Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Guest posts

See all MNHQ comments on this thread

Guest post: Kirsty Wark on misogyny - are things getting worse for girls?

299 replies

MumsnetGuestPosts · 08/05/2014 12:50

I am an optimist. I was optimistic in the 1970s that life was getting better for women. The Equal Pay Act in 1970 was followed five years later by the Sex Discrimination Act and I thought, naively, that the legislation would trigger the death of sexism, the end of sexual harassment and the bullying of women at work, controlling relationships, and domestic violence. In short, a revolution. And by the time that I had my children in at the beginning of the 90s I still had that optimism. Now they're in their early 20s, I'm not so sure.

Of course much has improved for women and girls - our lives are probably unrecognisable to our grandparents. There is no job we cannot do, no heights we cannot scale. And girls are doing brilliantly in the classroom. So why in the last few years does there seem to have been a tidal wave of openly hostile and aggressive behaviour towards women, from the online response to Professor Mary Beard's participation on Question Time last January, to young women at school being 'slut shamed' and touched up; from prostitutes being beaten up and killed on a video game, to some of our best known comedians thinking rape jokes are a great laugh? Last year it was even possible to buy a t-shirt proclaiming 'I'm feeling rapey.' Why has the conversation around women become so coarse? And – crucially – what does it mean for the next generation?

For a new BBC2 documentary – Blurred Lines: The New Battle of the Sexes - I set out to investigate. When looking at several examples of sexism and misogyny that had provoked outrage, in order to gauge their offensiveness, what was striking was that the 'pain threshold' was so different, among both men and women. And particularly with young people.

Take the case of Stirling University men's hockey team singing a new, significantly more explicit, version of an old drinking song on a busy public bus at around nine o'clock at night. A video had been taken on a phone and posted on the internet. To give you flavour:

A lady came into the store one day asking for an orgasm. An orgasm she wanted – who gives a f* what she got…

A lady came into the store one day asking for a lady train. A lady train she wanted – a miscarriage she got…

When we spoke to students at Stirling University about it, one, Katie said "I think it's okay because obviously I know some of the guys and I know that they are not sexist", whereas another, Miriam, told me "this song isn't a one off, terrible song that a group of bad individuals have sung - this is a common example of every day occurrences that really highlight an underlying misogyny."

Offended or not, there was a common feeling that this sort of behaviour was "normal". And, as some students pointed out, if Family Guy, Jimmy Carr and Frankie Boyle can tell rape jokes, and the like, why shouldn't they? This split over whether humour renders misogyny harmless, or just acts as a cover for it, came up with schoolgirls that I spoke to too. Yaz, seventeen, told me she “would hear at least three [rape jokes] every day just walking down the corridors”.

Humour, of course, has always played an important role in breaking taboos. But with a resurgence of retro-sexist jokes and banter, I wanted to know whether it could have an impact. And when we probed the research the results were striking – suggesting (in the experiments at least) that when sexist men heard sexist jokes it reinforced their attitudes, and in the immediate aftermath they were more likely to act in a sexist way.

But it's not just sexist jokes that young people are facing. The internet, a thing of marvels in many ways, has seen an explosion in attacks on women and is the gateway to all kinds of content. It's also where the next generation are growing up. So where are the trusted guides to navigate this space? We spoke to teenage boys in a sex education class, and some of them admitted to watching porn. No surprise there, but the girls in the class worried that this would give the boys a pretty skewed view of healthy teenage sexual relationships – thinking they should be the "focus" of sex, and more "dominant". Some schoolgirls we spoke to even talked about being routinely groped. All attitudes feminists of the 70s campaigned to leave behind.

But I don't think this is simply about girls being victims – I think boys are under just as much pressure, and are just as confused about what their role is, particularly (and ironically) in the face of female success. Georgia, who’s fifteen and who co-founded the Campaign 4 Consent which lobbies for consent to be taught as part of the national curriculum, said something that really struck me – "it's hard to educate people about this because we're teenagers ourselves and it sounds preachy if we tell boys what they should be thinking - what we really need are role models, like adults and teachers who they admire, to come in and say why this is wrong. We need an entire attitude change and not just one person."

I'd really love parents and teenagers to watch the film together tonight, and have a genuine discussion about pop videos, rape jokes, computer games and porn… and talk about where they want to draw the line.

OP posts:
scallopsrgreat · 09/05/2014 07:55

Nope it doesn't Owl. Made up term by men who are a little miffed they have to give up their privilege. A bit like reverse racism doesn't exist. Not if you recognise the power structures at play. But of course men like AGoodDad don't.

OwlCapone · 09/05/2014 07:57

So what, off the top of my head, are the T shirts that say "boys are stupid, throw rocks at them"? Simple humour?

OwlCapone · 09/05/2014 08:00

Clearly it is not as prevalent or "bad" as misogyny but to deny it exists at all is stupid.

Clearly there's nothing called as "reverse racism" because everyone has a race. The equivalent to that would be reverse sexism not misandry.

mousmous · 09/05/2014 08:00

that programme was disturbing - in an enlightning way.

it makes me think more about how I want to raise my daughter and son.

scallopsrgreat · 09/05/2014 08:03

No. Did anyone say that was? But it isn't misandry. It's unpleasant. But it also goes against the current power structures. Women don't go around throwing rocks at men. There is no danger of that. Men as a class are not scared of women's violence. Men do go around throwing rocks at women though.

OwlCapone · 09/05/2014 08:04

You seem to be missing the point. Misandry is a hatred of men. It is not the same as sexism.

scallopsrgreat · 09/05/2014 08:05

Reverse racism is a term used to in relation to supposed racism against whites. It doesn't exist. White people have privilege over people of colour.

