To think that women being unpleasant to other women is not automatically internalised misogyny?

[Carla786]

I see this a lot on FWR and in other places.
It certainly can be, but it seems a cop-out to say it is always the cause. It's not anti-feminist to say that women can be cruel to each other for other reasons, just as men can : intrasexual competition, insecurity, narcissism etc

AIBU?

It’s very true and you saying that doesn’t make it false

Women will still exert power. All humans do it. Even babies and toddlers do it through crying and tantrums. Men do it physically and through status. Women do it with words and social signifiers.

I see my own dds who are in their early twenties belonging to more supportive female networks than when I was their age. I don’t know if that’s representative of their entire generation but I certainly see them and their mates being more forgiving and kind with each other. I’m hoping that this is a growing trend.

Oh for god's sake. Women can be vile of their own volition, it's infantilizing to insist women are only horrible to eachother because the men make them do it 🙄

Katie price is an absolute mess and no one would think it's acceptable for a man or father to be such a mess either. Kanye west is literally banned from entering the UK to protect the publics best interest, he hasn't got away with anything just because he's a man.

Also refering to other women as either fuck able aged or spit out by life is rank and misogynistic. None of the post menopausal women in my life have been spat out of are treated with less respect because they're not fuck able anymore. Many of them are powerful, successful women who are highly respected in their field and many are loving caring motherly types who are loved by everyone in their lives and get help getting things off shelves when shopping.

I didn’t say ‘men make them do it’. I’m talking about hegemonic patriarchal power structures.

Kanye West has been banned for his antisemitic comments, not that he is a mess and treats his wife like a living sex doll and is a terrible role model to his kids. He is still revered as a music artist.

And clearly all the older women who claim to feel invisible or overlooked are just making it up. Ok then.

If you dislike another woman (or a few) because you don’t get on, had an argument, she’s unpleasant to you etc. that’s just human nature.

If you dislike a lot of women simply for being women , or not the “right “ kind of woman , often justified by holding them up to impossible standards , that’s internalised mysoginy .

@OtterlyAstounding No, I'm saying that I think that claiming it's internally misogynistic to have discussions about whether or not any behaviour is motivated more by socialisation and the patriarchal culture we live in than by uninfluenced (impossible) personal desire, feels like a bad faith attempt to silence feminist discussion.
It's also interesting that all the behaviours mentioned in the comment benefit men, while many present a financial, emotional, or physical harm to women (football being an exception

That's why that poster chose them as examples. They're all preferences or activities that some women like, but are sneered at by other women because supposedly they can't genuinely like doing that stuff for their own sake - they're just doing it for the men, without realising it. Silly women!

Yes, there is a discussion to be had about patriarchal norms in society, but I see many people skirting the complex issues and instead using the idea as a reductive way of putting down women who like things they don't like, or have different boundaries which they find distasteful.

No, no they don't. Men kill women and men kill men. Women killing anyone is much rarer.

I don't share your self imposed victimhood and neither, I suspect, do a lot of women.

It is weak of women to blame men for every bad thing women do.

So you deny the influence that the socialisation of a patriarchal, capitalist society has on both men and women?

Preferences don't form in a vacuum, and so when women are in favour of things that are negative for them, positive for men, and just so happen to align perfectly with typical patriarchal norms, I don't think it's unreasonable to question why they're in favour of them.

Really, that poster was the one being reductive. It was also interesting that their only examples of women 'being misogynistic' were explicitly incidents of women questioning others' internalised misogyny. I wonder why they'd have a problem with that...?

So you deny the influence that the socialisation of a patriarchal, capitalist society has on both men and women

I literally said there's a discussion to be had about patriarchal norms in society.

when women are in favour of things that are negative for them,

What makes you think these things are negative for women?

I've had the same experience as you. There were a group of boys who bullied me in school but generally all you had to do was throw a few punches to sort it out.

As adults, I find men more straightforward in general and less two faced. They're easier, imo, to be with. Like you say, surface level banter, have a laugh, will help you out with things if needed but otherwise not really that deep.

I have a few female friends but probably only like 3 that I don't find absolutely exhausting.

Can you back that up with stats please?

I can't find anything to suggest that men are killed by women every day.

Then what's your issue with my comment?

As for your question, well, that would involve going into depth to address properly, so in brief...

Stag weekends are generally considered negative by many on Mumsnet (what the PP took issue with) when they leave a woman without the help or support she needs to deal with young kids, or involve strip clubs or prostitutes.

'Kinky' or casual sex can involve things that put women uniquely at risk – which is again when women tend to take issue with them on Mumsnet.

Make up and fashion involve spending large amounts of money and time that men aren't socially expected to spend but women are, negatively affecting women in that way.

