Is feminism all about man hating?

[PedanticPanda]

When feminism is brought up around my DP and my other friends they all say the same thing,

I agree with feminists who want equal rights for men and women, but not feminists who hate men and want women to be treated better than men.

Do these feminists actually exist? I assumed that feminism was all about equal rights etc, I thought all the man hating was a stereotype but wasn't actually true, but, most people I know seem to think this is the idea of the majority and it's the minority of feminists who want equal rights.

Humour is a very tricky area. It can add greatly to your quality of life, but it can also be a weapon.

Someone once said to me that humour/banter is good when it is directed inwards, amongst friends and those you are fond of. It can become a problem when it is directed outwards at people who may not feel a connection with you/the group. If you are sensitive to others and their boundaries then all is good. If you are unaware of the other person's sensibilities, then best keep quiet.

Whatmeworry, do you know many women?

Namechangeguy -- any sort of conversation where members of one sex are excluded detracts from team ethos in a work environment. Excluding women from conversations where any sort of language is used or any sort of topics are discussed really constitutes the formation of an alternative team, the Men's team, or sometimes the Women's team if men are the ones being excluded. In general, a manager should be frowning very sternly on this sort of division.

Using language that is known to be offensive or suspected to be offensive, or discussion of topics that are known or suspected to to be offensive is a way of bonding with the group using the language or discussing the topic. The exclusion of one sex or the other is not done from politeness; it is done from a desire to form a discrete group and the choice of language and topic is deliberate.

Whqtmeworry- have you ever actually met a woman?

Oops, sorry, cross post!

'We could not imagine a woman taking the mick out of another woman in quite the same way!'

You should move to Ireland. Slagging is an equal opportunity national sport indulged in by all.

Whatmeworry, do you know many women?

Some of my best friends... :o

Sorrry, but I find men are more likely to talk about politics, science, ideas - stuff that interests me. And I like the humour of office banter, its usually good humoured, I really don't see where all this "oppression" comes in. Maybe its because I grew up in Ireland where piss-taking is anational sport.

shrugs maybe it depends where you work.
When I worked in a call centre I found the dreary rounds of big-brother/eastenders/fashion stuff really boring, but it was fairly unisex. My current job interests me and has a lot of people in it who share my interests, and I don't think I've ever heard a woman where I work talk about clothes or their kids or whatever.

In fact, the people I know with their children's art up in the office are the men. The women who have kids practically pretend they don't exist. Incase their 'mother' role means they are taken less seriously at work, perhaps. Which would be sad. Parenting is a huge part of who we are.

at this Jane Austen vision of the men the dining room discussing politics and the events of the day, the women in the drawing room talking about embroidery and children.....

Whatmeworry, I think it's absolute balls that women don't talk about politics and art and stuff. Maybe they're just not so desperate to show off what they know as men are. Or maybe you give off the impression that you think they're a bit thick so they don't want to chat with you.

'Sorrry, but I find men are more likely to talk about politics, science, ideas - stuff that interests me.'

That sounds like something my mother might say on a particularly bitter day. She also grew up in Ireland, as did I. The Ireland where she grew up was one where women were pretty much invisible and inaudible. I hear lots of women her age (almost 80) complaining about empty headedness among women, and basically wanting to join the boys' club in preference to chatting about Hello. I always suspected their disdain for the comradeship and chat of other women came from the realisation that women were sidelined in a major way during their formative years, and getting heard at all required speaking a different language about things the oppressing class preferred to discuss together as a way of demonstrating its superiority to its members.

'In fact, the people I know with their children's art up in the office are the men. The women who have kids practically pretend they don't exist. Incase their 'mother' role means they are taken less seriously at work, perhaps.' Yes, that's the sort of thing I have in mind.

at this Jane Austen vision of the men the dining room discussing politics and the events of the day, the women in the drawing room talking about embroidery and children

Replace drawing room with kitchen and its pretty bang on, unfortunately.

Whatmeworry, I think it's absolute balls that women don't talk about politics and art and stuff. Maybe they're just not so desperate to show off what they know as men are. Or maybe you give off the impression that you think they're a bit thick so they don't want to chat with you

Of course they do, I said men are "more likely to", in an office setting. That is my experience, and I think its because women are less confident to express opinions.

I also think it's complete balls that men don't talk about clothing or shoes or golf gear, or phones, music systems and other techie toy stuff like that.

It's the basic assumption that what men talk about, or are assumed to talk about, must be superior to what women might allegedly like to talk about, is superior almost by definition, that gets my goat. Is sport superior to fashion?

I totally agree with you mathanxiety.

I have a busy social calendar this coming week, I might do a wee experiment and linger in corners listening to what each gender actually talks about.

