Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

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

999 replies

DioneTheDiabolist · 18/12/2016 18:30

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 Sad 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?

OP posts:
Thread gallery
5
girlwiththeflaxenhair · 22/12/2016 14:41

The problem I see with working together is that from your point of view there are no issues now for girls and women (in the UK at least), nothing that needs addressing or resolving

I haven't said this either.

bumbleymummy · 22/12/2016 14:42

Ami, if the alternative was that the children would live with their father so that I could work full time then no, I wouldn't feel disadvantaged. As I said, I guess it depends on what you value more.

"Being a feminist DOES NOT mean you don't support equality in general."

Of course not. But if you're more concerned with equality in general then maybe you're less inclined to call yourself a feminist because feminism is more focussed on women alone?

amispartacus · 22/12/2016 14:45

Ami, if the alternative was that the children would live with their father so that I could work full time then no, I wouldn't feel disadvantaged. As I said, I guess it depends on what you value more

You seem very binary in your thinking. Working FULL time, LIVE with their father.

There are alternatives in life. It's not simply a choice of working full time or not working, keeping the children or them living with their father.

amispartacus · 22/12/2016 14:50

however it does seem to mean that you don't focus on equality in general, but equality for women where you perceive women suffer inequality

Don't you think it's natural for people to fight more for people 'like them'?

Such as LGBT people who fight for LGBT people's rights etc?

If you believe in women's rights and want things to change for women, you are a feminist.

If you want things to change for LGBT people, you a "LGBTist"

if you want things to change for all people, you are an equalist (and a feminist and an LGBTist)

By definition, you are a feminist IF you want things to be more equal for all people. Being a feminist is a sub set of being an equalist

If you don't want things to change for women, you ARE NOT an equalist

bumbleymummy · 22/12/2016 14:51

Ami, if you remember, I am replying to your posts -

"But many relationships fail and usually it's the mum who ends up with the children and having to work around them whilst relying on the NRP for money. "

And

"in many separated couples, a lot of the parenting responsibilities falls to the mum - and that included appointments. holiday care, child care after school, school runs - which does have a MASSIVE impact on the mum - and the children."

You have presented quite binary situations which is what I have replied to.

bumbleymummy · 22/12/2016 14:54

I'm not entirely sure that I agree with that definition Ami. Some people campaign for changes that may be to the detriment of other groups do not necessarily about equality...

amispartacus · 22/12/2016 14:55

You have presented quite binary situations which is what I have replied to

The situations are binary at the moment - they don't have to be. I would like to live in a world where if separated, things don't always fall to the mum so she does not have to suffer financially.

Too many separated Dads are the Disney Dads. They see their child EOW, don't do the school runs, don't take care of their children when sick, see their child for tea during the week and if it suits them - and don't often pay maintenance.

All this has an effect on the mum, her earning power and poverty. Wouldn't it be nice to see a change - so the separated parent is expected to look after their children more during the week, is expected to do more of the childcare and to play more of a role in their child's life?

bumbleymummy · 22/12/2016 15:00

Ami, but again you are presenting it as a negative that the woman is 'suffering' because she has the children more. I know that my DH(and I'm sure plenty of others!) would feel that they were the ones suffering because they weren't getting as much time with their children. You are placing more importance on the finance side of it than the emotional side of it and some women just don't think like that. They would rather work part time and be there for the children.

amispartacus · 22/12/2016 15:00

I don't think many people on here would go on Black Lives matters and say they don't believe in improving black lives because they are an equalist.

I think that if you believe in improving the lives of women and girls, that makes you a feminist.

girlwiththeflaxenhair · 22/12/2016 15:04

By definition, you are a feminist IF you want things to be more equal for all people. Being a feminist is a sub set of being an equalist

I think you are getting it the wrong way around. An equalist would of course say that they wanted things to get better for everyone. A feminist only wants things to get better for women, and that is the difference.

I picked education as it is the clearest cut example of a sex based difference that everyone can relate to. When it has been raised, the female dominated NUS and even people on this thread will dismiss it as nothing to do with women or the education system setup to promote women. Not only that, but it's routinely actually blamed on men for being poor role models to boys.

amispartacus · 22/12/2016 15:04

but again you are presenting it as a negative that the woman is 'suffering' because she has the children more

You are placing more importance on the finance side of it than the emotional side of it and some women just don't think like that

It can have a negative impact on the woman and the children financially - and living in poverty can have a massive impact on life outcomes.

