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 bloody love Madonna for doing this?

308 replies

Destinysdaughter · 21/01/2017 22:19

I've been watching the speeches from the Washington women's march today and have felt so inspired and uplifted by them, it's really given me hope, didn't know Madonna was going to be there and I don't want to take away anything from the other speakers as they've all been brilliant but I just wanted to say well done Madonna for being there and adding your voice ( and admittedly celebrity kudos and attention) to this amazing show of dissent, power and love.

www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/live/2017/jan/21/womens-march-on-washington-and-other-anti-trump-protests-around-the-world-live-coverage?page=with:block-5883cfe4e4b00b8fc2ae363c#block-5883cfe4e4b00b8fc2ae363c

OP posts:
JustAnotherSilentOldNumber · 23/01/2017 20:27

She's entitled to her opinion. It's as simple as that.

And we are entitled to express our opinion about her, which is what we are doing. It's what we also do about men in the same situation

Not one person has suggested the whole entire planet's population of women is represented by her.

PigletWasPoohsFriend · 23/01/2017 20:28

She's entitled to her opinion.

She is also responsible for what she says and the terms she uses. Which in this case, we tend highly irresponsible.

PigletWasPoohsFriend · 23/01/2017 20:28

*are highly

Livelovebehappy · 23/01/2017 20:44

Would women have also been protesting if Hilary Clinton had won the presidency? After all, her husband was a serial adulterer during his presidency and was accused of at least one incident of rape, with his wife being complicit, allegedly, in covering these indiscretions up, even threatening some of the women into silence. I can't understand how most of these women are shouting their regret that Hilary didn't win the election, when in fact her actions towards women was equally abhorent.

MuteButtonisOn · 23/01/2017 20:57

Their marriage appears to be an AIBU ltb nightmare frankly.

iremembericod · 23/01/2017 20:59

Not one person has suggested the whole entire planet's population of women is represented by her.

So what is all this "she doesn't represent me", "disgrace to women" narrative? These types of comments mean women feel they either to align with the sisterhood or be a traitor which is a lose-lose situation.

When idiotic men say stupid things, men don't feel they have to take sides to be a man or they betray all men

She is just a person who made a speech. And she has an opinion. Like most men in the public eye.

SuburbanRhonda · 23/01/2017 21:08

live

You'd be surprised at how many women were revolted by Hillary standing by her man. She probably would have got far more than 3 million votes more than Trump if she hadn't.

But obviously it's impossible to say, and somewhat pointless to speculate on whether women would have marched in the same numbers had she won.

MuteButtonisOn · 23/01/2017 21:10

I can't understand how most of these women are shouting their regret that Hilary didn't win the election, when in fact her actions towards women was equally abhorent

I think her actions are worse. She is incredibly intelligent, and a lot of Trumps failings ( despite his apparent degrees in anthropology and economics - I think) come from a place of ignorance - which doesn't make it OK obviously. If half of what Paula Jones etc say is true Bill was absolutely monstrous, and Hillary complicit.

JustAnotherSilentOldNumber · 23/01/2017 21:22

So what is all this "she doesn't represent me", "disgrace to women" narrative? These types of comments mean women feel they either to align with the sisterhood or be a traitor which is a lose-lose situation.

Those comments are direct responses to the one or two posters (very small minority) on this thread who have suggested we have to "stick together" and blindly follow madonnna because she is female.

They are outright stating doing this is wrong as she doesn't speak for the masses.

JustAnotherSilentOldNumber · 23/01/2017 21:24

When idiotic men say stupid things, men don't feel they have to take sides to be a man or they betray all men

Yes you do get a minority of men feeling they have to stick together and follow the leader to be men. it's the same thing.

NinjaLeprechaun · 23/01/2017 22:38

The "you're either for us or you're against us" attitude being displayed on this thread - and it applies to both ends of the spectrum - is why I don't call myself a feminist. It's alienating and unhelpful.

"That is basically what has happened here, right down to being surrounded by propoganda calling it "peaceful protest" rather than looking at actual news of the riots it incited."
Do you mean the riots that took place the day before and weren't connected to the marches? Or do you mean the propaganda from police departments stating that there had been no arrests or incidences connected to the event?

"Such a shame it was overtaken by the "Women's March" people isn't it, to the point where it's now being thought of as a Women's March."
It was a Women's March: Organized by women, led by women, and highlighting issues important to women - issues like healthcare, education, climate change, LGBT rights, racial equality, etc., etc.

"Would women have also been protesting if Hilary Clinton had won the presidency?"
Would she be refusing healthcare to the most vulnerable people (not just in America, but worldwide)? Ignoring or trying to discredit climate change science? Selling off national park land to the highest bidder? Threatening to destroy public education? Actively attacking the press and trying to silence them? Supporting racists, and encouraging violence against minorities?
I'm sure that a lot of people - some of them even women - would protest if she'd been elected, and they would absolutely be within their rights to do so as long as it was peaceful, but I'm also sure that the numbers would be much smaller.

