The London Riots: The Elephant in the Room

[smugaboo]

I am probably being too quick off the mark in posting this as people are still digesting what is happening in London and Birmingham. I have seen references on here to police "shutting down the internet" and "shooting protesters" (rubber bullets, so that's okay). Let's hope that's the shock talking. But when the dust settles and people start analysing the root causes of the riots (i.e. social problems, poverty, unemployment, cultural concerns) one thing that will inevitably be overlooked, or at least not given enough attention, is the fact that this is gendered violence. It hardly needs to be said that very few women are involved in the actual rioting although I don't doubt that there are quite a number involved in looting. The same can be said in most similar situations anywhere in the world.

So I guess what I'm interested in exploring is whether or not this is actually gendered violence as such. Are the wives, mothers and sisters of the protestors sitting at home cheering them on? Is the only reason they don't join in fear for personal safety? Or do they feel fundamentally differently? I mean, would they ever be the ones to precipitate the violence? Do the males feel more disaffected - or are they actually more disaffected (I hardly think so!). Or, controversially, does this opportunity stir up some innate desire in males to simply be violent?

I've got to disappear but I'd love to hear what you think.

Yes OP there is that elephant in the room, but what about the other one?
Surely a lot of the trouble can be attributed to the feminisation of society as well. Please don't get violent and abusive towards me, just think about it.
It appears to me to be a significant causative factor.

In what way is the feminisation of society a cause of rioting by mainly males? Also, if there is a feminisation of society, who is doing it? It can't be women because they are not in charge.

Well for example: the state replacing fathers, authority figures denigrated eg teachers unable to discipline pupils, feelings of male worthlessness/uselessness projected by the media, modular education instead of exams, lack of apprenticeships, very light punishment for crime in the name of rehabilitation etc, an equality agenda which flies in the face of reality (ie no-one loses, everyone wins, everyone can go to University - except when the real world is met massive frustration and disorientation results).
Do you do conversations swallowedafly?

I don't think that anyone is saying that your son doesn't respect you and very few people are slagging off single mums. Everybody has different views about the cause of the riots. The black youth workers and ex-gang members like Shaun Bailey and others on TV believe it is essentially due to family breakdown and the loss of respect and discipline. I agree with them.

archieleach, I agree with some of those things. But it isn't women who have made these changes.

AL, most of those things have nothing to do with feminisation, and the state has not 'replaced' fathers. The one about modular exams has not been borne out by research.

Margaret Thatcher would never have stood for those progressive policies.

saf is right. This is a parenting forum and supposed to be supportive of parents, whatever form they take. This is also the feminist section where stereotypes should be challenged and all this nonsense about "it's natural" for men to be violent is just that - nonsense. These men were violent because they wanted to be not because their hormones ruled them. They are violent because they are brought up in a violent environment. They are violent because they feel they don't have to take responsiblity for their action.

Blaming this on single mothers is quite frankly shit.

And as feminisation of society - well that made me laugh at least. What a crock.

Hi Claig, How is it not women who have made these changes? I wouldn't say it was either gender to be honest, people have made these changes. Why they made them is a whole different story.
Can you explain Milly, how these things are not feminisation? It seems very evident that these few examples are diametrically opposed to a very masculinised society such as Sparta, 1930's Germany etc

Archieleach, do you think Margaret Thatcher was a good leader?

Of course men are naturally more violent than women. To ignore that is to ignore reality. Of course it is to do with hormones. Why do you think "roid rage" exists?

'How is it not women who have made these changes?'

Because women are not in charge. Margaret Thatcher was the only woman who was in charge and she was against most of those progressive policies.

Oh how predictable. The riots are women's fault. Couldn't see this one coming.

The riots looked pretty fucking masculined to me.

And it's OK to use it as a stick to attack single mothers, is it? Of course that'll be it. Hang them out to dry so we don't actually need to look at the issues that might not reflect so well on all of us.

And I find it very patronising to trot out the 'black men wot said it'. What about the black women? Do we not give a shit about them now? Do we somehow forget that patriarchal ways of describing things and deciding who to blame is not the solve reserve of white people? And that heaven forbid black people might have a range of voices, what with them not all being a homogeneous mass? Of course the voices that prop up what the malestream says get heard.

It's political, it's not women doing it. The people who spin these policies and implement them are men.

Are you sure there has been no research about modular education favouring girls? I thought there was lots. Through observation of teenagers working it appears to me that girls are more disciplined over a sustained period whereas boys tend to do well in short bursts of energy

Claig, are women not "in charge" of education nowadays? Aren't most primary and secondary teachers women?

Yes women are the majority of teachers. But the people who set policy are the ministers in charge of education. Now it is Michael Gove. I can't remember who the last one was, I think it was Ed Balls.

Just because women are the majority of teachers doesn't mean anything. Women make up the majority of nurses. But that doesn't mean that the NHS is feminised or controlled by women.

Stop blaming women. Start looking at the politicians who create policy.

Feminisation of society? What a load of shit.

Sometimes leaders delude themselves into thinking they are being leaders whereas in fact they are just following their followers to remain popular, for example. If the general trend of the followers is in one direction and the leader in another, the system often breaks up, so I would question whether these "leaders in education" are following or leading. If indeed they have all been men in the last thirty years, about which I have no idea.
If an educational leader (read "male" I suppose) suddenly decided that birching, caning etc should be implemented, would he get it past his "followers" - of course not

Margaret Thatcher was once in charge of the country, and we haven't had a better leader since.

Claig, I'm not blaming women at all.

'If an educational leader (read "male" I suppose) suddenly decided that birching, caning etc should be implemented, would he get it past his "followers" - of course not'

No it wouldn't get implemented, because the majority male MPs in parliament would not vote for it. You can't blame women for every policy you don't like. The majority of MPs are men and they set policy. I refer you once again to the legendary Margaret Hilda Thatcher, just one of whom is worth a hundred male MPs.

This is a post-industrial, democratic. It is pointless to put it in a frame of reference that includes Sparta and 1930s Germany when nobody in this country has a desire to choose those as the alternatives to our current structure.

Will go through your points:

1. State replacing fathers. Parents have a number of roles - the physical care, emotional support and financial support of their children. The main role shared by the state is financial. This applies to poor families with and without fathers. Sometimes the state takes on a heavier burden than usual because a father that could financially contribute has chosen not to. Choosing not to support your children when you could is not a gender trait; it is simply irresponsible.
2. Worthlessness of males and females is presented in the media. You could argue from anecdote for either side getting the worst of it, but ultimately, both genders get it because they can sell you tat so that you feel like 'you're worth it' again.
3. Modular education has now been largely abandoned at GCSE. Attainment of boys at GCSE has not risen as a consequence because the gender element was a myth (although personally I'm glad for my son and daughter that modular education has gone).
4. Apprenticeships have gone for both boys and girls. This is a social disaster, but not one that makes society more feminine, just less skilled and more unhappy.
5. Light punishment for crime is not in the name of rehabilitation. It is in the name of saving money. There is no appetite among women for shorter sentences for offenders.
6. The equality issues are many and varied. The one you mentioned - lots of people going to university is not a good thing if it is brought about by closing down other options. But again, there is nothing particularly feminine about more people being graduates.