I don't know why I bother.....anyone else the same?

[mcmooncup]

I use Facebook. Put up funny posts, pictures...bla bla bla.

Everytime I post something I usually get about 30-40 likes.

Yet EVERYTIME I post something vaguely feminist. Blank. Zero. Occasional like.

I find it so depressing. Today I have posted about International Women's Day and linked to the letter in the Guardian.


How do we break down this wall of silence?

Why do people not want to be associated with 'ranty feminists'?

Our communication seems to be very isolating, even though it's not meant to be.

Qu's I ask myself....

Why can people not see what I can see?
Is the harm done to them so 'normal' that they can't see it?
Are they scared of being ostracised into this rad fem group if they speak out?
Are they afraid of losing their families/jobs/attractiveness to males?

I just wondered if we could have a discussion and try and learn what is it that non feminists hear when they hear a feminist talking. It might help us improve our communication.

[TheDoctrineOfSnatch]

Cultural conditioning...

I don't have a moral objection to eating meat and I don't think horses are smarter or more "human" than cows and pigs. I know horse meat is sometimes eaten by others in Western culture. There would be no intellectual reason for me to decline horse meat if offered it in France, say. I can identify that I am purely culturally conditioned not to knowingly eat horse meat.

I still wouldn't choose to eat it though.

Being aware of cultural conditioning and choosing to go against it are two different things.

[mabongwen]

I am confused, is that aimed at me TheDoctrine ?

[TheDoctrineOfSnatch]

No, mabongwen! It was an example of how being aware of cultural conditioning (taking a PP's example of female friends who have become SAHMs) doesn't necessarily mean it's easy to act against it.

[mabongwen]

ohh I see, sorry I am new and trying to figure out how conversations/threads run.

[TheDoctrineOfSnatch]

No worries - I have patchy wifi so sometimes draft a post but can't post it until later, which doesn't help.

[mcmooncup]

"So for me the DV is a part of the agend/portfolio that I personally can't get my head around. It's not feminism, It's not feminists it's just a personal issue for me. "

I'm going to have a go at putting this statement into a feminist context....

I completely get that you for you it seems that your DV experience was just 2 individuals and the police that just sorted it out but there is a wider context to why you happened to become a victim of abuse from a male perpetrator and there are a few things in your post that may join the dots as to why feminists do see DV as a gender issue.

You say that DV happens women to men - this is an arguable point. There are many statistics out there and it depends on how they are presented and many who work in the DV field say the level of female to male abuse cases are very low. My opinion of the statistics is that there are cases of female to male violence, however on analysis approx. 50% of these cases are reported as incidents where the women was feeling threatened by the man they attacked. So the stats may not be straightforward. Also the incidence of female to male violence is significantly smaller than male to female / or male to male violence. Males are overwhelmingly the perpetrators of violence in our culture.

Also, the statistics do not really account for what an abusive relationship entails - financial abuse (withholding finances to control freedom), sexual abuse (coersive or forced sexual activity), emotional abuse (verbal destruction, gaslighting)

As to why males are the main perpertrators of violence.......this is a direct quote from the Women's Aid website....
Abusers choose to behave violently to get what they want and gain control. Their behaviour often originates from a sense of entitlement which is often supported by sexist, racist, homophobic and other discriminatory attitudes.

Domestic violence against women by men is 'caused' by the misuse of power and control within a context of male privilege. Male privilege operates on an individual and societal level to maintain a situation of male dominance, where men have power over women and children. Perpetrators of domestic violence choose to behave abusively to get what they want and gain control. Their behaviour often originates from a sense of entitlement which is often supported by sexist, racist, homophobic and other discriminatory attitudes. In this way, domestic violence by men against women can be seen as a consequence of the inequalities between men and women, rooted in patriarchal traditions that encourage men to believe they are entitled to power and control over their partners.


If we look at individual cases of DV, yes, there are individual circumstances and differences, but generally they can be applied to the problematic patriarchal structure of inequality that exists in our society.

Another quote I like is this one - it shows that all the things we take for granted, the things we internalise as 'normal' have a context, a reason, a history and never "just exist".

?Ideally, what should be said to every child, repeatedly, throughout his or her school life is something like this: 'You are in the process of being indoctrinated. We have not yet evolved a system of education that is not a system of indoctrination. We are sorry, but it is the best we can do. What you are being taught here is an amalgam of current prejudice and the choices of this particular culture. The slightest look at history will show how impermanent these must be. You are being taught by people who have been able to accommodate themselves to a regime of thought laid down by their predecessors. It is a self-perpetuating system. Those of you who are more robust and individual than others will be encouraged to leave and find ways of educating yourself ? educating your own judgements. Those that stay must remember, always, and all the time, that they are being moulded and patterned to fit into the narrow and particular needs of this particular society.?
― Doris Lessing, The Golden Notebook

[mcmooncup]

Excellent old thread here about "man-hating feminism" www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/a1215630-Man-hating-feminism#25857331

Dittany really was brilliant. Has some excellent stuff about why feminists are called man haters.

