Are you a feminist?

[spacedonkey]

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?

but bugsy and soapbox - how many of those women who "disappear" from the workforce do so because of the lack of flexible working arrangements or decent affordable childcare?

Er not the middle class mummies - they disappear purely out of choice. In SW18 there are hoardes of them: doctors, lawyers, accountants, management consultants, editors, teachers, fund managers, opticians - who have all choosen to enjoy being at home with their children.
I'm not saying that is wrong, but it hardly inspires employers with confidence in promoting the prospects & investing money & training into their hot 20 something women - if a huge percentage of them bugger off!

Well we don;t know do we - how many disappear because actually it's too much hassle because we'll get no help from crappy DH/DP on teh domestic front and I might as well just become a fully paid up slave?

I've no idea, but I think it is about more than just earning power. I think it has a lot to do with joint ownership of the 'at home' part of work - the domestic and child caring stuff that doesn;t go away just because you are at outside work during teh day!

Soapbox, but the costs of training and recruitment are surely no different for those of a man who leaves after a couple of years? Although I know you're saying that a man leaving after a short time would be viewed as a waste too. Agreed that presenteeism, as mentioned earlier, does discriminate against parents who want to see their children at all. Well, while they're awake anyway. And work culture in the UK and much of the world is based on presenteeism, which is pants. sd, really, that's awful about the employment agencies. Years ago I worked as a recruitment consultant and my (white, female, 30 something) boss showed me how to make sure it was obvious on the form if someone wasn't white and it wasn't clear from their name alone - in other words in order to be able to discriminate

Well good point soapbox. Yep, slave about covers it for plenty of sahps.

And I think for a lot of men the domestic and childcare stuff DOES go away just because they're at work all day, despite the fact that their partner may well be at work all day too. I remember asking my mum why my step father was allowed to come in and sit down and read the paper while she cooked a meal andcleaned and put washing on etc etc and she said 'because he's been at work all day' - she absolutely didn't see AT ALL that it applied to her because she had too!

WWW - I was explaining what employers might base their arguments on re investing in women. I did say that IME, in the firms I have worked in, that employers did invest almost equally in women up to the point of havign children. I don't think in practice it puts them off.

It's turning very professional again though - probably not the same discussion to be had on shelf-stackers, checkout persons, cleaners etc. Probably different issues altogether.

There is also the huge issue of self-esteem. Alot of women have big problems with this & allow themselves to become slaves. I certainly did. Here I am, well educated, professional (dare I say it, intelligent) woman but I still allowed by ex-husband to bully and manipulate me - so that I became the domestic drudge. This issue must need addressing too as I can tell just from mumsnet and amongst my own friends that this is a definite problem.

Soapbox, true, true re the shelfstackers. But they're mostly part time women anyway so have few rights and don't cost much...
gotta go, dh wants to spend time with me, dammit! But I will be back tomorrow, thanks for an interesting discussion so far.

bugsy, your point about self esteem is an important one (Naomi Wolf, anyone?!)

I went to see her talk about The Beauty Myth when it was first published sd. And I have Fire with Fire on my bookshelf but haven't read it. Really have got to go now!

I'd like to see a new edition of it (The Beauty Myth). It's as relevant now as it ever was.

Very ignorant here, I know who Naomi Wolf is (visually) but what is her take on this?

I don't think I can paraphrase it adequately tbh bugsy. Essentially she's saying that after the second wave of feminism, women are being kept in their place by undermining their self-esteem via the beauty industry. Of course her argument's much more involved than that one sentence!

Sounds very interesting - will have to go and buy her book. We do seem to live in a very "lookist" society but there must be more to it than that though. I have really strong, self-confident female friends and they are not the most pretty of my friends but somehow, they seem to have great inner confidence - if that makes sense.

In all the time I was a SAHM, DH never expected me to do any more than he had done when I worked full-time i.e An equal share.

Soapbox, I cannot believe that this is so unusual. Your view that the majority of women leave the workforce because it's 'easier' than having to do everything sounds shocking! It certainly isn't in my experience (of myself and friends)

Bugsy, leaving the workforce was the hardest decision I've ever made. It certainly wasn't an easy option. And surely the amount of SAHMs must drop dramatically once their children reach school age?

Bugsy in answer to your question "how can a woman expect to be taken seriously in the job market when she might drop out to look after babies?" the answer is "when a man might be just as likely to do so."

And when men are, I'll have a lot more sympathy for f4J.

Any more than I had done. Not he.

I agree Caligula, I think that was what I was trying to say. When we are economically equal with access to really good, affordable childcare - then there might be more equality.

here here

Homemama - start a thread on here and ask how many men equally share the domestic work and childcare if the woman WOTH! I bet you'll find you are unusual!

Caligula - very good, very wise

homemama, absolutely no personal criticism intended of any idividual's choice at all. We have it tough enough, without doing each other down.
My only argument about returning to the workforce after children go back to school is that generally speaking you return many rungs down the ladder. Alot of professions require you to retrain if you have been out for more than 3 years (thinking doctors, teachers, nurses here). Even working part-time, it is hard to be taken seriously. All my friends who work part-time (myself included) work in less prestigious positions than we did when we were full-time.
Big sigh!

I also suspect that more women than men actively want to spend more time with their children, even at the expense of their career. I think few women are as driven by men by status and money - and I think that's a good thing. Women (in general) rate other things as more important.
And I think billing by the hour is the problem here. I bet many women get as much done in 30 hours as the men do in 65. They male-created, male-dominated environment has set up a totally artificial payscale that values antisocial hours more than results. Typical!

Let's be honest here too, many women rate men by their financial and career success. A rich, dynamic, ambitious, driven man can marry a beautiful young woman very easily.
In the lonely hearts ads, women look for success and men look for looks.