What's your take on why many women and girls lost interest in feminism over the decades?

[nestoftables]

Just that...I've read a few things talking about why feminism became an unfashionable word etc.

Having just finished reading 'Material Girls' which has a brief summary of second wave and third wave feminism towards the end, I am interested in different perspectives on what happened, based on different experiences and different reading on this. Thanks!

It’s only with the benefit of hindsight that I can see how many of the things that have frustrated me throughout life have been related to being female. Those negotiations that I found so difficult, the frustration I felt that sometimes it seemed I was paid less than my male counterparts might well have been related to the sexism of those in charge. A recent survey of my profession showed that a woman would routinely be offered £1,000 to £3,000 less than a similarly qualified male when applying for positions, and that the female candidates were regarded as being much less likely to achieve promotion or partnership.

I think we're in the same profession AnyOldPrion. I'm in my 40s, not my 50s, but your experiences rang true. That survey depressed the daylights out of me but also was a strange comfort in a way...the realisation that my lonely, slowly dawning suspicions were correct and it wasn't just me. Assumimg that we are in the same job- it does not help that it's such a narrow boys' club that any notion of kicking up, demanding to see the breakdown of pay by sex and muttering about employment law would be professional suicide. I've seen women got rid of out of jobs - not for that but because they were inconvenient in other ways - and it's easy to do.

Thanks stumbled. It's fascinating reading. A bit of history I had no idea about.

I've always felt a bit out of step with the wider society but for a good number of years I lived abroad in a completely different culture and when I came back I didn't recognise the laddette culture or the belief we had arrived and we were equal. Yes, more opportunities than where I lived before but not equality. I couldn't understand where the women I knew were coming from.

Really interesting thread

I completely agree with those saying:

• that until you have kids, and unless you're the victim of some form of sexual aggression, you can be forgiven for thinking that feminism has won: the life of a young woman doesn't necessarily differ very much from that of a young man

• that society still doesn't think much of feminism, and women pick up on that.

I'd add:

• that young straight women are generally hopeless at feminism because - and obviously I've been there - we're swayed by wanting to impress the boys. Not everyone, obviously.

• and this is going to really annoy some people: there is a strain of feminism which, in its way, is as dogmatic and inflexible as today's transactivism: the sort that focuses on ticking people off for using the word "actress" and insists that, say, Priti Patel and the chief exec of Twitter and Sid the Sexist are all part of an overarching, unified "patriarchy" - and, Jeez, has no sodding sense of humour

• and this probably won't upset people here: feminist organisations like the Fawcett and WEP have become keener on being seen to be righteous and good than on sticking up for women - even when women get bullied for saying that they don't want a strange cock in their changing rooms.

How does that change? First, I reckon feminism needs to work out what it's there for. It's not there to mutter nice-sounding platitudes about how everyone can be a woman if they like, or to invent rules to divide people into goodies who know the rules, and baddies who don't. It's to foster the wellbeing and interests of female people. There's a clue in the name. Female people- including those with kids, those without, those unable to have them; those who fancy men or women or both; those who like dressing to kill and those who live in jeans; those who know all the theory, and - this bit is vital - those who are just living their lives and have never read a feminist tract in their lives, but who are still affected by the physical and psychological reality, and societal expectations, of being born female.

The next step was obviously going to get to involve changing men's behavior: letting women be in public space without harassment, men taking care of half the housework, men actually paying attention to women's sexuality.

It may be that in wider society, and amongst TUs etc., that some were just fighting to equal rights etc., but the WLM was totally about not freeing women to be like men, but to free women and society from the patriarchy and its structures.

All this was pre internet (of course) so there were a number of meetings. I can remember an event (not sure who organised it or why) but it was sort of like FWR IRL. You could walk down a corridor past rooms with notices saying what the discussion was about. It could be anything from Feminism in Education, Women and Motor Mechanics, Matriarchy, and so on. I remember drifting into a workshop about feminism and families. Remember nothing about it but one woman saying something along the lines of "we have to be careful that all this work we (women) are doing on restructuring the family to get man more involved may in the end turn out to be a trap for ourselves. We will be putting so much into this re-invention that we are then trapped into staying in a structure that will always tie us down." 40+ years later I cant help thinking as I did then that she was probably right.

