not understanding it correctly?

Ibelieve - just go on any of the trans threads where anyone disagrees and you will see it.

Or you could go on any one of a number of threads from the last 10 years about separated parents and assumptions about male / female behaviours where someone might point out that having a penis doesn't mean that you have been the perpetrator / abuser / cheater only to be told that they should be ashamed for not showing solidarity to their sex.

It's not about a steady influx of people coming on 'for a fight, shouting bigot, hysterical wimmen', it's about topics popping up and people with an opinion, experience or knowledge joining in a discussion to offer a view or learn.

The fact that you are labelling people who disagree like this (even if you and others are interspersing with smiling faces) is a perfect demonstration of the fact that these arguments aren't happening 'by means of logic, facts and reason' as you seem to think, they are happening through passive aggressive (sometimes and outwardly aggressive at other times) put downs, distraction strategies and shut downs. It is that behaviour which would make me want to disassociate with the label feminist (even though in some sense I am one), because I would not want to be associated with that sort of behaviour. My impression from the posts of some others on here (and previous, similar threads) is that I am not alone in that - perhaps if people are depressed by the figures quoted because they think the numbers should be higher they could listen to that with an open mind, particularly as some of those people are talking about 'learning' from other people's posts.

But it is used as abusive the amount of times I've seen it used online to belittle someone and to shutdown debate and it's not an accurate descriptor as it's not a male only trait

I find it fascinating that people can have such a different perception of threads in FWR.

Ditto, speak

Speak although I have seen it on FWR I'm talking in general now

on mansplaining at least although I think the phrase itself is an abomination if MRAs had made up womansplaining I imagine an outrage obviously we'd never know but there's been outrages over a lot less

Sorry, my stupidity is being mistaken for contrariness. I'm just trying to understand.

I've never used mansplaining as a put down or as a derogatory term. It's a concept that I've discussed as to why some men do that particular behaviour - discussing if it's a sexist behaviour or a general behaviour towards everyone. Whether their belief that they know more is based on the sex of the person they are talking to, or just their own personality.

Alongside the points made already, I would say that the difference is between whether they are talking "up" or "down" a group.

In comparison (and for example) you'll see "cis-splaining" and "trans-spraining" are both used on the www, in both cases when the person talking believes they are considered the "lower" in the scale.

I guess it comes from a similar place as "it's okay to poke fun up but never down"?

If you said a boy "runs like a girl", that is meant by the person saying it as a put down to the boy.

"Manspreading, mansplaining, whitesplaining" - it's a great description of an activity carried out by a group (as a class) generally towards another group who suffer discrimination.

There is a difference. I am sure that loads of people have been 'explained to' by someone else who has assumed they don't know something because of the group they belong to. It is patronising behaviour but the reasons behind it are the key.

Ooh hang on though womansplaining or wifesplaining isn't derogatory said the man

I'm sure wifesplaining goes on - the assumption that the husband doesn't know how to do something because they are the husband.