It's a negative for the dad if he is unable to work part time to see his child because it's still unusual for men to work part time.

RufusTheSpartacusReindeer · 22/12/2016 15:04

By definition, you are a feminist IF you want things to be more equal for all people. Being a feminist is a sub set of being an equalist

I like this

And the bit about if you dont want things to change for women you are not an equalist

amispartacus · 22/12/2016 15:05

A feminist only wants things to get better for women, and that is the difference

Thanks for explaining that to a feminist Hmm

bumbleymummy · 22/12/2016 15:05

"I think that if you believe in improving the lives of women and girls, that makes you a feminist."

But if it is to the detriment of others then you're not an equalist.

Mistoffeleze · 22/12/2016 15:06

@amispartacus

As a headmistress, I see that there is a difference between the genders and it isn't due to conditioning from birth, it's intrinsic

Yet you go on to suggest that girls struggle compared to boys with, for example, presenting.

I'm surprised to hear a headmistress say that. Teaching is definitely one area where there is still a lot of hidden messages towards boys and girls, how teaching styles affect those people (especially girls) who lack confidence, who don't want to put their hands up, who worry about presentation etc. I hope that you encourage your teaching staff to ensure that their teaching methods help girls to learn.

I do. Equally, I expect teachers to change their methods to suit boys or anyone else in the class for that matter. Lets not forgot that girls are out performing boys in the classroom, uni and beyond. This is however lost of feminists who only care about poor women whilst declaring it will help boys too.

Their choice - is it? Is it a choice made from free will, without external pressure, societal expectations, social conditioning etc etc

Of course it is free choice to have children. There's similar pressure on men to return to work and support thier children and wife. Do you know why? It's largely due to the fact that they don't have wombs or boobs!

There's domestic violence toward men and women

Overwhelmingly towards women.

True. Infanticide is largely by women but I'm yet to see large groups of men protesting about women and children being left alone together.

Plenty of evidence why girls are put off science... Seen as a 'male' subject. Mainly boys in the class. Male teachers. A culture where the teachers don't see girls as being there.

Physics is largely a male subject. It's suited to fairly lazy boys who can learn a few formulas and how to use them and get fairly good grades. Girls tend to do better than boys in biology. Chemistry tends to be for the most intelligent which tends to be boys.

One look at MN would lead one to suspect women are judged far more than men.

You're coming across as far too intelligent to pretend that MN is a true representation of real life.

I am sure most people would like more gender equality, wouldn't they?

But that Isn't what feminism means. It's now, as someone else said, taking from men for the promotion of women. Positive discrimination and blaming an entire sex for our issues.

amispartacus
I'd just love for girl to say at least one thing they think feminists want.

Can I answer this?

I believe feminists want equality of outcome when it suits but, hypocritically, not when it doesn't. They want priviledge at the expense of others. They want to blame everything that is wrong in the world on men and they believe that they and only they are right. The believe there's a special place in hell for women who don't support other women and they feel entitled to whine and moan about everything that goes wrong in their lives and instead of taking control, growing a pair and sorting it out, blame nasty violent men.

@Oswin

Every single woman in my life has been either assaulted or sexually assaulted by a man.
Raped, stabbed , punched, kicked, slapped. Murdered.

I don't know any. I'm sorry if that happened but I'm not sure what you want me to say. As I said, No women I know have been assaulted (sexually or otherwise) by a man.

@Hotmail

If you like having access to a vote, education, a range of jobs, contraception, abortion, domestic violence legislation, equal pay legislation then you're lucky. Because feminists fought hard for those rights for you.

They did, thank god. We could extend equal pay legislation into equality legislation though and then we can happily agree that those amazing women won the battle.

@lastgirlontheleft

it might mean they have never experienced men's sheer unadulterated hatred of them, just because they were born female.

Absolutely. I can't for a second imagine it as as I'm likely to have has as much experience of men as you ie. meeting and interacting with them, it suggests that this isn'ty men as a whole, but a few.

lassWiTheDelicateHair

*Don't like being told I'm weak because I don't want to chase a career

The issue is that some posters think opting out of a career to have children has to be accommodated in some way should you want to opt in again so that you don't miss out compared to women who don't.

Are you for this or against it? We have maternity leave. I think anything else is ludicrous. If you make a choice putting child-bearing above you career then you are choosing to miss out on the career side.