BillSykesDog · 24/01/2017 00:00

stubborn, have a Google for Dudley mosque. There was a lot of local opposition to a new mosque based on the fact the land it was to be built on was designated for buildings to provide employment such as factories and offices. It also wasn't in keeping with the local area which had a medieval character. All fairly reasonable objections, but the EDL hijacked the campaign and made it all about 'no mosques' and 'this is a Black Country area about mining and beer and mosques have no place here'.

I know personally that planned protests in Rotherham by victims groups and their supporters were stopped for the same reasons as I know people involved in them. The victims don't want to be associated with that because it discredits them.

They hijacked events in memory of Lee Rigby and overshadowed a peaceful remembrance event in Woolwich by kicking off in central London.

Shotton in Co Durham had objections put I re converting a pub to an Islamic centre which centred around it not having dedicated off street parking in a highly congested area. Again, hijacked by the EDL.

They hijack forces home coming parades:

sheffield.indymedia.org.uk/2010/06/454452.html?c=on

They hijacked a Sikh protest against the mishandling of the case of a Sikh girl being assaulted by a Muslim man.

I could go on...but it's bedtime.

But if you organise a March on a sensitive issue even with the best intentions you're probably going to end up being attacked by the far left and far right which is a pretty frightening prospect.

JustAnotherSilentOldNumber · 24/01/2017 02:41

It was a Women's March: Organized by women, led by women, and highlighting issues important to women - issues like healthcare, education, climate change, LGBT rights, racial equality, etc., etc.

I think you'll find those issues affect everyone, and not one of those things is raised, tackled or highlighted by wearing a pussy hat or T-shirt.

Or do you mean the propaganda from police departments stating that there had been no arrests or incidences connected to the event?

I mean propoganda from both sides.

NinjaLeprechaun · 24/01/2017 04:41

"I think you'll find those issues affect everyone, and not one of those things is raised, tackled or highlighted by wearing a pussy hat or T-shirt."
It certainly highlighted the point that this was a protest being primarily staged by women though. Which was, I believe, a point worth making. (More traditional "women's issues", which were also being highlighted, affect everyone as well. This is also a point worth making.)

"I mean propoganda from both sides."
If it's propaganda then it must serve a purpose or further a narrative. What agenda do the police - a notoriously patriarchal institution - have that is furthered by publicly commenting that these protests were without incident or arrest?
I understand the agenda of people trying to connect the behaviour of the riots on Friday with the protests on Saturday, of course.

JustAnotherSilentOldNumber · 24/01/2017 07:40

What agenda do the police - a notoriously patriarchal institution - have that is furthered by publicly commenting that these protests were without incident or arrest?

As far as i know they don't and no one has said they have. This thread has been about madonna and madonna centric. We KNOW she incited violence.

It certainly highlighted the point that this was a protest being primarily staged by women though.

Not really, all it did was cast a net so wide that nobody really seemed to know was being protested. it's still a confusing jumbled mess of things.

JustAnotherSilentOldNumber · 24/01/2017 07:56

I understand the agenda of people trying to connect the behaviour of the riots on Friday with the protests on Saturday, of course.

To be fair the time difference in the countries participating makes it hard to know when one ended and another began. So hearing about an anti-trump protest riot on the news the day of January 21, 2017 when England or Australia, you don't automatically adjust for the time difference and think “It’s still yesterday there.”

There will be a case of days getting confused when you have something happening across time zones.

NinjaLeprechaun · 24/01/2017 09:03

"We KNOW she incited violence."
Do we know that? Even if she had, that wouldn't have been propaganda. Because that's not what propaganda is.

"Not really, all it did was cast a net so wide that nobody really seemed to know was being protested. it's still a confusing jumbled mess of things."
I think that this was a cage rattling exercise. A 'we're paying attention and you're on a short leash' kind of a thing. Honestly, reading this thread I do wonder if that fact is lost in cultural translation somehow.

"There will be a case of days getting confused when you have something happening across time zones."
Of course. But there are people who are deliberately trying to connect the two in order to discredit the protests on Saturday.

Prompto · 24/01/2017 10:01

For everyone saying it made no difference, all movements have started with protest. The reason you can vote, go to work, own property, have parental rights over your own children and so on is because people protested. Because they stood up and said no.

And from everyone saying that we already have lots of rights so what's the point of the protests, we still have so far to go. Woman still struggle to have control over their own fertility. There are countless stories of women having a coil or implant fitted and when the want it removed due to adverse side effects they're told no, ride it out (in other words, just put up with it). Women who know they want to be sterilised and are told no because they might change their mind, because they or their husband (or future husband if they're single) might want children/more children. There are women in the UK who don't have access to abortion services. Last week the government finalised criteria for claiming tax credits for a third child after April 2017, part of this guidance states that if a third child is the result of rape, the victim must prove it was rape. Is it any wonder that the large majority of rapes and sexual assaults go unreported when shit like this is being spouted by our own government? Also last week a Sky news reporter said live on TV that if a woman has provoked a man by wearing revealing clothes and drinking, she possibly deserves to be raped, he likened it to being punched in the face due to provocation. We still live in a world where if you get drunk, you're asking for it. If you lead him on, you're asking for it. If you consent to see with one man and he then invites another man to join in, you automatically consented to both. If you go back to someone's house, you asked for it. Walking around alone at night? Asking for it. Short skirt? Asking for it. People teach their daughters how to avoid being raped, how many teach their sons not to be rapists? There still exists the double standard of the slag versus the stud. Still the notion that a man who speaks his mind is direct or forthright whereas a woman who does the same is a bitch. We still earn less than men over the course of our careers, less likely to be promoted, less likely to work in certain sectors, less likely to be a CEO. Our daughters are conditioned to be nice, to be compliant, to please people and to nurture whereas boys are conditioned to be loud and boisterous, to take what they want, that "boys will be boys". If a boy is horrible to a girl, he must have a crush on her - I've seen threads on here saying that exact thing - and she should be flattered. Flattered that someone is treating her like shit!? We're constantly told in a million subtle ways to know our place, stay in our lane, put up with it - you can drive and vote and work, what more do you want?

