In one respect I think I must be a really bad feminist..or am I?

[grimbletart]

Just that. I need a) someone to tell me I am being utterly unreasonable or b) confess they have felt the same way on occasions.

Please excuse length, but bear with me.

I'm an old gimmer, one of the second wave feminists who fought through the 60s and 70s for equal ops, equal pay, end to sex discrimination etc…

In that respect, and others, I feel that I have earned my stripes as a fully paid up member of the awkward feminist squad . Plus, as I've said before as well as having a feminist mum and grandmother (suffragette) I have been a feminist since before I even understood the word i.e. from kindergarten.

And yet I find myself getting irritated (Jeez I have to be careful how I phrase this or I am going to get jumped on from a great height) by what I feel is an attitude (acceptance?) by some that one should never ever criticise a woman or girl for their actions because socialisation and societal attitudes mean that they are never really responsible i.e. they are acting the way they do because they are pressured or vulnerable or lack self esteem or whatever. It is never their fault.

One of things I fought for as a second waver was that equal opportunities and rights would also mean equal responsibility for one's actions, so if a woman is being a twat she is being a twat and should be called on it and not given a get out of jail free card just because she is female.

Otherwise are we not playing into the meme that females are, by definition, vulnerable weak and in need of special protection?

I've been aware of my uncomfortable feelings about this for a while now over a number of issues on and off MN. But I think it is the Maguluf thread that finally prompted me to stick my head over the parapet. Yes, the media (especially) the holiday reps, the 24 idiot men are all nasty knobs and the double standards are diabolical and utterly wrong. But the reluctance by some (most?) to attribute any personal responsibility whatsoever to the girl I found really irritating.

That was a recent example only and my views are not drawn to apply to that situation particularly so am not prompting another discussion about that: I simply found it illustrative of the notion that females are helpless, vulnerable and cannot be held accountable for their actions - it's nearly always someone's else's (or society's) fault.

This is not what I fought for, the notion that we are fragile flowers - the woman as victim idea ironically seems to be more prevalent now when liberation/equality has never been stronger - at least legally.

I'm baffled and disturbed by a) what I appear to see happening or b) that maybe that after entering my 8th decade as a feminist, I am not really a feminist, merely someone who wanted equality, and that what I saw as feminism was not feminism at all.

Or maybe it's simply that I am just a "get a grip" sort of person at heart as a result of having to spend a lifetime fighting the corner for women.

I feel like shouting "come on women you're better than that".

I actually hate myself for feeling this way, but what is going on with so many things this last decade or so, whether it's porn, pinkification, woman as victim, girl as decorative accessory to boy, is leaving me disillusioned and wondering whether all our struggles of my generation and my parents' and grandparents' generation of the 20th century were worth it.

OK, I'm Aunt Sally - shoot me down.

Sorry for the somewhat inchoate ramblings.

AskBasil. I have explained that badly - you are right - everyone does have values but an awful lot of parents (IMHO) seem to fail to 'enforce' for want of a better word, those values because they want / need to be friends with their children. In my experience that enables a child to develop without those internal checks, the 'what if?....

Anyway, don't want to divert this into parenting because there are so many factors behind this - but fascinating thread.

Sarine, I kind of agree with you. I watched a neuroscientist/psychologist talk about why most people don't feel empathy for out groups. People who did show empathy in brain scans had the following features.

1. When asked to harm others, they considered in their own minds what their mother or grandmother would think of their behaviour.
2. They always asked themselves if the end justified the harmful means and were prepared to go against thejudgement of the group.
3. They had role models who had helped an out group against a dominant group and knew their story well (Helping Jews in Nazi Germany for example).

When I say I want to get rid of judgement I mean in feminism, not in parenting. I judge my children all the time - "that's not kind," "please don't speak so loudly" etc etc. Parenting is a whole other realm (incidentally, one that women are seen to be responsible for, note the references to "what mum/granny would think" in the above posts).

A genuine related question - how does morality come into the Magaluf thing? In what way was that woman's actions "immoral"?

