Something that's been bothering me

[mumwithdice]

I've been doing a lot of reading lately and talking with DH about his work. He says that one difficulty he has is with women whom he knows to be capable and competent coming up to ask him to do really ridiculously simple things in breathy little-girl type voices (they put these voices on specifically). He tries to manage this by showing them how to do whatever it is not doing it for them. He has also had women try to avoid learning any technical things which are requirements for their jobs (opening zip files) by using the stereotype of women not being capable of techy stuff as a get-out clause.

So what bothers me? I suppose, really, I keep feeling that texts are telling me that women don't bear any responsibility for their actions because we live in a patriarchy. That is, that there is nothing wrong with the women above because they're trying to get by in the system. And yet at the same time, I feel that actions like that do a disservice to women who can and do want to do technical things because it only reinforces stereotypes.

So can women do a disservice to other women and thus to the aims of feminism?

I am genuinely asking because I don't know the answer, it really bothers me not to know, and because I've found this board quite good at answering questions. Also, again, if this is Feminism 101, please tell me and I will look it up there.

She sounds great, you must be doing a good job.

I like Manuel J Smith's "Bill of Assertive Rights", here: h2g2.com/dna/h2g2/A2998551

Being centred and powerful won't stop shit happening to a woman (though feminism might -one day). But it will 100% help her not to blame herself for shit that happens, or to let others blame her.

Well it sounded like a gotcha to me who had just shared humiliating and frightening experiences of being sexually harassed.

I forgot myself for a minute and thought I was having a discussion with feminists who support each other when it comes to sexual violence. How silly. I'm usually very careful not to post anything much about myself because there is always someone who will gleefully use personal stuff to score points and make digs.

I find your remark about 'mental baggage' offensive, sly and dubious. I don't think I will report it - better for others to see these things.

Garlicbutter.

So now the Babygirl and Man conversation is in your words "fictional" a "sketch". In describing it as a "mockery and derision" that was exactly what I was getting at: you were presenting a parody and impicitly and explicity holding up the man, the masculine, as a model to be aspired to.

How did I not respond respectully to you? How did I "deride the act" ? In using the words " fictional" and "sketch" are you not acknowledging something. Fictional sketches are just that. Where did I show you any lack of respect?.

The lack of respect I see on this thread is mainly from Scottismummy in her repeated personal attacks on Nyac: describing her as angry, having issues with anger and the patriarcy, an obsession, her sense of persecution and distress. As a clinical psychologist I recognise these taunts for what they are: the classic tools that have been used against women.

You have aligned yourself with someone who thinks that feminism as expressed on this thread on this forum is all in Scottismummy's words "just blethering". Well you know what? For some of us it is not just blethering. For those of us who went out on the streets in 1970 to fight anti-abortion laws and to change the law we were not just fucking blethering. We were fucking angry and we wanted change.

You can align yourself with whoever you want Garlicbutter but it is not a feminism I recognise. There is a reason that in 1970 the posters we held up said "WOMEN UNITE!"

those of us who went out on the streets in 1970 ... All of us except me?

Thinking about it, I started in 1971. Does the one-year difference invalidate me?

Agreed, Dust. I hope she can talk to me and her mum about anything. There will be times, though, when we aren't there with her, and she needs the tools to cope with the stuff that life throws at her.

And that bill of rights, garlic - it's going above my desk, with number 10, 'You have the right to say, 'I don't care'.', it big red letters

Sanjeev - if that is genuinely what you want, then my advice would be, when she tells you she is experiencing sexism at work, don't tell her it's because she works in a backwater, don't tell her that it's all just dandy where you work, don't tell her that maybe it's down to capitalism, and don't ask her what she is going to do to change it. And if she speaks to you in an assertive and direct way about her experiences, don't accuse her of dick-waving.

You've got me wrong Beach, but you carry on believing I was talking about you. Can't be bothered to explain, frankly.

How could you report it? It wasn't a personal attack, that is how you twisted it.

As a clinical psychologist, esperance, I'm disappointed that you chose not to pursue my earlier post where I wanted to start a line of thinking about how recovery from abuse could be used as a metaphor for feminism (or whether it can't, even.)

It's interesting that you perceive me as taking sides. I'm not 'aligning' myself with any particular poster, except for a bit of friendly banter with Dust last night. I try not to join in playground battles, joining one girl's army and all that. Strikes me as a waste of energy while there's a proper war on.

esperance,that's an erroneous summation, do allow me

yes I did query why nyac accused posters of stalking her
why she demanded to know poster identity
as frankly it is v bizarre, and yes I dud comment on the emotive words she used

nyac has been v attacking in her tone, I commented on that

now, as I see it dialogue/discussion is point of a discursive medium
I can legitimately discuss my experience of sexism in workplace,that was perpetrated by female. now that may or may not ring true for some and it may be unpalatable to consider women do behave like this. but it in no way diminishes my point

Alice, I am sorry you have taken things that way. In the case of the waving comment - somebody said directly to me that they were using computer systems so advanced and powerful that they were way beyond anything I would have experienced. Now if those systems were at the LSE or one of the major London banks, chances are I installed them and/or worked on them in the late 80's. To me it seemed rude and the kind of put-down that, if a man had said it to a woman, all hell would have broken loose. I don't see why I should have to put up with rudeness.