Many women were leaving their husbands because being part of WLM meant they were faced with a reality that they had just sort of followed a path laid out for them by society. Women who left husbands and then also entered lesbian relationships and wanted to keep custory of children would invariably mean they would not get custody.

Women were setting up housing co-operatives - new remerging as Co-Housing (only for the rich) whereas Co-ops were for anyone.

The real problem was how a consumerist male led society translated these changes. And then started to effectively promote their own feminism through the media appointed feminists. And behind that is the push for consumerism.

So even the quite well established campaign and life style changes of challenging gender conformity, in clothing and children's toys soon got swamped out by advertising the what seems to be out weakness to allow people who want to sell things persuading us that that is what is going to make our lives worthwhile.

@stargirl1701

Until I had children, I felt my life was equal to men around me. I had everything they had: contraception, uni degree, my career, my own property, my own car, etc. I saw feminism as something that was needed in the developing world. I think many men in the UK see only this surface level too.

I was unaware of the lives that women in the UK were leading with regard to domestic violence and coercive control. Social media has massively expanded my awareness. Traditional media just didn't cover this in the 90s.

Having DC has opened my eyes. Mumsnet has opened my eyes. I don't know how to explain all this to younger women who will see the surface as I did.

If I had remained childless, I don't know that I would've grasped the issues. It's certainly unlikely I would've joined MN.

Struggles with infertility opened my eyes made me see how worthless not deserving part of society attitudes towards women without children. Like women only worth something if fertile. Think feminist to not have those attitudes and to see women as important even if childless.

We honestly believed we could do anything and be anyone. We were told we could be.

Yeah this was me too.

Honestly as a late teen / early 20 I found I just didn't believe some of the beliefs. The ones I held on to would have been akin to thinking Nicki owning WAP was the height of female empowerment. Honestly I haven't exactly made my mind up on those types of issues yet and often change it.

Like most 8 year old wannabe Spice Girl, I fell quickly back to earth at 16 when I started working and got a taste of the real world. Also known as the man's world.

I think it was two things.

1).By the mid 90s, there was a general belief among young women that the battles had been fought and won, and all that was left was "can we wear lipstick and still be feminists?" type debates.

2. Gen X women with the potential and opportunity to project their voices generally had children far later than in previous generations.

These two together meant that a lot of smart young women just didn't click at the life course discrepancies caused by their biological sex until they were much older, until they had children or until they reached an age where it became obvious something wasn't quite right.

It wasn't until I hit 40 that I started to notice how my smart and clever female friends just had not done so well in their careers compared to old male college friends who were distinctly mediocre.

In some cases, the disparity was vast.

I think it hasn't spoken to a lot of women.

Many women value things that feminism has told them, or they feel feminism has told them, they shouldn't. Or told them they need to accept a narrative about the nature of women, or about the nature of men, that they don't relate to or disagree with. Or that feminists need to do things and fight for policies they disagree with.

To some extent I think it can be similar to the current problems of the Labour Party. If people tell you that they don't want your vote or membership, people will just go away.

I am a quiet feminist (by my own standards).

I have absolute conviction that women can achieve absolutely anything, and are equal in every way to men. But I don't need to shout about it, I live it instead and find that has more impact on those around me.

I have a full time career, a child, my own house, car, pension etc paid for only by me. I've raised my ds to be a happy, healthy, independent child and I'm financially secure.

But I prefer to deal with issues I actually see, rather than some of the issues that get discussed on feminist boards.

the revolutionary feminist group in London were not keen on the ‘how do we oppress each other’ angle and the socialist feminists didn’t like the ‘who oppresses us’ and I think the groups that felt particularly oppressed themselves just wanted to concentrate on that.