OwlCapone · 09/05/2014 08:08

Regardless, I would say there are actually a very tiny number of scenarios where sexism probably does apply to men - things like midwifery spring to mind. They are so small as to be inconsequential and do not apply in general every day life but it should never be denied that they exist.

scallopsrgreat · 09/05/2014 08:09

Women don't hate men. And you seem to be missing the point as your example doesn't seem to be showing any level of misandry. It's a slogan on a t-shirt that bears no relation to anything that happens in real life. Women getting angry and raging against their oppressors is not the same as oppressors hating those they oppress.

OwlCapone · 09/05/2014 08:09

White people have privilege over people of colour.

I imagine that isn't true in countries which are virtually completely non-white. However, that is not reverse racism, it is simply racism.

OwlCapone · 09/05/2014 08:11

Women don't hate men.

Really? You know that of all women do you? I would argue that men don't "hate" women.

This is precisely why I have hidden the entire feminism topic and never engage in these so called "debates". They are not debates and women are perfect creatures whenever do anything wrong. Which is bollocks.

Goodbye.

scallopsrgreat · 09/05/2014 08:12

It's funny though how quickly everyone wants to remove the focus away from men's behaviour and back onto women's supposed behaviour.

scallopsrgreat · 09/05/2014 08:13

Bye!

AGoodDad · 09/05/2014 08:24

LRDtheFeministDragon - Misandry does not exist. (You are proof that it does!)

antimatter - Are you working in IT? (Yes, and there aren't many women in IT but they would be welcomed)

merrymouse - " If men step up to the plate" Everyday there are thousands of men in court fighting for the right to "Step up" but are being denied that right by WOMEN and the feminist family law system.

merrymouse - "I am very glad that the law is giving more equality to men" so it's not equality then just more equality, women have been given "More equality" so what's the problem?

AGoodDad · 09/05/2014 08:30

ScallopsAreGreat - "Women don't hate men." men don't hate women, there are a few who have no respect for women but if you think men hate women you're living in a dream world. Yes inequality is a form of oppressions then stand up for equality including where you have to give up superiority.

scallopsrgreat · 09/05/2014 08:32

What superiority is that?

teaandthorazine · 09/05/2014 08:38

Owl - Can you expand on what you mean when you identify midwifery as a source of sexism?

AGoodDad · 09/05/2014 08:39

Scallopsrgreat - Women committing crime are treated leniently. Women are automatically given parental responsibility over children, men aren't.
Women are automatically deemed to be the primary carer of children in separation and men have to fight years to prove they are worthy (even if the father was the primary carer)

scallopsrgreat · 09/05/2014 08:47

No they aren't to all the above. Women do most of the childcare before splitting that's why they are generally resident carers. If men want to change that then give up some of your privilege power and status and start doing the unpaid work.

Women get parental responsibility automatically because they give birth. Not sure how that equates to superiority as women get penalised all the time for bearing children. Someone has to have parental responsibility and if you aren't willing to show the commitment to even turn up and register the birth of your child why should you get parental responsibility? Of course you can always apply for it retrospectively. Courts will almost certainly grant it (unless there is a history of abuse).

Women get harsher sentencing.

AGoodDad · 09/05/2014 08:51

Scallopsrgreat - "It's funny though how quickly everyone wants to remove the focus away from men's behaviour and back onto women's supposed behavior." Yes because in your eyes equality only goes one way.

Not once have I said I support things the way they are. I have condemned inequality and abuse of women and only sought equality. I have raised the fact that inequality exists both ways and for that I have been attacked on here. Yes it does exist both ways and is not right both ways. There are many here who seem to want the big chip on their shoulder so they can whine on and on with their "Me me me poor me I'm a women" but refuse to acknowledge that equality should go both ways. Where is the real problem? If you keep crying out for equality where it suits you without being willing to acknowledge or give up where you have superiority, then you will never have equality or credibility.

I stand for equality, not only where it suits men but for both men and women. I'm sure the feminists on here will have an issue with that.

Meglet · 09/05/2014 08:55

Can't think why agooddad has lost contact with his kids in a family court Hmm.

AGoodDad · 09/05/2014 08:57

Women get parental responsibility automatically because they give birth. Not sure how that equates to superiority as women get penalised all the time for bearing children. Someone has to have parental responsibility and if you aren't willing to show the commitment to even turn up and register the birth of your child why should you get parental responsibility? Of course you can always apply for it retrospectively. Courts will almost certainly grant it (unless there is a history of abuse).

I could argue then that "If women will show up and take responsibility for all jobs including the lowly ones" (I don't see the hoards of women trying or any evidence of it) then they will be more accepted in the higher ones.

If men turned up then we will give them rights (cant automatically have them like we women do) Like so many feminists you're so sexist it stinks. Don't expect equality unless you're willing to give equality.

scallopsrgreat · 09/05/2014 08:59

Men have more privilege and power than women. So yes equality does only go one way. Men have to start giving up that privilege and power.

And no you haven't condemned the abuse of women. You have said women collude in their own abuse. That isn't condemning. That isn't examining male behaviour and condemning it.

Again where do we have superiority. Because you just haven't provided any evidence of it

scallopsrgreat · 09/05/2014 09:00

Wel exactly Meglet!

scallopsrgreat · 09/05/2014 09:04

I could argue then that "If women will show up and take responsibility for all jobs including the lowly ones" (I don't see the hoards of women trying or any evidence of it) then they will be more accepted in the higher ones. You could argue that of course but it would be nonsensical. Most of the men in the board rooms haven't done the 'lowly jobs'. And women do most of the unpaid work. Women do most of the 'lowly jobs' too. For example 70% of the world's farmers are women.