But why use "dick-waving" about a woman?

Another question, Alice, re capitalism. Why don't you think that an economic system that encourages dog-eat-dog mentality, scrambling to the top and using any weapon - including sexism - to put down a rival, would be an enemy of feminism? I think that as long as you have what is laughingly referred to as 'free market' economics, women will be kept down, as well as most men. That has to be worth fighting against.

Because, Card, metaphorically that is exactly what she was doing - 'my computer system is soooooo much biggerer and more powerful than anything you know about'. Imagine if I had said it. If the word or the context is really that offensive, I have apologised already, but I have seen far, far worse language on here.

Another few tips Sanjeev - when your daughter picks you up on something, don't minimise it as being 'the way she's taken it' and then explain at length why you were right, when she was there for the whole conversation too. Don't do the whole 'reverse sexism' thing. And don't assume you do or don't know what her view is on a subject that is tangential to what she is trying to discuss with you.

why do you mention your job esperance?are you seeking credence, to inform us of status that your post carries clinical brevity?given this is online chat, and you cannot assess or interpret a nuance, and you're interpreting the words on the screen

but as a sentiment yes mn is online social discursive medium.it's not a safe space, it's not therapy. it's strangers online chewin the fat, and do expect to be disagreed with.I'd suggest one needs to be robust and be able to roll with it online

And if you ever need to apologise to her, don't say, but but but I apologised if anything was wrong which it wasn't anyway so ner.

Sanjeev I don't think you understand why people questioned you for using it. You used weird sexual male (hint women have no dicks) language about a woman, and associated showing dick with showing status. On the Fem boards.

I've read this thread on and off for a few days. It's very interesting.

I have both men and women ask ridiculously simple IT questions of me and both male and female colleagues on a regular basis. I can't say I've noticed that women dick about wasting their time massaging my male colleagues egos in order to get them to print a word doc or whatever. Neither have I noticed male colleagues be oh do direct and professional that I have taken my hat off to them as being models of the behaviour I should follow tout suite in their requests for helping print off word docs.

I suppose the op's bloke is using the age old stereotype of the socially clueless it spod who only understands computers and not people rather than actually making the effort to develop good communication skills and mutually respectful relationships with his colleagues.

I agree with all the posters trying to explain it's not about the women and their perceived behaviour. It is hard to get past I can see that too.

I have to go out. It's been interesting. Catch up later, I hope.

Garlicbutter.

This 1970 or 1971 stuff is bullshit pedantics. My point was that we went out on the streets and "UNITED" because we were serious about change. That you want to joke about 1970 or 1971 is just stupid. We wanted to "UNITE" with other women. Surely you remember that?

I have absolutely no idea about what you mean about abuse and a "metaphor for feminism". I mean that honestly. I have no idea about what you are talking about. WTF is a metaphor for feminism? Since when do we need a metaphor for the abuse that women are subjected to? I don't need a metaphor. I don't know any women who needs a metaphor.?
Why do you need to tell fictional sketches, when you and other women have there own true stories? Why do you want to make fun of us? Why do you want to present the masculine as being the superior mode for functioning in the work environment .

You are disappointed in me ? I was raped vaginally and sodomised at gunpoint by a male intruder in my final year of university. I know all about surviving as a victim of male abuse. For me the abuse, rape and slaying of women is not some fucking metaphor. So spare me the metaphor shit. We are talking about real women and real lives: real rape, real torture, real murder.

I will say again that you have colluded with someone who thinks that the victimisation of women is some fucking joke. "Yuk yuk."

I hope that anyone who reads this thread will see you and your ilk for what you are, and it sure aint feminists.

right you are now just making things up and lying
I have never said that the victimization of women is a fucking joke you chose to paraphrase and ascribe that to me, to score some point no doubt

it's alarming you resort to lies and exaggerated paraphrasing to express your displeasure

My ilk? There you go again, esperanca, pigeonholing and aligning people into sides. Quite a patriarchal approach in a way.

I'm pleased that my feminist clinical psychologist didn't rubbish my interest in viewing my abuse and recovery in the context of feminism. I shan't bother trying to explain all over again, I've raised a few issues on various threads here and shall continue to do so.

Thanks, I do like a little joke on occasion. Rest assured I won't call you "stupid" in return. I'm not that disrespectful.

I don't know what you mean by "Yuk yuk."

Quote: "why do you mention your job esperance?are you seeking credence, to inform us of status that your post carries clinical brevity?given this is online chat, aavand you cannot assess or interpret a nuance, and you're interpreting the words on the screen

but as a sentiment yes mn is online social discursive medium.it's not a safe space, it's not therapy. it's strangers online chewin the fat, and do expect to be disagreed with.I'd suggest one needs to be robust and be able to roll with it online"

Another post from Scottishmummy that is virtually incomprensible to me. What is "clinical brevity"? Once again for Scottishmummy it would seem that this is all just online chat and one needs to be robust and be able to roll with it online. For Scottishmummy it is all just a bit of fun isn't. There are no real women on MN who have suffered abuse at the hands of men and the patriarchy. It is all just a bit of blether and a laugh. and a bit of entertainment.