a question for the men here

[Mitchy1nge]

what makes you think you have anything of real value to bring to discussions about women's experiences and expectations?

obviously some men can make interesting contributions (although those sorts of men don't often announce themselves here) to some discussions but generally, on the whole, everything everywhere else is already pretty saturated in Male Voice so was just wondering where you got the idea from

kim - that is interesting, isn't it?

Fastidia - depends on what listening to their experience is. FGM for example is often carried out by women on other girls/women. It's always been like that and they don't know it any other way. Going by their experience, there is no reason to stop. Should they not be told that it doesn't have to be that way?

Is a female anti-abortionist's voice more deserved to be heard, than a man's who wants the freedom to choose for his sisters, daughters, partners?

Morebeta "
I have reluctantly concluded that men cannot engage with Feminism and Feminism does not want to engage with men. It is a political movement and like all political movements it seeks a 'divide' to define itself. "

It's sad that you've come to that exclusion. There are many streams of feminism, and not all are for segregation.

I think the Pan episode is more than a personal squabble. It encapsulates a good deal of the difficulty women and men experience when engaging on the subject of feminism both on an individual level and on a wider scale. On an individual level because Feminism by its nature uses the terms 'men' and 'patriarchy', etc., which some men see as evidence of hatred of men. On a wider scale because there is a tendency of men against all logic to band together in the face of a perceived threat -- maybe the fight or flight response; it is visceral and not rational.

There seems to be something threatening to men about the phenomenon of Feminism as a whole - many men in general seem to have few problems with individual issues that feminism champions, like reproductive rights, equal pay, equal access to opportunity in the workplace. Otoh, Feminism, as a movement and as a theory provokes a reaction of discomfort. If there are men here who accept that, I would like to know their thoughts about why this is. If that answer can be given without using the phrase 'man hating' there will be bonus points awarded. I am looking for insight into male instincts and emotions here.

I am genuinely interested in what the male posters have learned from the last 34 pages, and whether you will continue to post in this section.

Pretty much this > "we don't add any real value, we merely antagonise, however well intentioned"

Will I post again in this section probably not. (unless accidently through active topics).
I suspect I won't be missed but I shall continue to read.

There are people campaigning against FGM from within the communities where it is happening. I think listening to them and supporting them is the way to go.

From International Campaign to Ban Female Genital Mutilation Worldwide -

The direct role of activists and parliamentarians from countries afflicted by FGM in the United Nations negotiations is an important and innovative aspect of our work. Their participation is not mediated by the international NGOs or international coalitions, but rather follows directly from their own national and regional lobbying, with their own parliaments and ministries. We hope the action at the international level will increase their ability to effect lasting change in-country, and will lead to their full ownership of the success, when they will get a Resolution adopted, and their ability to make the most of it to change local legislation, policies and practices.

I don't think anyone here is arguing for segregation, just an acknowledgement that men's role within feminism is a supporting role and that sometimes that will mean, you know, actually supporting us.

WW
You missed the bit in my post where I said " (if supporting them is something you think is a good idea)"

I don't think it's a good idea to support FGM, so I wouldn't be supporting those women who do men's dirty work for them. By the way, the reason women have carried out FGM is because men in those cultures where it's done, won't marry women who haven't had it done. Men can loftily pretend it's a woman's thing, nothing to do with them by getting women to carry it out, while ensuring it's done by simply making it impossible for a woman to function in the society she lives in if it's not. I think we need to bear that in mind when we talk about women carrying out FGM.

And I have no idea what you're on about re women who want to force other women to give birth. Again, I wouldn't think it was a good idea to support a woman who wants to force another woman to give birth, so what is your point?

It is important to remember that while women are the ones wielding the rusty knife or the shard of broken glass, FGM is done entirely in the context of a society where a female can only survive if she is acceptable as a bride and as a wife to a man.

x post

mathanxiety, storming stuff in your last couple of posts.

(Tangentially - thanks for the links, very interesting. There is a review of a couple of books in the LRB this week which talks about these sorts of issues btw)

"You missed the bit in my post where I said " (if supporting them is something you think is a good idea)""

So you're basically saying "women are better suited voice an opinion about this stuff, as they're actually experiencing it" unless you don't agree with them. Rightyo. I don't really follow you there.

Mathanxiety has been very astute and incisive about the dynamic about certain responses. I wish I could switch the part of my brain on that does that kind of analysis, and make it come up with something about why MNHQ so consistently, so crashingly, keeps making silly errors of judgement about feminism and the FWR boards. (without opening old wounds; rather, enjoying and possibly even sharing the soothing balm of an elegant explanatory hypothesis)

It's something to do with the status-quo bias of traditional liberalism; something to do with small c conservatism; something to do with not caring much? - something to do with applying a false symmetry to a non-symmetrical situation? - yes that last one is resonating a bit but goddammit, I need to articulate this properly or see someone else do it or I WILL DIE*

• possible exaggeration

math I really don't mind your using my name in vain. Really.

No that's not what I'm saying WW but if you want to read it that way I'm fine with that because tbh I don't really follow you either and that's also fine with me.

It is the bits where it went 'askew' that we must look at and learn from.

mathanxiety - "Otoh, Feminism, as a movement and as a theory provokes a reaction of discomfort. If there are men here who accept that, I would like to know their thoughts about why this is."

I refer to my earlier post about Feminism as a political movement by way of explanation.

I believe in the welfare state, the NHS and good state education and I deeply resent the bailout of undeserving bankers who caused chaos in our country. Despite that I vote Conservative, I am by most peoples standards comfortably off, I cannot in any sense engage with the Labour party.

You see that apparent contradiction. I still dont hate Labour voters though even if some Labour voters would see me as the enemy.

Curryeater, I like that, 'applying a false symmetry to a non-symmetrical situation.' Pithy. And pertinent.

I think Conservative / Labour, or any party politics, is a good analogy.

FFS! I don't think ... is a good analogy.

Yes I like that false symmetry thing too.

Good one, I'll be using that.

The "askwed" bit? Now that really is a complicated one.
I'd remain an optimist, tho' and not be too bedraggled. There is too much good in so many men to not think that way.imvho.

The Labour party defines itself as the party of the poor and defines the rich as the enemy of the poor?

That's mighty simplistic and there's plenty of Labour MPs who would disagree.

Feminism is not a party and does not define men as the enemy of women. A good slug of us push men out of our vaginas, why the fuck would we think you are the enemy?

Feminists would like the patriarchy to stop getting in our way but we do not hate men.

TheDoctrineOfSciAndNatureClub

who or what is the patriarchy?

You missed your chance to get some bonus points there MB.

You made an assumption about Labour voters that is interesting, used the term 'the enemy'. You have posted two assumptions you hold about the thought processes of others (as far as I have counted on this thread) and though you don't hate the groups whose thought processes you hold assumptions about, you find it hard to engage with those groups, apparently because of barriers you have erected in your own head.

Feminism hates men. Labour voters might see you as the enemy. I am interested in this habit of mind.