Sorry but I found that description hilarious. Like something out of a Month Python sketch.

"But by the 80s, and I am not sure but somebody must have written about it, there was a distinct male backlash against women's liberstion. ie the promotion of girl power and ladettes was part of the that backlash because it promoted the idea that if women just became a sort of female lad (or stock broker) everything would be okay (even though women would still have to go home to house work etc.)

One of the consequences of this is that some women, then realised that this stupid capitalist version of equality, marketed as having it all, was just a con. (It also help for instance the housing market hike it prices so that whereas previously one salarly could just about cover housing costs it became standard that two salaries were needed, even if only renting.)"

This comment spoke to what put me off. Growing up in the 80s I was sold the promise of 'having it all'. I went into life, marriage etc believing I was on an equal footing and grateful for previous generations of feminism. I was all prepared for shared childcare, continuing working and building my career. By the time I had three children, one with special needs, my illusions fell apart. I'm the one who has had to give up my work, because the system was set up for 40hr work weeks and DH just couldn't make part time work for him. The demands of home were too big. What's more my biological drive was to be with them early on and this didn't fit with modern work ethics. All of this and the feeling that I had 'chosen' to have children so should suck it up.

At this point, rightly or wrongly I felt let down by a feminism that I felt allowed us entry to the world but only on male terms. We have fought to not be seen differently but we are, we have different needs. I feel very little societal support for parenting, and mothering specifically. I find it hard to get self esteem from being at home when it is not externally valued and I feel I have failed in some way by not being in the workforce.

These are partly my own personal demons, and as the quote above states it may not be the fault of feminism per se, but of it being coopted by capitalist systems. But, I do feel let down by a feminism that seemed to fight for us to be allowed in with the men, but hasn't fundamentally changed the work place or the value of care.

@Naunet

Because girls are raised to prioritise men, and men don’t like feminists. I’ve never seen any other human rights movement get so much hate, even from the people who are meant to benefit from it.

Absolutely this

I was at school in the 80s/90s. I remember our male HT leading a discussion on "womens rights' in what would now be year 6. The consensus was the prime minister was a woman, the queen was a woman and girls were out performing boys in school, could vote and all the professions were open to them unlike our mothers eho were often asked to leave work if they had a baby. So what was left to do? There was also the idea that feminism equalled hating men.
There was no deepter discussion than that.

Then off the back of that the spice girls were seen as great feminist icons.

Blaming feminism for the structural inequalities women face is self defeating.
It's mostly disempowered women who feel the harm the most and they have the least voice.
Women who see the problems, even if they don't experience them have the most influence. Which is why it's so disappointing to be sold out by wishy washy 'feminist' MP's

@smithsinarazz 'there is a strain of feminism which, in its way, is as dogmatic and inflexible as today's transactivism: the sort that focuses on ticking people off for using the word "actress" '

For me it's the other way around on that, and I regard that word as something of a litmus test around attitudes to women and internalised misogyny - it's not an absolute rule, but generally, I've noticed institutions that favour 'actor' and 'correct' the word actress (even in direct quotes in articles about sex-specific harassment!) and thus remove all the sex-specific experience and history of that word, are the same ones that brought in mixed sex toilets, say 'people' and 'womxn' rather than 'women', employ Owen Jones and silence Jenni Murray.

Ha! @IvyTwines2 - completely with you on that.

@IvyTwines2
I'd agree with that

I've no problem with actress because actor hasn't historically been the default.

Blaming feminism for the structural inequalities women face is self defeating.
It's mostly disempowered women who feel the harm the most and they have the least voice
Women who see the problems, even if they don't experience them have the most influence. Which is why it's so disappointing to be sold out by wishy washy 'feminist' MP's

Interestingly the women I was talking about who was saying how feminism was bad fir men amd responsibilities fir fir breakdown of the family unit has also tweeted about the joys/embarrassment of dealing with morning sickness in gender neutral toilets.