I think the issue with the judging thing is that some feminists of the second wave criticised feminine presenting women, which feels like a judgement that anything associated with women is somehow worse.

And I would also say that many feminists of the third wave are extremely critical of mothers and older women.

A lot of criticisms of women being too sexualised can just be attacks overwhelmingly aimed at working class women.

So while I'd agree with Basil that we should attack the structures, I do also think Thicke is accountable as an individual, and to a lesser extent the women. But if we are going to start criticising Zoella for being too feminine(for example), then no, because that femininity creates a safe online space for girls.

Cailin, I don't think there is any real difference between her and women who say wearing lingerie makes them feel sexy.

I dislike the women's sexuality is performative stereotypes and I mildly judge people who perpetuate them.

But such an issue is dwarfed by the behaviour of the rep and the media in the Magaluf reporting.

I think that everyone (male and female) needs to take personal responsibility for their actions.

For example, I have always taken responsibility for getting myself home at the end of evening out drinking. I make sure I know the bus times, I have enough cash for a taxi and a taxi co. phone number, I can speak coherently and walk without falling down and my shoes will let me walk a mile or two if necessary.

To be clear, I in no way think that failing to do any of these things means a person deserves to be attacked, and I do realise that accidents happen, drinks can be spiked, your taxi fare can be pinched from your bag etc. and your best laid plans for getting home can fail.

However, it isn't fair to expect other people (my friends, family, the police or anyone else) to have to get me home safely when I can't be bothered to do it myself. But I have had arguments with people that say expecting women to at least plan to try to look after themselves means I am not a feminist.

Cailin, women are mostly responsible for parenting. It isn't that it seems that way. It is that way.

Indeed it is that way almond. And feminism should address why that is and what the implications of that are for women, men and children.

MrsCakes, I have never come across a situation where someone expects others to get them home safely. But your example is a good illustration of what I was talking about. People make poor choices - drink too much, fail to make necessary arrangements to get home etc. That has absolutely nothing to do with feminism, that's just a human trait that both men and women exhibit. The issue for feminism is the fact that when women make bad choices the consequences for them tend to be a lot more serious for them than for men because men prey on the fact that women tend to physically weaker. So, there's an inequality there. Plus, when a woman does get drunk or takes a dodgy route home there's an implication of "what did she expect?" as though assault and rape are just normal consequences of behaviour (like falling over when drunk) rather than an active, violent choice made by men.

What I mean is, women are seen to be responsible for their own choices and the choices made by men.

Feminism does address it.

I agree almond. I'm not sure what your point is?

Yes cailin - I see what you are saying about the potential seriousness of consequences and the way the woman is held responsible for those consequences.

Sorry maybe I should clarify my point first. What I was saying is that parenting only overlaps with feminism in two ways IMO:

1. The issue of how parents are teaching their children to think, talk and act around the opposite sex
2. The fact that women are considered the default parent and what that means for society as a whole and women in particular.

Quality of parenting in terms of morals is a separate issue IMO although "morals" as far as I can see is code for "ways in which we can make women feel deviant."

Hi everyone. May I just say thank you for making this such an interesting and informative debate - also for not making me feel as if I am a traitor to the cause of feminism .

I do regret a bit using Magaluf as an example as it tended to derail off into sexual behaviour, which is not what I intended. It was simply that I had been having these uncomfortable feelings for quite a while that (some) feminists seem reluctant ever to criticise a woman for anything and that does make me uncomfortable. I've wanted to post on the topic for some time but chickened out. The Magaluf example simply came along as I finally thought "what the hell, if I am jumped on from a great height, so be it, but I really do feel uncomfortable about they way some feminists appear either to absolve women of responsibility or are scared of criticising a fellow female. Am I the only one and does it make me not a feminist any more? Have I been fooling myself all these years."

