Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Other subjects
Original poster

Are you a feminist?

350 replies

spacedonkey · 29/12/2005 11:52

I was born in 1968, so I'm one generation on from the 1960s/1970s women's rights movement generation. Growing up I was more focused on hating Thatch than women's issues - it seemed the battle for equality had been won. But it hasn't. And increasingly I find myself reaching for the dungarees, so annoyed do I get about the continuing inequalities women experience (still paid less than men, getting sacked for being pregnant, still doing most of the unpaid work in the home, not to mention the tyranny of "beauty" etc).

Where is feminism these days?

OP posts:
monkeytrousers · 02/01/2006 20:35

Can feminism(s)(There are many, you're right) be simply defined as a human rights movement? Who could argue against it and not reveal themselves as a bigot if we did describe it as such? Or is that a bit strong? (I've started on the sherry )

cat64 · 02/01/2006 20:48

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn

WideWebWitch · 02/01/2006 20:59

Cat64, otoh when dh stayed at home with the children for a while (and he's still on his own with them in the week as I work away) people thought he was marvelous! He is, of course, but you don't often hear that said of women who sah

hercules · 02/01/2006 21:01

cat64- my son (nearly 10 ) was the only boy in his class of 36 (20 boys) to join the school dance club for his class. He was not embarrassed or felt odd in the slightest.

hercules · 02/01/2006 21:03

and as said earlier for me feminism is not about having the same things as man ie reaching up to their ideal as they have it right so why should I dress my son up in a pink frilly skirt to make him an equal?

Original poster
spacedonkey · 02/01/2006 21:04

herc- you're being disingenuous!

OP posts:
Bugsy2 · 02/01/2006 21:05

I'm always confused by feminism. I don't really know what it means. I believe very strongly that women should be valued and respected just as much as men should be. However, I also believe that in many ways we are different, our brains are wired in slightly different ways and that men are generally better at some things and women at others. BUT, I do not believe that this is any excuse for slacking by either sex.
Because of our history, we do live in a sexist society - where women are traditionally seen as "homemakers" and men as "breadwinners". This is utter rubbish of course as both are capable of being either. Our society is not supportive of the family in very many ways and therefore individuals seek short-term solutions for success - none of which is conducive to valuing the contributions of either sex particularly but is generally still biased to recognise men more than women.
I think alot of women still see men as a free meal ticket. They cant wait to give up work to stay at home "looking after the children", which perpetuates the myth of man as the breadwinner and means that economically women will never be taken seriously.
Big sigh - always feel disheartened when I try and get my head around this. Feel confused and muddled about what is best not just for women or men - but society at large.
I would just like to say though, I am so glad to see the subject discussed - thank you spacedonkey for getting us going.

hercules · 02/01/2006 21:06

But how many men earn enough anyway for women to be able to stay at home?

Original poster
spacedonkey · 02/01/2006 21:07

not many these days

OP posts:
soapbox · 02/01/2006 21:08

You're all kidding yourselves - there are droves of them on here!

hercules · 02/01/2006 21:10

But maybe that's the type of person mumsnet attracts. Mumsnet isnt a good representative of society. Dh earns a decent wage but I couldnt afford to be a sahm.

Original poster
spacedonkey · 02/01/2006 21:10

what - droves of SAHMs?

OP posts:
hercules · 02/01/2006 21:11

I mean mums who have partners who earn enought for them to choose whether to stay at home or not.

WideWebWitch · 02/01/2006 21:11

Bugsy, you say "I think alot of women still see men as a free meal ticket. They cant wait to give up work to stay at home "looking after the children", which perpetuates the myth of man as the breadwinner and means that economically women will never be taken seriously."

Are you serious? Being at home looking after children, a MAN'S children, is a 'free meal ticket?' Do you really think so? Do you not think being at home with children, whether men or women do it, is worthwhile and a useful contribution to society? Do you really think it's the easy option? I think working oth is a damn sight easier! (although that's just for me I don't expect everyone to agree). So do you think that if a woman (or man presumably? Does your position apply regardless of the sex of the sahp?) stays at home she/he doesn't deserve to be taken seriously because she/he's got a, and I quote, just so people are clear that these are not my words, 'Meal Ticket'? I am shocked.

soapbox · 02/01/2006 21:12

Yes

Oh I don't think so Hercs - many of them are poor as church mice if you read the threads!

I think for many of them the choice to go back to work doesn;t exist as they would still need some form of childcare which wouldn;t be covered by their earnings/loss of tax credits.

It is difficult to generalise though!

hercules · 02/01/2006 21:13

I cant wait to go back to work on Wednesday. These 2 weeks at home have been soo long.

soapbox · 02/01/2006 21:14

WWW - there is a thread going at the moment which does sound a bit like that

However, I wouldn;t say that is the main reason why women more than men opt to stay at home, sometimes there isn;t really the choice that there seems to be, in that child care costs are too high anyway!

WideWebWitch · 02/01/2006 21:15

You see for me, the point is that it takes a man and a woman to have a baby (I know, there are exceptions but on the whole this is true) and yet the work of bringing it/them up often is seen as solely or mostly the responsibility of women and I think that's wrong. I don't think it's wrong for either or both partners to sah/work/wah/woth but I do think it's wrong if the job of bringing up children is seen as completely womens work, I really do.

hercules · 02/01/2006 21:16

I could never afford childcare for my 2 kids so dh works nights and we share it between us. Far from ideal though as we have zilch quality time together as a whole family.

soapbox · 02/01/2006 21:17

Ah WWW - but thats the holy grail in a sense isn't it, but we're a long, long way fromn that yet

WideWebWitch · 02/01/2006 21:18

But why are childcare costs assumed to come out of a woman's salary? She didn't bloody well make the baby on her own did she? (turkey basters aside) So why aren't childcare costs assumed to come out of a joint household income? Women don't only work for money! Countless teachers and midwives and nurses will testify to that!

hercules · 02/01/2006 21:18

I started a thread recently asking why we were so far from that. Is it because women are prepared to do far more than there share still?

WideWebWitch · 02/01/2006 21:19

So often the rationale is 'my salary won't cover childcare' to which my response would be why is only your salary taken into account here?

Tinker · 02/01/2006 21:19

Or that women don't allow men to do their share??

hercules · 02/01/2006 21:19

When I said "I", I mean our income as a family.