It seems bizarre that you would see the problems with these things and the black maternal mortality crisis and poor representation etc but not see that actually we are on the same side. I get cross at people who want to enjoy the benefits of what feminism has given them but then judge feminists. The only reason they get to be the "good guys" denouncing feminism is because someone.else took the role of the "bad guy" or they'd not be given.a platform.or opinion at all.

Growing up in the 80s we had a female PM and monarch. The film's were full of shoulder padded "career women" Cosmo and the like were full of articles about "having it all". Madonna and the Spice girls sold us a story of go getting women achieving what they want and men not getting in the way. The top of the class was all girls. It looked like equality had been attained.

When i started work it became clear that all the bosses were male with a token female and middle management was largely male. I thought my industry was just behind the times but it was clear to me aged 21 that men were prioritising men to push them up the career ladder, but it was dressed up as "the best person for the job".

Despite being the number 1 accounting firm globally my company made a lot more women than men redundant in its frequent ruthless efficiency drives. Often women who had just had children. There was a perception they were slacking.

I've always been a feminist but I think a lot of young women believed the equality myth for much longer. Certainly in my industry things have improved. Nowadays you get 50 something white men complaining that it's a great time to be a woman (they'd never say anything about race or sexuality because that's bigoted!)

We had a meeting for our women's network and we got mainly women of all ages and there was a very clear divide between those who had already had children who realised there were problems and those who are in their 20s and thought they could merrily continue their career unimpeded to whatever level they liked, with no difference in pay or prospects than a man.

I think things have improved in the workplace but not domestically. There is great inequality in the amount the majority of my female friends do compared to their husbands in the care of children and house. It's an individual battle and not enough women take a stand ensuring equality in their lives.

The greatest trick the devil ever pulled was convincing people he didn't exist. I think today's teenagers and 20 something women are sleepwalking into continued inequality. They don't even know to take a stand. Things gave got worse because today's standards on relationships allow men to perpetually act like kids in a sweetie shop and the women who want commitment or emotional connection are being needy.

If men wanted equality it would have happened by now. I reckon we are going backwards.

I think it was a combination of complacency - second wave did get rid of a lot of the more conspicuous sexism in society - and wilful blindness. Truly embracing feminism means seeing the deep and underlying misogynism pervading society. I don't think many women do want to face that. It's easier to pretend everything's all right as it is.

I think we should be careful not to romanticise the second wave. Yes a lot was achieved in the 60s/70s but a) some of the real heroines and heroes were actually my parents' generation who pushed the changes through into law b) women's liberation was not a cool or popular movement and we faced pretty much the same abuse: 'ugly' 'manhating' 'mean' 'no sense of humour' that we face today.

Furthermore I have to add that c) as a 19 year-old who loved clothes (still do) I found women's groups a hostile place in the 70s and I drifted away. While lib feminism has arguably and with hindsight led us into this current mess, the appeal at the time was immense.

@Floisme Yes, didn't mean to suggest that second wave feminists did all the work. They were simply building on the good work that went before. It's more that I saw feminism stall after the second wave, and was trying to think through why.

It wasn't specifically directed at your post Rad - but thanks .

I just think we're not going to learn from the past unless we're clear sighted about it, limitations and all.

RadandMad is right, the second wave did deal with a lot of the obvious sexism in society. True feminism does mean looking at the dark side of misogyny and sexism still woven through every aspect of our lives. Once you've seen it, you can't forget or ignore and so it's easier for straight women, in particular, to ignore it. I've heard many women talk about how becoming a feminist ruined their lives by opening their eyes.

One of the big steps in the decline was the loss of Women's Studies departments. They became Gender Studies. That was when the rot set in and Liberal Feminism (male-focused feminism) crept in. We need to initiate proper women's studies again.

Some really interesting responses here. It seems that one challenge is many of us don't really know a lot of specific detail about the history of the feminist movement/s. Of course there are many different histories of it. But wouldn't it be nice to have studied social movements like feminism (and others) in school?