Why aren't women feminists? Surely no-one thinks all the battles have been won?

[WideWebWitch]

OK, so I don't have any proper evidence to back this up (so don't post I hear you say, oh well, I bet there is some, so I will!) but I gather that increasingly young women aren't feminists and don't believe there's any need for a feminist movement of any kind. They think all the battles have been won. I know for sure they haven't but WHY do they think this? And why would anyone NOT be a feminist? If you're not, why not? I know this conversation has been had before on mn but I'm still interested.

I agree with Janice Turner about New Woman mag rebranding itself because young women don't like the word 'woman' fgs, this is an example of the sort of thing I mean.

isn't the argument written in this thread by many different posters essentially about equality of opportunity? to stay at home or go to work be a pilot be a muslim president of the united states?

i am not a Feminist. i believe through history, they like other special interest groups have made great strides. However i truly believe that feminists are one group fighting for equality, as are BME groups, gay groups, disability groups.

I believe that we have unwittingly become embroiled in a system where each group fights for its equality, ignoring the plight of the rest. I am not a Feminist becuase i believe in equality of opportunity for all. I believe that Feminism divides. Women arguing that they want the same equality of opportunity afforded to men. disabilty groups arging they want the same rights and equity as the rest of society. BME groups and religous groups arguing that they need to fight for their cause. So, i am not a feminist becuase i truly believe that the special interest groups are like splinters of wood sometimes even fighting each other for the same resources (lack of). I belive truly that if we came together and all faught for the equality of opportunity, education, freedom for all we could make a difference. As splinters we cannot. As splinters we allow the depravity, ignorance, poverty and social status within a capitalist society to continue. By each fighting out corner we are truly divided and conquered.

There was one girl in the class who wanted to be a secretary - it was what her mum did, it was what she really, really wanted to do.

He stomped on her with his stupid impassioned speech - so much for women having freedom of choice.

Being a secretary is hardly a terrible career choice for anyone - I was one myself for a bit

Learning to type is a very useful skill, after all.

After I got my degree I did a bit of secraterial work and enjoyed every minute of it.

"I think a lot of women want to be home for children, and would rather invest energy in that rather than career"

see its comments like that that make my blood boil, i'm sure the poster of that comment didn't realise what she was saying but in essence that comment sums up the difficulty many women and men have when they don't fit the society approved gender stereotypes.

If YOU personally prefer to fulfill a caring and/or family focused life that is your choice and it dammed well should be supported and respected. However PLEASE don't make generalisations based on gender, simply because you prefer family over work doesn't mean that other women do.

I wonder if you have any idea how that comment makes me feel? I don't prefer to be at home with the kiddies, I prefer to be "forging my way ahead" in my career. To be told over and over again that women prefer to be with the children, that women only work until they have a family, that women have a stronger urge to be mothers than career girls all feels a little 1950's to me.

But hey what do i know, obviuosly i'm a ball breaking dyke because i want to work, enjoy my career and quite frankly feel nauseus at the 'staying home with the darling children' and fulfilling my biological urges crap that gets spouted.

Hang on, I didn't say there was anything wrong with being a secretary: there isn't! What IS wrong is that in the olden days if a woman could type she often would find herself in the role of one even if that was not her job just because she was a woman who could type. It happened.

I agree that feminism is about equality of opportunity and that means the freedom to be a sahm or to woth. Absolutely.

Custardo, I don't understand why you wouldn't describe yourself as a feminist. What does the word mean to you?

But riab I have to agree that I think some (a majority even?) of women would rather put their energy into bringing up their family than furthering their career. I'm a WOHM and my dh is a SAHD but I still wish I could be here more for ds, even though I enjoy my job and frankly looking after ds drives me barmy. I don't think that is society's expectation (it certainly wasn't mine before I had ds) but it is how I feel.

Given the choice, I would prefer to work part-time in order to balance my priorities. However, what I do object to is the assumption that part-timers are really just there treading water and could not possibly advance through an organisation like a full-timer, which I do feel is what often leads women to be sidelined for promotion and is more to blame for the absence of women in top positions than women themselves preferring to stay at home.

I agree it isn't as simple as 'a lot of women prefer to put their energies into their family' - I think a lot of women are hampered by not being able to fulfil all of their ambitions and the appalling cost of childcare doesn't help here either. My friend in Sweden pays £150 a month for full-time nursery care for her 2-year-old.

What a fascinating thread!!
I remember wondering why my Mum had such a negative view of feminism,as an unencumbered independent student

I remember her saying several things

Firstly that feminism had in effect given women an "extra" job.Not only were women expected to raise the children and do the housework they were also expected to hold down a career.

Secondly that as a SAHM not only was she looked down upon by men but also increasingly her own sex who worked,as the care of children was perceived by wider society as a menial,non demanding,unimportant task.

Thirdly that women would only achieve equality when men started picking up their dirty socks/cleaning the toilet/getting up in the night to a wakeful child.Or got paid for this unseen labour!!!

