To think there is a group on MN deliberately trying to downplay the institutional oppression of women?

[PerryPerryThePlatypus]

I've been hanging around these here parts since Pom Bears were just a bizarre crisp but more and more I see posters chipping away at other posters experiences, feelings of unease etc. It's difficult to articulate but it's just a shift from NAMALT to women are just as bad so stop complaining. An almost subtle silencing.

There's been a problem with one particular PBP who keeps reregging to send abusive disabilist PMs - I'd imagine it's the same kind of thing here. There is no way a simple post saying you haven't experienced something could lead to any reasonable person calling you a rape apologist. The fact they do it by PM shows how cowardly they are - I hope you reported it

Tara- that's awful. I hope you reported?

Skaro- did you challenge the poster on the thread? Which thread was it?

This thread is a good example of the limitations of a feminism that is mired in liberal individualism. No-one seems to be able to get beyond these facile debates about "all men"/"most men"/"some men" because actions are seen as irrevocably individual.

I personally think it's offensive to say things like "all men are rapists". I don't think it's offensive, however, to talk about "rape culture" or a pervasive, culturally determined masculinity that is conditioned to treat women as objects, or to talk about the uneven distribution of wealth, opportunity, jobs, childcare, domestic work, sexual assault in our society as a whole. We need to talk about power. We need to talk about the structural domain. We need to talk about capitalism.

And yes, of course men can be allies. More than that - in a lot of cases, the problems experienced by some groups of women (and let's not make the basic mistake of thinking that all women have one single, simple common cause that is unfissured by issues of race, sexuality and class) are implicated in circuits of oppression that are also problematic for other groups. The us v them mentality on here is often a drastic simplification of a very intersectional reality, in which there are many points where common causes touch, as well as many differences between groups that require acknowledgement.

baroness it wasn't you who said that, and I get what you say 'a bit' however to tar all men (or all people of any class,race, religion etc) with the same brush. It doesn't sit well with me. It would be inappropriate to class all Muslims as terrorists......

@BaronessEllaSaturday

I'm fully prepared to believe that Kryten is very different from me, for example she likes strange men coming up to her and talking to her (from another thread) in a deserted train carriage or deserted train station.

That poster is most DEFINITELY very different from me, because I would NOT be comfortable or happy with that. As has been said, you can bet these men would not start chatting a a strange man in the same manner.

To clarify, I was in no way saying that women have to put up with unwanted male attention. If you’re not happy with it you should tell him to ‘get lost’ or whatever choice phrase you want to use. (I can’t abide the f word hence my reluctance to use it. Sometimes I wish I didn’t feel that way though.)

If the man doesn’t leave you alone, then that’s definitely harassment.

thanks I did report it. I'm thick skinned but that, to me, was a new kind of low.

Baroness, who said we had to tolerate it because we are women?

Derxa, I can't figure out if you're being sarcastic or not

Pumper, that's not really what people are going though, is it?

@BaronessEllaSaturday

We fundamentally disagree.

I think men and women are different (based on averages). We're different physiologically, chemically and mentally.

I don't want to see 50:50 splits as this is unnatural. I want to see everyone given the same chance.

@BertrandRussell

It's viewed as man-hating radicalism. Do you deny that women (and men) are deserting the label 'feminism' in their droves and even see it as an insult?

Arguments that these huge numbers of people are 'wrong' doesn't help when you're trying to shift cultural conceptions.

I know pumper How anyone looks at posts about the violence of men and just bleats on about how lovely their dh is and how namalt and expects people to moderate what they are saying else somehow their lovely husband is being branded a terrible rapist is crazy!

It's fairly straightforward to be able to discuss these things whilst simultaneously understanding that posters such as myself don't hate men and have nice men in their lives that they care about very much. But naman!

It was me that said that many men don't treat women as human beings. I don't think that's the same as tarring all men with the same brush, or similar to saying all muslims are terrorists. If you prefer I can retract it and rephrase as "too many men".

whiskeyowl I hear you.

