"Mumsnet hates men"

[AnnieLobeseder]

There's a Facebook page created by some school kids called "shut Mumsnet down cos they hate kids" or some such thing, which is harmless enough.

But they've posted this advert from F4J, which is rather more sinister.

I wasn't aware that it was mandatory to hate men to be a Mumsnetter. I shall have to inform DH at once that he is to leave home and never see the DDs again.

They're rather sad and scary aren't they?

[LRDtheFeministDragon]

'You are saying that I should subjugate my own needs and desires and put a whole class of people before myself. Aren't you saying in this that my own desires and wants aren't important and so should be disregarded?'

No, I'm not. HTH.

Please re-read my post. It doesn't say that at all, does it?

[LRDtheFeministDragon]

buffy - YY, I agree it's reacting to a prevailing culture (must remember to nick that phrase!).

[LRDtheFeministDragon]

I think it is a version of 'I'm alright Jack'. But I also think it is missing the point, that when someone says 'women are victims of the patriarchy', they do not mean 'you, nicky, are the victim of your husband'. Because you, nicky, are not 'women' and your husband is not 'the patriarchy'.

[nickymanchester]

Buffy

While I will certainly agree with you that there is an element of I'm Alright Jack what really annoyed me is that my reading of LRD is that she said that I shouldn't have this attitude as a woman and that I should consider the whole ''class'' of women.

Now if she had said that I shouldn't have this attitude as a ''person'' and that I should consider the whole ''class'' or less advantaged people then we could have a reasonable debate on that point.

What really gets me is the unstated implication that it is ok for men to act like this - or perhaps she ''expects'' men to act like this - but that it is not acceptable for me, as a woman, to act in this manner.

That, as a woman, my ''Alright Jack'' attitude to the ''class'' of women should be condemned rather than condemning me as a person who has an ''Alright Jack'' attitude to other less-advantaged people of either sex.

The point she should be making is that she is condemning me as a person with these attitudes not for being a woman with these attitudes. However, she specifically refers to my gender and I do find that patronising.

[LRDtheFeministDragon]

'she said that I shouldn't have this attitude as a woman'

No, she didn't.

You are lying now. I find it offensive and shitty, so I'm out.

[nickymanchester]

I'm not lying, this is what you said:-

LDR

I love the 'I don't see myself as a victim' bit. Yeah, cos it's obviously all about you and not at all about women as a class, including, you know, the ones who may not be as lucky as you

[PortofinoRevisited]

nicky, I used to think very much like you. I'm not a victim either. I had a reasonably good education, have always earned my own money, my dh is not an abusive bastard etc. But....I have listened to the feminist argument, not just on the surface decided it wasn't for me - I have to say it was like the scales fell from my eyes! I have learnt so very much and hope to pass this on to my own daughter. I am not an activist by any means but have had the privilege to discuss such issues with some very clever and switched on people. Even in my reasonably equal little world, I found behaviours and attitudes that needed challenging.

[nickymanchester]

Could it be because our prevailing culture says that women have a place, and that place is to put themselves second? Second to their children, second to their husbands. Women shouldn't be selfish and prioritise their own needs


This is what annoyed me so much about the comment from LRD that it is wrong for me as an individual woman to be concerned about myself rather than putting ''women as a class'' ahead of my own personal needs.

LRD is demonstrating exactly this prevailing cultural attitude by referring to me as an individual and then comparing me to the whole of ''women as a class''. Going from the individual to the group in the way she did she is obviously considering me as a ''woman'' rather than as a ''person''.

I don't accept these sort of things from men and I won't accept them without a challenge from a ''feminist'' either.

[LRDtheFeministDragon]

Re-reading my post - I don't want to be harsh. I shouldn't call it lying. But nicky, I didn't say anything like what you claim I said. Quoting it again doesn't make it so.

I can see that this is an issue where you feel so strongly that you've already decided you know what people are saying before you read it. I acknowledge what buffy said about this being a fairly easy trap to get into given the culture we live in. But can you please give us a fair go, and read my actual posts instead of the ones you imagine A Nasty Feminist might write?

Honestly, none of this is really complicated and MN definitely doesn't hate men.

TBH I think making out that it's complicated is a big part of the problem.

[ArtetasSwollenAnkle]

Is it not possible that ordinary, non-academic (at least in terms of feminist study) people find dividing the whole of the human population into two groups a gross over-simplification? Feminism can seem so binary - an ingroup and an out group.

I am not telling anyone what or how to study. I am talking about why non-feminists can struggle with what to feminists seem straightforward and obvious statements. Add in the 'hate' word, and sometimes it can seem rather divisive.

Thinking out loud here, not trying to belittle anyone's beliefs.

[LRDtheFeministDragon]

Cross post.

nicky, if you re-read your post that I was responding to, you'll remember I was responding to you saying you weren't concerned about yourself: you said you were 'not a victim'. I didn't say you shouldn't be concerned about yourself; I merely took you at your word that you weren't.

My comment was that this is not all about you - so when feminists talk about female victims, they do not necessarily mean you. You also seem to feel they shouldn't mean you. Where exactly would you like to disagree?

[LRDtheFeministDragon]

arte - YY, I think that's the problem feminists have, that the world is divided into two binary groups, and every time you describe that situation, someone comes along to shoot you down for it and to insist we should all pretend men and women are already equal.

I don't think it's to do with 'academic' versus 'non-academic' viewpoints, TBH - just to do with what people want to believe.

[LRDtheFeministDragon]

Every time you try to say 'hey, maybe little girls don't need to be treated as a different species' someone is along to say 'oh but they are so different'; every time you say 'women are more likely to be raped than men', it's all 'oh, how dare you, men and women must be the same'.

It just makes my head hurt.

[lemonmuffin]

I think the most vocal posters, who spend a lot of their time here, are more inclined not to give men the benefit of the doubt.

they seem very hasty to condemn the man and urge the woman to leave the relationship.

[PortofinoRevisited]

But you have to put in a context. My dh can be an arse sometimes but I generally recognise it for what it is - general arseness - and would never dream of posting for advice. The posters who do post have, in most cases, ongoing issues of total arseness, where LTB is in fact the correct advice. Not always, of course, but no-one is going to move out whatever the advice if it is a case that it has all calmed down the next day.

[nickymanchester]

LDR

I didn't say you shouldn't be concerned about yourself; I merely took you at your word that you weren't

To be frank, on rereading what you wrote I do have some trouble seeing that but, if that is the case, then you have my apologies that I misunderstood you.

[nickymanchester]

Buffy

I wasn't talking about her views on feminism at all. I am very aware of what are ''proper'' attitudes for us to display and I very often fail to display these ''proper feminine attitudes''.

I may well have misunderstood what LDR wrote, but my reading of it was very much as I put in the post above; in that comparing me as an individual to the whole class of women that she was treating me specifically as a woman rather than a person.

There are lots of times when it is entirely appropriate to consider men and women separately, but in this case - my ''Alright Jack'' attitude - treating me as part of the class of women rather than people she is implicitly stating that is acceptable or expected for this not to be such an issue for men, otherwise she would have referenced men as well. It is this underlying, implicit sexism that I find very annoying and I find it incredible to come from another woman.

Of course, I accept that I may have misread what LDR wrote