Ultimately as I've said on this thread, any human can be mean or nasty without it being internalised misogyny, and I do not think that pointing out potential internalised misogyny is itself internally misogynistic

Whatever label you might choose, people can be bloody nasty - maybe we’re just more affected by another woman being at guilt.
Yesterday morning I spent 2 hours outside our village supermarket, handing out flyers for the local lawn bowls club, who were having an open morning. I’ve long accepted that locally, we’re more for the 45+ player, much better socially for most rather than for highly competitive play, enjoyed by just a few, so I know the type of person I’ll approach.
One woman told me to fuck off, another asked me if she looked that tragic, and another looked me up and down before telling me it hadn’t done me much good. Out of the majority, men, not a single one was rude, albeit some clearly weren’t interested.
At 67 I don’t expect that anyone is going to see the ‘real me’ but I’m human, caring and was doing something for my community.

Ultimately as I've said on this thread, any human can be mean or nasty without it being internalised misogyny, and I do not think that pointing out potential internalised misogyny is itself internally misogynistic

It can be when it fails to acknowledge the possibility that women can be independent, strong-minded and perceptive enough to like these things of their own accord and not for men's sake. They know the risks and costs, and have balanced them just like any other decision.

I don't really have a problem with pointing out societal bias. It's when it's used as a cudgel to beat women with that makes me mad - as so often on here. As if the perfectly rational, intelligent choices and desires of women are not worthy of respect (and the women thus also contemptible), simply because those choices represent potential internalised misogyny. Or, more likely, because the poster expressing contempt doesn't like them herself.

Football does harm women, violence towards women increases when England don't win.

You keep trying to make this women-specific, when it isn't.

Men are just as prone to being influenced by societal norms. It's not that women are particularly weak-minded, all humans are shaped in ways they're probably not even aware of by their environment, and believe things they wouldn't otherwise believe. That's why advertising, propaganda, and religion all work so well.

Besides, men on Mumsnet expressing misogynistic views or clinging to patriarchal norms are just as likely (more so!) to get torn to shreds over them, so I'm not sure why you think pointing out (internalised) misogyny is beating women with cudgels. It's an equal opportunity affair.

I'm also not sure how pointing out the potential internalised misogyny or negatives in regards to something, is itself internalised misogyny??

Oh, good point!

But they can be absolutely horrid to each other. I was a girl at school once!

Just watch MAFS AU and you’ll see exactly how nasty women can be - to both men and women.

I'm sorry this has been your experience of women, but it being your experience doesn't make it a generalisation. Personally I've encountered more 'bitchiness' from men - directed both towards women and other men.

You keep trying to make this women-specific, when it isn't.

Well yes, I thought that was what we were talking about? Women castigating other women on MN, for having beliefs and preferences that they perceive to be unwittingly misogynistic?

I don't often see men on here talking about internalised misogyny - but if they are, that's a completely different issue.

I'm also not sure how pointing out the potential internalised misogyny or negatives in regards to something, is itself internalised misogyny?

Like I said, "pointing out" is one thing. Accusing, scoffing and belittling are quite another. (Not saying you yourself do these things, just that I've often seen them on here.)

Assuming that women don't have the agency and acuity to make informed decisions about what to wear, do and buy is just disrespectful.

I’d really like to engage with your final point. Because I don’t believe anyone truly has agency in this world. I personally want to go and live on a private island and be a nomad and live off the land and sunbathe and fish all day. How realistic is this choice unless I have loads of money? And how much does where/when/to whom i was born influence how much money I make? People definitely have agency but they can’t buy things or choose things that don’t exist.

Absolutely! By "agency", I don't mean anyone being able to do anything - just that we all do have some power to make choices that are of our own volition, even within an unfair system. There's nothing wrong with your desire to live a nice island life, but it's informed (and unfortunately nixed) by your lack of a gazillion pounds. And your lack of a gazillion pounds is, as you say, informed by factors outside your control, such as your family background.

I honestly believe that women can do what they like and wear what they like (including football and high heels if they so choose), within a patriarchal system, without it being a demonstration of internalised misogyny and thus contemptible.

I feel like you're deliberately misunderstanding me.

I am saying that I do not think that pointing out potential internalised misogyny is itself internalised misogyny - that's like saying pointing out abuse is itself abusive. It's ridiculous logic.

Especially when men on Mumsnet are pulled up on their (not internalised, just plain) misogyny, or patriarchal viewpoints. If women were held to different standards than men, then perhaps pointing out (internalised) misogyny would be misogynistic, but if anything, the men are treated much more harshly.

People might disagree with others' positions, but if someone would make the same argument to a man or a woman - about a patriarchal norm that frequently harms women - it's not misogyny.

And again, you're making it women-specific when it isn't. No one has as much agency as they think they do. Everyone is hugely shaped by their environment and current norms, and generally don't realise the extent to which they are. Pointing that out isn't disrespectful, it's an observation about humanity.

For instance, most women wouldn't entirely depilate their vulvas or armpits if it hadn't (somehow) become a social norm in our culture and time, but many will argue black and blue that they just can't tolerate vulva or armpit hair, and they do it for themselves not because of society - which is patently untrue. After all, men get along fine without shaving their public and armpit hair (ETA: and women in other cultures and times).

Men have fewer things like that to adhere to, but there are many things I'm sure they do purely because of social norms, and not because of any innate desire to do so.

I feel like you're deliberately misunderstanding me.

We must be talking at cross purposes, then, since I feel the same about you! Perhaps I'll leave it there for now, since I've made my point on this thread.