Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Teaching your children about Egalitarianism, not just Feminism.

190 replies

Geminian · 17/09/2017 11:00

I've just seen a post about a child's T shirt saying Feminism on it, -
although I do see the point and do think it's a lovely idea to promote Feminism - sadly the truth is it will spark up debate with those who are passionate about Feminism (and those who will wonder why on earth you are 'showing off') while you are out shopping which can cause upset while in public and could escalate in front of your children.

My question is, do you really want to put yourself and your children in that situation? And my advice is, why not try "Egalitarianism" instead.

Not many people are aware that there are different types of Feminism as there are different believes but all believe in equality for women, and personally for me, Feminism has been blown out of portion thanks to social media.

OP posts:
Thread gallery
8
EamonnWright · 19/09/2017 20:47

What us wrong with being a TERF?

DrKrogersfavouritepatient · 19/09/2017 20:56

First When has that ever happened? Screenshots will be fine.

Then What point were you making with those images DJ? That bad men exist?

FFS

Datun · 19/09/2017 21:09

What point were you making with those images DJ? That bad men exist?

Yup. Same as it ever was, right?

Only now they are changing the laws of the country I live in.

Datun · 19/09/2017 21:12

Those people in the pic/links are out and out c@nts. Welcome to the internet! Where healthy discussion becomes death threats.

Which are changing laws.

How many times does it have to be said?

Out and out cunts are managing to change laws. That are damaging to no one, except women!

BertrandRussell · 19/09/2017 22:19

"Show me screenshots of men online threatening women"
"Here-have a look at these"
"Oh, I didn't mean those, they are
just nasty people. Show me some other ones"

PricklyBall · 19/09/2017 22:23

We need a new name for this - the "no true nasty man" fallacy?

Datun · 19/09/2017 22:24

I'm just waiting for someone to tell me that men defining the word woman doesn't count. Just like none of the other shit counts.

Datun · 19/09/2017 22:27

No one, literally no one, is bothered by men who are decent and nice.

It is the percentage of men who are out and out cunts, the predators, the rapists, the sexists. Or the men who wear the mantle of decency who are misogynistic underneath.

But if one more person tells me that the cunts don't matter because NAMALT, I'm going to explode.

SmileEachDay · 19/09/2017 22:42

SMALT

[[https://fairplayforwomen.com/domestic-violence-some-men ]]

CoteDAzur · 19/09/2017 22:46

"when you're talking about quotas for board members, that isn't equality."

Is this a problem of English comprehension or intellectual dishonesty? I very much did NOT talk about quotas for corporate boards or elsewhere.

I said: We want equal opportunities for women and an end to work place discrimination so that there can be equal representation in the upper echelons.

ChesGuitarra21 · 19/09/2017 23:47

Quotas exist to remedy a situation where men are unfairly discriminated for. That isn't equality, you just don't want the status quo changing because the change won't be to your benefit. By the example given of 3 in 6 seats on the board, you would still have 50% of the board being male - very much equal, but it would mean that many of the mediocre men wouldn't get as much of a look in. There is this wonderful myth that all the men in positions of power and authority got there on their talent and merits and frankly it is utter bullshit. The old boys' networks exist.

(As an aside this thread has gone the way of all internet discussions on feminism. They get hijacked and derailed by one or two troll posters who deflect, obfuscate and demand relentlessly. It does nothing to further the discussion.)

I can't see how anything that has been posted by MancLife and others, about the problems faced by men are different to the situation 150 years ago. Before women had the vote and before feminism was even a thing. Which very much suggests that the problems are not attributable to, nor caused by feminism at all, but by a system, by laws, religion, society and culture created, implemented and dominated by men.

Men killed in combat - yes but by whom? Who leads them and who sends them to war? Not women, and feminists have been some of the most notable conscientious objectors - Sylvia Pankhurst for example.

And yes men are over represented in the prison population, industrial accidents and among the homeless, but to paraphrase Charles Dickens, you get the best of times and the worst of times. They are also overrepresented in the billionaires, bankers, richest people, political leaders and dominate virtually every field of human achievement. Men seem to scale the dizzying heights but also be exposed to the worst lows. Take it up with and admit that the problem is other men, instead of demanding that feminism fight your battles for you. I never hear anyone telling British Heart Foundation that they should be funding cancer research, or gay rights activists that they should be campaigning for straight people. It boils down to the simple fact that many people are not prepared to allow that women as a cause are worth fighting for.

For me, feminism is about the social and political advancement of women, because we as a group are worthy of, and deserve parity with men. Equality does not mean the same as. Installing a lift for my disabled colleague to allow her to reach the office on the fourth floor is not treating her the same as me. I don't need a lift, I can use the stairs. But it is treating her equally. It's an important distinction and one many people fail to grasp.

corythatwas · 20/09/2017 00:32

I know I keep harping on about this, but when female representation was brought up at a meeting at my workplace last year, the response was that this could not be seen in isolation from other minority groups. THAT's how far we've come with equality: women, who make up over half the population, are seen as a minority group!

And yes, you guessed it- there was not a single woman at top panel of decision-makers and executives, though the rest of the room was about 50/50.

BorisTrumpsHair · 20/09/2017 00:54

No smashing the patriarchy for you this weekend then op?

Shame that ...,,

BorisTrumpsHair · 20/09/2017 00:59

Isn't egalitarianism treating everyone the same?

"So where should we start?

Should we advocate for two men a week to be killed by their partner? Or for one in five men to suffer rape or sexual assault? How about recommending eight-year-old boys get sold in marriage to 55 year-old women?

Perhaps we could start a practice where boys get half their penis cut off to stop them enjoying sex, you know, just in case they want to have sex with a woman when they're adults. And we should certainly kill any young man who wants to marry outside his religion. Not forgetting killing 117 million boy babies before they're born, of course. We mustn't turn a hair when 200 million boys go missing across the globe.

Because that would be equality.

If, on the other hand, if you want to stop those practices for women, that would be called feminism."

Posting this again.

Datum you are a fucking legend! 👍🏽👍🏽👍🏽

BorisTrumpsHair · 20/09/2017 00:59

Argh early morning bold fail.

New posts on this thread. Refresh page