@girlwiththeflaxenhair

The gap in educational attainment is a very recent and unless you believe that girls are just smarter than boys then there could not be any other explanation for it.

Girls tend to occupy the middle ground in IQ tests (which I'm well aware aren't perfect) whereas the brightest and dumbest tend to be boys. With the decrease in things like grammar schools and children all lumped in together, the brightest are held back giving the middle (girls) more opportunity to do better by comparison. A great example of feminism enabling girls at the expense of boys.

Wow, that's a long post! I had lunch in the middle!

amispartacus · 22/12/2016 15:07

But if it is to the detriment of others then you're not an equalist

In what ways do you think the aims of feminism is detrimental to others?

amispartacus · 22/12/2016 15:08

With the decrease in things like grammar schools and children all lumped in together, the brightest are held back giving the middle (girls) more opportunity to do better by comparison. A great example of feminism enabling girls at the expense of boys

What's feminism got to do with that?

girlwiththeflaxenhair · 22/12/2016 15:09

I don't think many people on here would go on Black Lives matters and say they don't believe in improving black lives because they are an equalist.

If they were black and had mixed race partners or children and believed that the black lives matters campaign negatively impacted them, would they be racists for saying so ?

Mistoffeleze · 22/12/2016 15:15

What's feminism got to do with that?

Earlier, you said,

I'm surprised to hear a headmistress say that. Teaching is definitely one area where there is still a lot of hidden messages towards boys and girls, how teaching styles affect those people (especially girls) who lack confidence, who don't want to put their hands up, who worry about presentation etc. I hope that you encourage your teaching staff to ensure that their teaching methods help girls to learn.

If feminism is for the advancement of women and the push for them to be equal in a patriarchy (I'm humouring you here) then this has been achieved in schools and has gone beyond equality. Removing streaming based on ability benefits the middle achievers to the detriment of the highest ie. at the expense of boys.

It's, to my mind, an example of where feminism is about taking, not giving and not about true equality. It's about the creation of a matriarchy.

bumbleymummy · 22/12/2016 15:17

Ami, ensuring that there are equal numbers of women/men in certain work environments which could mean that a more suitable male candidate is overlooked in favour of a female candidate.

amispartacus · 22/12/2016 15:25

Removing streaming based on ability benefits the middle achievers to the detriment of the highest ie. at the expense of boys

Umm, the Grammar debate is irrelevant to feminism. I have no issue with streaming. I have an issue with grammar schools in general (but that's a different debate). Education is an incredibly complex area and attitudes towards education from pupils, attitudes within a class, attitudes of the teachers, attitudes towards lessons and subjects and the curriculum are very important.

But I personally have no issue with streaming.

PoochSmooch · 22/12/2016 15:31

Mistoffeleze, what does this mean?

"Chemistry tends to be for the most intelligent which tends to be boys"

Have I got it right that you're a teacher, and you believe this to be true?

Blimey.

Ami, you are being very patient. Hats off to you!

Mistoffeleze · 22/12/2016 15:33

Education is an incredibly complex area and attitudes towards education from pupils, attitudes within a class, attitudes of the teachers, attitudes towards lessons and subjects and the curriculum are very important.

Oh, are they? Tell me more.

Thank's for parentsplaining to me!

How is education not relevant to feminism? Girls were behind / less educated yet now they aren't. Was this thanks to feminism? Surely the mysiginistic patriarchy wouldn't have done something to benefit girls at the expense of boys?

Earlier you said you hoped our lessons were geared towards girls and their different learning styles. You've spoken of barriers to entry into STEM areas.

How is this not relevant to feminism? The vast majority of grammar school pupils were male. Grammars are for some reason seen as unfair and have now nearly vanished.

If pupils really were streamed then in a 3 form entry school, the likelihood would be a top and bottom set of mainly boys and a middle of girls. How would you feel about this?

amispartacus · 22/12/2016 15:34

I am wondering if anyone can explain to me why we don't need feminism today?

Do they really think that there are no barriers facing women and girls in the UK today and no expectations of women that need challenging?

amispartacus · 22/12/2016 15:37

If pupils really were streamed then in a 3 form entry school

Streamed based on what?

IQ? Intelligence?

Or results at KS2?

The vast majority of grammar school pupils were male. Grammars are for some reason seen as unfair and have now nearly vanished

I think someone can explain that to you...