The people in power should be promoting equality, not working to keep us down.

HattiesBackpack · 24/01/2017 10:15

Prompto-

Good post, Sometimes I get a bit carried away with my own tangents, I think I needed a bit of a kick up the bum to remind me
Why the heck are we fighting amongst ourselves!

derxa · 24/01/2017 10:26

Our daughters are conditioned to be nice, to be compliant, to please people and to nurture whereas boys are conditioned to be loud and boisterous I must have missed this conditioning.

mothertruck3r · 24/01/2017 10:29

Last week the government finalised criteria for claiming tax credits for a third child after April 2017, part of this guidance states that if a third child is the result of rape, the ^victim must prove it was rape

This isn't actually correct. They are not being asked to prove it was rape, they are being asked to report it to a GP or social worker before their claim is processed. Seems pretty reasonable. There isn't a time frame in which they have to do this either.

Our daughters are conditioned to be nice, to be compliant, to please people and to nurture whereas boys are conditioned to be loud and boisterous, to take what they want, that "boys will be boys"

Bullshit, sexist and offensive. Growing up I remember that rhyme that girls are "sugar and spice and all things nice" whereas boys are "snips and snails and puppydog tails". Boys seem to be the target of blame for everything at the moment - they are seen as wild, uncontrollable, loud, even when they are toddlers (testosterone will have that effect). When I was in school the biggest group of bullies were a group of girls, who were relentless in their loud bitching and bullying of both the boys and other girls. Still, I expect that was the fault of the patriarchy for making them act that way? It's totally ridiculous.

Prompto · 24/01/2017 10:57

Have a look at the clothing aisle next time you're passing the shops. Girls t-shirt say things like "little princess", "daddy's sweetheart", "pretty as a flower" and so on. Boys t-shirts have slogans like "wild thing", "demolition expert", "saw it, wanted it, screamed, got it", "little monster", etc.

Toys shops. Toys marketed at girls - dolls, prams, tea sets, styling heads, impractical princess dresses. Toys marketed at boys - guns, cars, action figures, 'gross' science.

It's still expected that when children come along, the mother will be the one to either give up work or go part time in order to look after the children whereas the father will continue his career. Stay at home dad's are still in a minority to stay at home mums and men who do stay at home are regarded as either heroes for doing women's work or castrated wimps for doing women's work.

I could go on listing examples but, while you may not think the conditioning exists, it does. It's right there, every day, and ranges from how products are marketed right down to the attitudes of the society we live in.

derxa · 24/01/2017 11:03

Have a look at the clothing aisle next time you're passing the shops. Girls t-shirt say things like "little princess", "daddy's sweetheart", "pretty as a flower" and so on. Boys t-shirts have slogans like "wild thing", "demolition expert", "saw it, wanted it, screamed, got it", "little monster", etc.
It's disgusting I agree. I was being flippant earlier but I was dressed in very plain trousers and jumpers as a 1960s child.

mothertruck3r · 24/01/2017 11:12

Prompto - all the examples you have given re kids clothing are just as stereotyping of boys as they are of girls. I don't know any little boys who are exclusively into stereotypically boys activities (playing with cars, guns, football etc) and I know plenty of quiet little boys who like doing traditionally "girly" things like crafts, playing with dolls etc. I have also found that the clothing isles tend to have a much wider choice of girls clothing, girls can wear trousers or skirts, they can wear blue and colours associated with boys whereas it is much harder for boys to wear dresses, skirts, pink without facing ridicule and peer pressure.

All the women I know work and most have professional jobs. They voice their opinions and have never been stopped from doing things because they are women. I also know a few men who are "mannys" (male nannies) and the amount of negative comments they receive behind their backs are ridiculous and prejudice (i.e. "I would never leave my child with a male nanny as they might be pedophiles" etc.)

I'm sorry but there is just as much negative conditioning against men/boys these days as there are for women and there are just as many negative stereotypes and assumptions about men and boys as there are about girls/women imo.

Prompto · 24/01/2017 11:13

I was early 80s derxa and dressed the same. Corduroy trousers, cotton dungarees, that sort of thing, then towelling shorts in summer. None of it was bright pink or had "precious" stamped on the front.