Nicola Horlick says she is not a feminist. Does Nicola Horlick know what a feminist is??

[stillstanding]

Am completely confused .... see article

I mean it's pretty nonsensical for anyone semi-conscious to say they are'nt a feminist but for HER to say it? And in the same breath as calling for quotas to get more women in boardrooms??

It's just daft. Am actually quite cross ...

OK, consider me shouted down.

I respect the fact that you didn't get your gang to come and beat me up as well.

I think you're right, FattyArbukel - like others said earlier, sometimes not having the feminist label means you can actually get more done for feminism.

But I do think there is a difference between not declaring yourself to be a feminist and deliberately saying you are not one. It only reinforces the stigma attached to feminism and does a disservice to all feminists, including closet ones.

There is a difficulty with defining yourself as a feminist when there isn't a theoretical basis for feminism, AFAIK. This is the point I've been trying to make. Last century, the debates within feminism were mainly around political theory. Any attempt at a theoretical basis now seems to be absent (although I may be wrong). I made my comment about feminism seeming to resemble narcissism because the definition of feminism seems to consist of 'whatever I (the speaker) say feminism is'. So the Queen, Kate Middleton, Katie Price, Col Gaddafy, could indeed claim to be feminists, and could define feminism. So should Nicola Horlick sign up to one of their definitions, or all of them? In signing up to feminism, would she be agreeing that lapdancing is a damn fine thing for women, or not?

Links?

No, I meant to theory!

Well, I do think the above proves my point. But I wouldn't ask you to agree.

My, but this is a friendly thread... no-one being bashed at all.

Hmm. I think I'd rather she said, "I'm not a feminist but clearly quotas are necessary" than "I'm a feminist but there's no need for quotas". The whole not-a-feminist sentence reads a bit oddly, I think she was actually asked straight out and her answers to this and other questions have been edited together.

Is it Karen Brady who manages a football club and went back to work hours after having her kids? She says the same thing about not-a-feminist. It seems clear that even successful women in business need to kow-tow to the status quo - maybe if when quotas are introduced it will create enough of a change in atmosphere that women will be able to 'come out' as feminists (only if they feel they are feminists, obviously) without damaging their career prospects.

And I think people can do feminist or un-feminist things, regardless of whether they identify as feminists or not. So both Nicola Horlick and Karen Brady (if I've got her name right) do feminist things.

No, I don't think she is a feminist.

She held a high position in commerce, but she was just a mirror image of the male in the same environment.
She played the men "at their own game"; but because she was a woman, she by necessity had to play the game harder and better.

She worked hours that were not conducive to her home environment and like a lot of men in the same environment sacrificed and compromised their personal position in order to succeed.
Although a sweeping generalisation (for which I will be rightly flamed), this is a more difficult position for most women.
I believe that she had a breakdown of sorts, although I'm not entirely sure.

It's essentially the "can women have it all" debate. Yes they can, but not at the moment and as things stand.

The fundamental difference that has to be embraced is that women are different to men. Vive la differance.(sp.. snot)

At the moment institutions like the City are over run with a "who's got the bigger balls" mentality; and the women with bigger balls succeed. That isn't progress in my view.

Secconding and legislating women onto boards is not the way forward; ther'll just be more miserable women trying to function in a male focused world.

ther'll That's a new word by the way. Did I mention that I've got a head full of snot ?

Just thought I'd share

It would if they were recruited on that basis; but in a legeslative position, and forced into a corner, the board will appoint women from within the biggest balls category.

Unless they have a "road to Jerusalem" moment, then they will not advance the situation of women substantially.

It should be noted that the "biggest balls" category actually perceive the requirement for women to be different as something to be sneered at and ignored. Until it's too late.

Nicola Horlick did nothing for women (in terms of advancing and enhancing the feminist in the work environment; as a case in point, whilst in an ultimate position of power and influence).

So what changes would you make Jemima, if not quotas. How would your plans work if there were few women to push them through?

If you read the whole article you will see Nicola Horlick is making a lot of sense. Some people on this thread though have spectacularly missed how crucial this issue is of how to get more women on company boards and instead nitpicked over the phrasing that Nicola Horlick has used.

It is very important that more women get on the boards of public companies. It is a practical issue that must be addressed if women are to have a greater influence.

I am glad to see Nicola Horlick put her support behind the campaign for quotas for women on boards. There hae been a fair few articles in the press about this issue and I hae been shocked to see a number of senior and very influential women arguing against quotas on boards. It is those kind of women who really are not doing women any good. Nicola Horlick is saying she is 'not a feminist' to avoid the negative 'brand' stereotype (agrees with hobbgoblin/itsalarf/BDSM) that is attached to that word.

She is being absolutely and resolutely practically feminist in the call for quotas on boards (agrees with Dittany). Yes I agree she had a lot of home help and worked the long hours but that is what The City requires. She did it and she was successful. How do you think men in the City get to be successful? They have someone running the show at home whether that be a SAHM or more likely a team of nanny/cleaner/gardner/driver/accountant.

People on MN should be supporting her not criticising her. She has done good.

We don't push. Shoving against a brick wall gets you nothing apart from a sore shoulder.

The answer is. I don't really know.

Gone are my days of massive shoulder pads and lunch is for wimps.

I'm too busy running my own feminist enclave in my own little way; in my own business. Employ women on genuine flexi time, provide childcare, let women pop out/breastfeed/get pregnant/get sick/let their kids get sick/bring children to the office etc.

But education is the key. Feminism should be a compulsory subject for both boys and girls in schools. This is bias, but justified on the basis that men have been in a position of supreme power for generations.
I also justify it on the basis that men can only benefit and also be enriched by feminism.
I am also of the belief that feminism

She is being absolutely and resolutely practically feminist in the call for quotas on boards (agrees with Dittany). Yes I agree she had a lot of home help and worked the long hours but that is what The City requires. She did it and she was successful. How do you think men in the City get to be successful? They have someone running the show at home whether that be a SAHM or more likely a team of nanny/cleaner/gardner/driver/accountant.

If that's success and feminism, count me out.