Again I am generalising, not referring to Magaluf, but my friends, fellow feminists and I way back when, thought the aim of feminism was to make women equally respected human beings with equal opportunities and no discrimination. In a way we saw it as setting the bar higher for men in terms of respecting women's lives and choices and how they treated us. I am not sure that that is what is happening and we seem so afraid of victim-blaming or appearing to endorse double standards - which is absolutely my biggest hate of all - that we can't say to women "you don't have to do what men want just because they want it". The statements 'fuck off sunshine' and 'you and whose army?' remain as useable now as they were when us oldies frequently used them.

Anyway, I am off now to tackle my jungle aka my garden while the sun is still shining. But thanks again for tolerating my ramblings.

"you don't have to do what men want just because they want it"

in my mind that describes exactly what "compassionate criticism" might sound like though - you are (in so many words) telling a woman that her actions are damaging to other women but also acknowledging where that behaviour might stem from (a patriarchal system where women do what they are told by men). or have i got completely the wrong end of the stick?

For me it is about not wanting to actively participate in the patriarchal phenomenon of women being used to police other women's behaviour and make an outcast of women who are to be made an example of and then held up as justification for the crappy treatment of women generally because, look what a "slut, bimbo, ditzy blond, dirty bitch, piece of shit, golddigger, this woman is".

As basil says there is a loud chorus already there to do that whilst remaining silent on the actions of men.

Women are being pornified in current society and then blamed for it.

Deep thread is deep. On one hand feminism is most relevant where women are disadvantaged with limited agency. On the other hand feminism moves forward as women gain advantage and free agency. While both are 'true' unfortunately they are inherently divergent in outlook. When applied to the same situation they clash terribly. Get it wrong and you have, either, legitimate agency decried as counterfeit or fake agency passed off as the real thing. I suppose that is a core dynamic dilemma of any 'ism', because the ultimate path of any movement to address injustice would see it remove the reason for itself to exist.

Deep thread is deep? How interesting.

I agree with you OP. I do think Magaluf is an interesting example (sorry) because yes, the woman involved made a decision (presumably) to go on a holiday that involved getting as shitfaced as possible as often as possible, and that was her decision that she is responsible for (for example if she ends up needing a liver transplant in a few years).

However, it is not accidental that the 'forfeit' she was asked to do was a sexual one, and that she has been vilified for doing it, oh and doing it willingly. That's sexism. So ultimately I don't think there is a conflict between saying 'she is responsible for her choices' and 'she is being judged in a way that men in the same situation would not be'. I'm not sure what would have happened if a young man had done the same sexual forfeit.

While I can critique with compassion individual choices that individuals make, you can't just ignore the stuff around that choice.

I went to the feminism in London conference last year, and there was a woman who worked with female offenders. They have been convicted and judged by people other than me/us. She pointed out that the vast majority of them had already been let down by social services, the care system, mental health services, the police, etc., etc.,

She had a phrase which was ""maybe it's not the fish, maybe it's the water that is the problem*'.

So while you can look at a choice that an individual has made, and see that it is not good, I think you still need to be aware of the water.

So ultimately I don't think there is a conflict between saying 'she is responsible for her choices' and 'she is being judged in a way that men in the same situation would not be'. I'm not sure what would have happened if a young man had done the same sexual forfeit.

Its an interesting question but I cant work out an answer, assuming you could even get a dozen girls to spread their legs for a quick lick without offering an inducement, and that raises many questions in itself. I am sure you would have a male volunteer though.

I think, on a wider social platform, media would never touch it as it would be seen as too extreme for public consumption. I suspect that the young man in such an event would be heavily and negatively judged by older men of the generations who did not see cunnilingus in the more positive terms males in their teens-mid twenties now see it in. Perhaps society at large would see an individual woman in such a competition as even more of a 'slut' than if she had licked a dozen dicks, or assume she were paid.

"Perhaps society at large would see an individual woman in such a competition as even more of a 'slut'"

Than the original young woman in Magaluf? Possibly. Than the man doing the licking, in this hypothetical example? Definitely.

What if a young man had done it with 24 other men, gay, bi or straight (given there was no real attraction in this scenario?) - where would the judgment be then, DWH?