I have as much earning potential as my husband yet I stay at home to look after the kids. (I am fortunate enough to be able to do some work from home). To an observer one might think that this is me conforming to some gender stereotypical role, it's not it's what I genuinely want to do. Not because I'm oppressed to playing second fiddle to the man in my life but because I want to see my kids grow up and I have better skills (more patience ) to deal with our disabled son.

I do feel as though there is some backlash against women who make those choices because we are somehow letting 'the sisterhood' down.

I'm not very good , I don't think, at getting my point across, but the issue is much more complex than simple oppression, my situation cannot be unique.

it's not even the 'many or too many' it's the treating as 'human beings' part that I struggle with assassinated.

I see that women throughout history have played second fiddle to many men or to men generally but I don't get the 'not treated as human beings bit'.

Ofgs, are we starting on "feminists won't let me do xyz" already?!

BeyondNoone I think this is a really interesting debate. Don't shout me down in it for raising a point.

I have been brought up to see myself as equal to any man. It is a valid question.

It is the shouting down by feminists of other women for asking questions or being interested in understanding the perspective of feminists that puts so many off being identified with 'feminism' imo.

Sorry, that came out more snarky than I intended.

I am a sahm.
Plenty of feminists, even the not-fun radical kind, are sahms

You are not "letting the sisterhood down". I doubt many feminists would agree with that, I certainly don't. Most feminists are likely to agree that child rearing is massively undervalued in our society and support you doing it. I really don't know where the idea that all feminists think that women must work out of the home comes from.

I have never seen or heard any feminist I personally know accuse another woman of "letting the side down". I can't think of an occasion where I have seen it online, even.

I get what you mean, taratill, I feel that way sometimes as a SAHM to my adopted DDs. I definitely don’t feel oppressed by making that choice. DD1 has attachment issues so she needs one of us to be available as much as possible. And we’re fortunate in that we can afford it.

It’s not that feminists mean to make us feel that we’re letting the sisterhood down, but I suppose there is a part of me that feels that I’m conforming to social roles.

Beyond no problem.

Assassinated really? I'm surprised by that.

" do feel as though there is some backlash against women who make those choices because we are somehow letting 'the sisterhood' down."

Can I ask where you feel the backlash is coming from? I've been involved in many threads on here about SAHMs and I can only remember a couple of people disapproving on feminist terms. Practically everyone else thinks of it as a perfectly valid choice - provided it is a free choice and in spite of having concerns about financial independence....

taratill - See, I would like to see both you and your husband be able to spend that time at home, AND both have careers, without that being somehow a mind-bogglingly complicated thing to do (which it currently is), or a decision that involves taking a hit in wages because men are more likely to be paid more from the get-go than women are for the same job (which is the case for a lot of families now), or a decision that holds back anyone's career because part-time work is somehow seen as less valid than full-time (which it currently is). I think high quality free childcare and proper support (i.e. a helluvalot more of it) with children who have additional needs is probably a pretty important element in this; also, closing the gender pay gap.

And, presumably hasn't even noticed that the person he fancies a chat eith is a woman, and would have behaved exactly the same to a man?

Well yes, and this is what makes the difference isn't it really.

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/am_i_being_unreasonable/3061617-I-think-the-golden-rule-for-men-should-be?msgid=72706095

Went into a large amount of detail on this last night, which seems to have been ignored by the same people who would argue that its shocking to think a man should not approach women. Its not really about a man never approaching women, its...do not approach IF you are only approaching because she is a woman basically.

I don't really think its that difficult to understand.

Mittens I think you've hit the nail on the head. Perhaps it's an internal feeling that I am somehow not doing what I should by not achieving my potential in the workplace rather than anything that anyone else has said.

Although I think sometimes SAHMs are made to feel that way by working mothers (feminist or not).

whiskeyowl husband and I are both lawyers. My area of law is much easier to do on a work from home basis than his. That (and the fact I have more patience with the children and want to) is the reason I stay at home not him.

We are equal on household chores.

Pay wise we would be similar if I was working in the same environment and I earn the same as male colleagues doing the same work.

I appreciate this is not the same for everyone.