The problem is that none of us can possibly know what the OS talk about when they're in single sex groups because the fact of our presence changes the group dynamic. Sex change anyone? In the interests of feminist research!

I'm probably more likely to chat politics with my female friends but will close up when men are around because it can tend to become a competition about who knows the most. Men have more experience in adversarial conversation and enjoy paying devil's advocate and so it's best just to bow out. I realise that's a huge generalization but it's happened enough times for me to be wary of it.

Mathanxiety "is sport superior to fashion?" you are spot on. Why should we feel the urge to hide our interest in our children, in fashion, and yes EMBROIDERY is awesome!! Why are topics like sport and politics intrinsically more important? Hmmm, lemme think....

I know it's a radical thought but, whilst some men obviously feel unable to do so, it is entirely possible for women to be interested and excel in a broad range of topics. (Obviously to do with the superior communication between both cerebral hemispheres, given to us courtesy of the neuro-sexists )

Obviously I can't speak for every all-male group, but when me and my friends get together we normally end up talking bollocks.

Figuratively, not literally I hasten to add.

UniDad. Love the honesty! Tbh after a few me and my friends are about as intellectual as a bunch of monkeys. Monkeys talking about sex that is!

I have a 15 year old daughter. There is a guy at work who does a similar job to me and who has become a good friend. He has two daughters, now grown up. I find him a useful sounding board for the frequent 'challenges' that my daughter is currently setting me .

So it isn't all football and cars, though there is a place for that too.

The men and women I know talk about the same things, but the women talk more intimately on the whole.

The main difference is that women actually listen to each other.....[big spoon emoticon]

My mother works in a school, so very female dominated environment.

Every day at break they sit down with the paper and discuss all aspects of the news. Including gasp politics!

I have strong political beliefs and my brother is a politician. He's honestly the only feminist man I know, and I still can't discuss politics with him. He gets very aggressive. Aggressive isn't quite the right word but it's a bit 'don't-challenge-me'

I don't discuss any of my feminist views with men, and none of my feminist friends do. Every man we've tried to engage with just takes it very personally and like on here, can get quite condescending.

Lurking IKWYM. The reason I tend to shy away from talking politics with men is because I can't separate my views on politics from my feminist beliefs, and of course once you out yourself as a feminist then your credibility goes down and the number of eye-rolls go up...

^The reason I tend to shy away from talking politics with men is because I can't separate my views on politics from my feminist beliefs, and of course once you out yourself as a feminist then your credibility goes down and the number of eye-rolls go up6

Which brings me back to the original issue here, ie some extreme Feminist beliefs (and Feminists) are plain daft unhelpful, and its a PITA to always start on the back foot in any discussion as you have to deal with this rather than getting on with your own argument.

Fwiw I have always found its is more effective to say "yes, they are extreme, all movements have extremists, but they do not speak for the mainstream" than go for blanket denial, evasion or rudeness.

But it would be so much better if one did not have to start on the back foot all the darn time, it really doesn't help Feminism!

In my more conspiracy theory moments I wonder if the more extreme Feminists are paid by the Patriarchy to deliberately reduce the whole movement's credibility.

I really don't see where all this "oppression" comes in

You are very lucky then.

What a rude post Worry.

whatme Have you ever heard/read about "The Tone Argument" being discussed? I wonder if that is influencing some of your thoughts about 'the whole movement's credibility.'

This is a good post about it,

"The Tone Argument says: I don?t have to listen to you unless you phrase yourself in just the right way. And of course, the cunning trap of the Tone Argument is that there is no right way. The same statement can be too angry for one person and not angry enough for another; too simplistic, too complicated, too critical, too condescending. Too ?ugly?. (Is there a ?pretty? way to object to the glamorisation of an attempted murderer?) There is no perfect way to critique something."

Essentially, the thinking goes: a lot of people who are saying "well I'd be a feminist if the feminists weren't so shouty" ... are not telling the truth. The dismissers use feminism's legitimate anger over the deaths and mistreatment of women and girls (show me a feeling person who isn't angry about the DV and rape rates!) to dismiss the whole discussion. But if things are couched perfectly nicely, politely, gently, with extra flowers and sugar on top - then the tone is clearly not that important, easy to ignore... and feminism is dismissed a whole other way.

further selections from the post linked to just above:

When discussing the Tone Argument, a comparison that comes up time and time again is one person standing on another?s foot. The person whose foot hurts might yell. The polite response is not, ?Don?t yell at me,? but ?Oh crap, I?m sorry, I?ll get right off your foot.?

The Tone Argument overlaps with existing stereotypes: women are perceived as ?hysterical?, black people are perceived as ?angry?. It?s all been said before and ? trust me ? adds nothing new to the conversation. Addition: these stereotypes really do affect how people are perceived. Tone is so subjective in part because how a person interprets something is affected by their unconscious biases.