Now I have kids I can sort of relate to her views,though I do work pt,I do not have a cleaner and do feel I have 3 jobs to dps 1,now if I earned a high wage then maybe this would not be such an issue as I could fob the housework off onto someone else (presumably a woman?)

Am now waiting to be shot down in flames!!!

I agree about part time being seen as = treading water. Interestingly, Sweden has the highest proportion of women in parliament of any European country so there you go.

Wrinklytum, what a shame that your mum felt "feminism had in effect given women an "extra" job." That wasn't its aim but I can see how some pressure might have been created: this 'having it all' bollocks.

I think most feminists would agree that care of children/being a SAHM isn't menial and unimportant but while society measures worth in cash terms only then we've got a way to go. As we've said before I don't think feminism is about women working and that's it.

And wrt "men started picking up their dirty socks/cleaning the toilet/getting up in the night to a wakeful child.Or got paid for this unseen labour!!! " Well, if women marry and stay married to lazy men then yes, they do end up being put upon slaves. My dh pulls his weight and if he didn't I wouldn't be with him. I'm NOT saying it's womens fault that men are lazy but I do think we should demand that our partners pull their weight. I don't get why women put up with it, I really don't. My dh got up every other night, picks up his dirty socks, cleaned the loo (before we had a cleaner to do it)

You can't blame feminism for some men being lazy arses!

Oh I'd like to join you WWW but I have reading to do.

I have been reading this thread and smiling. It's great to be reminded that other proud feminists exist...

WWW I take your point!!!I am living with Traditional Northern Man AND ITS BLOODY HARD WORK!!!Am being sexist and areaist in the same sentence.Well,he helps sometimes but its a real effort,demanding years of training and I'm fast losing the energy!

I do feel that being a SAHM is grossly undervalued by society at large(and therefore not exclusively the feminist movement,obviously)but why is it that having children is so often perceived as an EASY option?I was so irate at my boss(childless woman) saying patronisingly "so hows life as a lady of leisure" whilst I was struggling with a toddler and poorly baby on mat leave.

Why is childcare so hugely expensive?(The nursery nurses/childminders are paid a low wage,though and they are usually female)I think that what I am saying is that I would love to think that we are achieving some headway in gaining equality but essentially I think a lot of the problem has to do with gaining earnings parity with men,or "Womens work" being valued.As a case in point I work in a predominantly female profession and earn far less than other jobs that have degree entry.

But then childcare is not expensive really, we pay childcarers pretty much minimum wage. When I was looking round nurseries I was appalled at the sad, sorry state of idiots who were presumably told to go and look after children cos they failed the interview at Macdonalds. Shocking. I want anyone looking after my child to have at least a flippin degree in Child Development and twenty years experience - is that unreasonable?!

Childcare is not a chore IMO but it is not easy. No I haven't taken a career break (as I have been told), no I don't sit about watching Trisha - maybe when she is at school and raising children well is important and a skill.

haven't read thread but couldn't agree more with title and OP.

it has been a bugbear of mine for a long time, since i was in a politics of gender seminar and the three other women in it said feminism was obsolete as women had reached equality.

drove me nuts then and still does.

Sorry just read that you had said that childcarers were paid a low wage. And sorry for the mangledness of my last sentence, think you get what i am saying though (meant maybe you get more time to yourself when children are at school)...

I too haven't read the whole thread but fascinating OP.

When I was at university my tutorial group (6 women, one man, female tutor) were discussing a similar question. One of the female students said that she wasn't a feminist as she thought all the battles had been won.

I was too gobsmacked at the number of heads nodding in agreement to reply. The only person to challenge her was the single male student.

mummymagic, Naomi Wolf says the reason childcare is so poorly paid as a profession is because it is competing with the ultimate slave labour: mothers. I'm paraphrasing but you get the gist.

Misconceptions, Naomi Wolf. Should be 100% compulsory reading. For everyone. Especially parents to be.

I know that dh reading it changed some of the dynamic of what happened after the birth of ds for much the better (which is in large part a testament to his intelligence and feminist heart).

If Naomi Wolf couldn't get the birth she wanted in America, well, what hope is there for most women giving birth there? It sounds horrible.

Oh I went right off her with that book.
And her claim that her academic supervisor sexually harasses her.

she's so good on what happens afterwards though in terms of the demarcation of roles.

classic chapter about the guy who feeds and puts his child to bed for the first time that week practically getting an oscar for it from all the couples around. as if it is somehow beyond the call of duty.

moondog why?

it is fantastic book.

this is what really makes me laugh, child care as a profession is lower paid than supermarket workers, on the whole.

women moan about the lack of/standard of care but are unwilling to pay for it. it makes me laugh my head off.

I am trying to remember. It was read a fair while ago.
Seem to recall it is to do with her unscientific approach of relating everything to her own experiences.

And the supervisor thing killed off least shreds of respect.

it isn't a science book, it's a polemic. a great one.

i don't remember the supervisor bit. and how do you know she wasn't....absolutely loads of that going on at uni i seem to remember.