[mabongwen]

mcmooncup I now see the feminists point of view on DV, and although I don't agree with it personally I can see why it is a issue for feminists. It seems to again stem from male influence/power over women. The constant power struggle that women face on a daily basis.

I am of the understanding that further research needs to happen with regards to DV. That saying its mostly male on women is not enough, what about unreported cases? what about mental health issues? what about social stigmas? for me there is not enough evidence to sit on one side of the fence, so for now I am going to have to sit on it, I'm sorry.

With regards to the man hating feminists thread, I think what people take issue is the generalisation of the word "men". Again this could be why feminists have a communication problem. I don't think my husband hates feminism or feminists. I think it's the issue of "lumping all with one" that people take issue with. Perhaps a change in the way feminists put across their message could help, saying "some men" rather than men.

I'm not picking on anyone, just trying to perhaps convey a reason with regards to the communication question you asked maybe?

[mcmooncup]

There is mountains of research about dv. Most violence on the planet comes from males, it is an uncomfortable truth.

But that doesn't mean feminists hate all men, actually they just tend to hate the system of patriarchy that allows this to continue.

[mcmooncup]

All feminists say "some men". I have never heard a feminist say all men. I believe this to be a way in which feminism is smeared and attention is deliberately taken away from the actual problems (violence etc.) and again attention put back onto the woman.

[vesuvia]

mabongwen wrote - "Perhaps a change in the way feminists put across their message could help, saying "some men" rather than men."

Perhaps feminists could start saying "some men" rather than "men", when for example, bookshops have to say they sell "some books" rather than "books" (because bookshops should not mislead the public by implying that they sell all the books that have ever been written).

[mabongwen]

mcmooncup ok, I see and accept your point of view on the all men, some men, men fiasco. Perhaps it is "modern media" that puts this message over to smear the work of feminists. I agree with you on that.

The DV, violence thing. It's a well know fact that men are the more violent of the sexes. They are in most species, after all that is all we are, animals. We belong to the animal kingdom. However females are no so pure as the driven snow. Women are more likely to commit neonaticide than men. Yes violence against women is wrong but for me violence against anyone is wrong, and it's just a personal opinion of mine. I am not a feminists so have no reason to see it any other way. Violence is wrong, full stop be it at the hand of a man or a woman.

I think no matter how much we discuss this, I'm not going to change my opinion on it. I'm sorry. I just can't understand why it is in a feminist portfolio and I never will, It's just my opinion.

[mabongwen]

vesuvia I don't think it is fair to equate men to books. Books are objects, men are not. However if you look closely inside the book shop, so that you know what "type" of book you have. So you have factual/fiction books the same way you have sexist men and non sexist men. You have to go inside the shop to see what it offers, the same way you have to look at men as individuals and what "catagory" they fit in to. You wouldn't write a psychological essay with the use of a maths book, so why argue feminism with the use of the "all men book"when you can use the sexist men book

just a thought.

[rosabud]

I have followed this exchange between those who are clear about feminism (mmoncup) and those are asking questions (mabongwen) with interest, as it has been explained so well. However, I am now confused. Having had things so well explained, how can mabonwen decide to "sit on the fence" on dv? What exactly do you not agree with? Do you mean, you don't agree that it is mostly perpetuated by men against women? What evidence are you waiting on, exactly? Are you waiting for evidence which will suit another point of view about dv and if so, what point of view?

[mabongwen]

rosabud sorry I wasn't very clear

I'm not prepared to see why it is a feminists issue. For me and it's my own personal opinion, domestic violence is a crime no matter who commits it, and should be a issue for society rather than feminism.

The more research bit, (sorry again for not being clear, my fault) I want to know a better indepth look at reasons/causes for domestic violence such as mental health issues and alcoholism and of course weather some men just despise women and so forth. If someone could say outright Domestic Violence occurs purely because male spouses are sexist and "hate" their female partner because they are female, then believe me I would agree with the feminists point of view. I really would.

I personally believe domestic violence occurs for many reasons and the underlying reasons need to be looked at.

I don't want a argument, I really don't. I respect your point of view and can see why it is a issue for feminism to a certain degree, but I just don't agree with it personally enough to warrant it a "feminists issue" personally.

I am sorry, I don't want a argument. Just saying I have a different opinion on that one soul issue have I made any more sense ?? Sorry if I have not.

[mcmooncup]

OK, I completely respect that, really I do.

I would say I do think it is a bit of a cop out to say "ah well men are violent, we are animals", we are not animals, we are humans, we have consciousness and we are able to decide things for ourselves. Why do most men chose not to be violent?

I would also be interested in why you stayed in a relationship which was clearly abusive after the first incident? This is extremely common place and perhaps demonstrates an internalised boundary system of what is acceptable from a male to female. Would you have accepted hair pulling or wrist grabbing from a female flat mate? What is your script for life? You have indicated that you believe that men are "more violent"...........what does this do to expectations? To your boundaries?

I will also maintain my view - dv is a gendered crime. Men simply aren't the victims of domestic violence in the way women are. There may be a tiny number who are, but if you talk to anybody in a casualty department for example, domestic violence is a gendered issue and women are the victims. Also some male victims of DV are victims of their male partners. People always imagine that male victims of DV must be victims of women, but generally it is not.

Even where women have been convicted of murdering their husbands for example it turns out that quite often it's after years of violence towards them. Violence against women is a gendered issue. It isn't women in Darfur or the Congo going on mass raping expeditions and mutitlating and killing their victims for example. It's a male on female crime.

[mabongwen]

*For me the reason why domestic violence happens, is not because of the power struggle. I feel there is far more to it than that.

gahh I'm not explaining myself very well this always happens to me.

[mcmooncup]

I x-posted that with your last reply

[mcmooncup]

"The more research bit, (sorry again for not being clear, my fault) I want to know a better indepth look at reasons/causes for domestic violence such as mental health issues and alcoholism and of course weather some men just despise women and so forth. If someone could say outright Domestic Violence occurs purely because male spouses are sexist and "hate" their female partner because they are female, then believe me I would agree with the feminists point of view. I really would."

There is much evidence for all of the things you are looking for there......but genuinely must sleep, early start. There are very few if any, crimes where women kill men purely because they are men, there are however murders for the converse - i.e. men killing and being violent just because they are women.

[vesuvia]

mabongwen wrote - "I don't think it is fair to equate men to books. Books are objects, men are not."

I wasn't trying to equate men with books. I was trying to show that the word "some" does not have to explicitly precede a noun in English, to be reasonably implied. "Men" can be reasonably implied to mean "some men", "books" can be reasonably implied to mean "some" books. That goes for people, as well as anything else. It's a linguistic shortcut, perhaps similar to "it's" being short for "it is."

[mabongwen]

Ok, ill see if I make any more sense this way, Don't hold your breath lol

I would say I do think it is a bit of a cop out to say "ah well men are violent, we are animals", we are not animals, we are humans, we have consciousness and we are able to decide things for ourselves. Why do most men chose not to be violent?

For me this boils down to the nature Vs nurture debate. Most men are taught not to be, some men witness violence as a child (look at the Bandura Ross and Ross experiment using a BoBo doll) Children who witnessed violence re-enacted it on the bobodoll, using the same words and phrases as the adult role model. This would support the nature side, saying men are either reared to not be violent towards others, where some and they are a minority are reared in a hostile violent enviroment, possibly having a affect on the later in life.

I would also be interested in why you stayed in a relationship which was clearly abusive after the first incident? This is extremely common place and perhaps demonstrates an internalised boundary system of what is acceptable from a male to female. Would you have accepted hair pulling or wrist grabbing from a female flat mate? What is your script for life? You have indicated that you believe that men are "more violent"...........what does this do to expectations? To your boundaries?

Because I was afraid, he kept giving me false promises "I won't do it again" "I didn't mean it" "I am so sorry" DV occurs over months, and because you love that person you are willing to take the apology and believe they are not going to do it again, and even when they do the groveling apology keeps you there. I had no where to go to begin with, I had fallen out with my mother, I felt a failure like it was my fault, that I should have changed, that I was doing something to provoke him. I blamed myself for it at the time I wouldn't have accepted it off another female or even another male, but because I honestly believed I loved that man I could forgive him each time. For me I have always found men to be more violent, witnessing punch ups by young men, and if you look at any major conflict we have had it was led by men. Men have a primal urge to fight, I can't explain it I can just see it. It's a personal perspective of mine. My boundries now are very different to what they were, my husband would not dare raise a hand to me. He would walk away from the situation than stand and fight.

I will also maintain my view - dv is a gendered crime. Men simply aren't the victims of domestic violence in the way women are. There may be a tiny number who are, but if you talk to anybody in a casualty department for example, domestic violence is a gendered issue and women are the victims. Also some male victims of DV are victims of their male partners. People always imagine that male victims of DV must be victims of women, but generally it is not.

And you are completely entitled to this view, and I respect you for it. Just because mine differs for me I don't think yours means any less to you or is incorrect. It's an opinion and I respect it.

[runningforthebusinheels]

vesuvia wasn't equating men with books

It was a point to illustrate some, all etc.

[mcmooncup]

Just quickly. In no way was I blaming you for staying in an abusive relationship - quite the opposite - I was trying (and failing) to point out how the current patriarchal system does exactly what you describe and keeps women unnecessarily and dangerously in abusive relationships. There is a much wider context to what happened to you with that 'man'.

[mcmooncup]

God and also - by saying there is a wider context, it is not meant to devalue your individual experience in any way either.

[mabongwen]

vesuvia But other's don't see it this way. They see it a a generalisation, and it's why it can sometimes cause problems. If a paper had a headline

Men killed animals in 1941

Some people would read it and think, "all men killed animals in 1941!" I know I would, untill I looked in to it further, but there lies the problem. Some people won't look in to it further and would walk away thinking all men killed animals in 1941.

So now to be more clear the headline would have to read

Farming men killed animals in 1941

Just because you see it or perceive it to be one thing, does not mean everyone does. And when talking about a group of people, in today's world it's better to be specific rather than non-committal.