Is the constant misinterpretation of Feminism ignorance or wilful misunderstanding?

[messyisthenewtidy]

The other day at work I had a book about feminism on my desk and my colleague jokingly said "oh gawd, you're not going all feminist on us are you messy?!" I replied that I'd always been a feminist and proud of it and they looked at me all like I was a bit odd.

It made me think that all my life feminism has been understood in our common language as a bad thing. Everywhere: in popular films to newspapers etc. From women saying "I'm not a feminist but..." to the common phrase "I believe in equality but feminism has gone too far" to the instances in my life where men, upon finding out I was a feminist, have gone out of their way to bait me and tell me why feminism is really a form of female supremacy.

I suppose my question is: How did this happen? And the people who misunderstand feminism - are they just being ignorant of what it really is or are they wilfully misunderstanding in a conscious attempt to dismiss it?

their message sorry.

To use your own analogy, you're basically coming along to Christians and saying Jesus didn't exist.
Can't resist that one. I'm an atheist so would say exactly that. Generally find Christians more than happy to engage with me about religion, I've had plenty of interesting discussions and learnt a lot. Perhaps what we're learning here is that feminism is not an evangelical religion.

Snow - my point was, if the guy didn't trust his partner why was he having sex with her? You say he would "demand" to wear condoms - what would stop him from explaining his fear of pregnancy and coming to an agreement with his partner that it'd be best to take extra precautions?

Yes I've learned a lot from you catkind. I won't worry myself with 85,000 women raped in the UK every year any more. After all, it's not really a problem is it?

"What would you think of a guy who you'd been going out with for 4 years who demanded to wear condoms (effectively telling you he doesn't trust you)?"

I would think it was his body, his choice. I might well stop taking the pill, if he was using condoms, as I don't dope myself on hormones for fun.

Started writing this post a while ago before getting distracted by children, so may be answering things a page or two back.

cailin I think you're deliberately misinterpreting me there. Of course I agree rape is an issue. I'd call it a criminal justice issue. I don't see that labelling it as a feminist issue does anything to get it solved quicker. I'm not convinced oppression is the right word for being statistically more likely to be a victim of crime.

I think I owe you an apology though for jumping on the word oppression. I had no idea that using the word oppressed for women was a feminist Thing. I know a good few people who self-identify as feminist and none of them have ever said women were oppressed before. Does kind of back up my point that different people mean different things by feminism.

buffy, I think you are making a good case for the inner city poor being oppressed. Not women. ?

cailindana
Snow - my point was, if the guy didn't trust his partner why was he having sex with her? You say he would "demand" to wear condoms - what would stop him from explaining his fear of pregnancy and coming to an agreement with his partner that it'd be best to take extra precautions?

He might well have trusted her (or been niave), up to the moment she got pregnant. Things might work out for the best (that the guy loves being a dad in many cases) but it does remove the choice from the guy. Seems you and Yonic are way too reasonable! :D It would be interesting to do a pole on here to see what most people would think?

I think Buffy means feminism has perhaps changed more from protesting against obvious issues (like the vote etc) to focusing more on the subconscious things holding females back because of stereotypes etc., now that a lot of biased rules have been replaced.

There have been many different definitions for feminism.

Some of the most enduring, and therefore arguably the ones that mean most to feminists are:

Feminism is the radical notion that women are people. - Marie Shear

I myself have never been able to find out what feminism is; I only know that people call me a feminist whenever I express sentiments that differentiate me from a doormat. - Rebecca West

Feminism is concerned with women's liberation from patriarchy. - can't find the source, which is odd, because it was saved on my computer yes DS, I'm looking at you and your fondness for deleting things randomly

I think I can see where you're coming from, Catkin. Perhaps the problem lies in the every day meaning of oppression. Say "oppression" and most people think of people being denied civil rights under a totalitatian regime, murdered for their religion, enlaved purely because of the colour of their skin. And to then put the life of the average white woman under this heading can easily come across as bonkers. (I'll get to why I don't think it is - bear with me!)

But at the same time, Buffy is absolutely right. We have a society which systematically channels women into certain roles (arts and humanities good, sciences, engineering, construction not so much so) and exerts subtle pressure from a very early age (lego friends versus lego technics, online shopping sites which when you type in "boys' science toys" throw up 100 hits with exciting stuff, and when you type "girls' science toys", throw up 3 along the lines of "make your own bath bombs.") There's also stereotype threat - constantly tell a subset of the population that they're no good at x and they will underperform at task x (you can do this with a class of kids by telling the blue eyed kids they're no good at maths - if you then give them a maths test, they'll underperform). And girls are constantly given messages that they're no good at maths, no good at science, no good at engineering, and they internalise this. And then that same society introduces pay differentials where "men's" jobs pay better than "women's" jobs.

Now I guess it might be easy if, say, you're a woman who is drawn towards a socially acceptable career like nursing or primary teaching to go through life thinking "but I haven't experienced these barriers in my way that feminists keep banging on about". But from my own personal experience in STEM professions, I'd say that every step of the way from primary school onwards I've been aware of the fact that there are many people who think I'm odd, wrong, misplaced, etc. for wanting to pursue my interests - I've been aware of subtle and not so subtle pressure that I just don't fit from a very early age.

So maybe the problem is with the word "oppression" - maybe "pressure" would be a less in-your-face version. But I'm not sure I'm happy with going there. Because I think women in say sub Saharan Africa at risk of FGM, being stoned to death for "adultery" (which might in fact be rape), or women in India being raped on the way to the toilet, or girls in Afghanistan being murdered for attempting to go to school really are being oppressed under any understanding of the word. And though my life is incredibly cushy by comparison, I think it's important to remember that the underlying cause for inequalities suffered by women in comfortably off western countries (being paid less than men, for instance) is the same - an entrenched belief held by a lot of people that women aren't full human beings (I'm afraid that's the only interpretation I can put, for instance, on people who insist that "women are equal but different" - i.e. "I'm perfectly happy with you doing what you want so long as it's appropriately feminine"). This judgement that women are not quite as important members of the human race is the one being made when women are murdered for going to school and also (although the consequences are not as horrific) paid less than men for equivalent work.

I'm a man - and this is what i used to think (when i was a young man). It boils down to the fact that men regard the society we live in as something they created, they either won it or defend it by the orchestration of violence on a massive scale. Internally the rules and laws of the country are also enforced by the application of organised violence - a monopoly which belongs to the state. Women are allowed to enter this society or have a say in how it is run because men let them, if men didn't let them - they cannot take what the want by force because they are weaker. Because they are weaker men do no respect them as much as they respect other men.

To men like me (when i was younger) Feminism is something engaged in by women who are bitter about the above interpretation of social history. They hate men but at the same time need men (see the organisation and application of violence) to end violence and discrimination against them, which is a difficult position for anyone to be in.

I am sorry, i hope you wont give me too much of a hard time for being honest i believe that many men will think something like the above. From an early age you know, i learned that the word "girly" was a pejorative.

Sorry - so to answer that actual question - it is willful ignorance on the part of some men at least.

So what changed your mind, mark?

well - that's an interesting question, but i suppose in general it would be "growing up", thinking for myself and meeting many wonderful and talented women. I could go on about how the majority of people are weakened and disenfranchised by the above description of a "society". I think nowadays that some women hang their own personal failings on "the patriarchy" but no more so than men who will blame their situations on their upbringing, social class etc. The main need for feminism to me is to end the sexualisation and exploitation of women. It grates on me too when you hear men posting on these forums saying "but men suffer from violence and intimidation as well". and "aren't these humanist issues" When you have a situation, where groups of people of one sex routinely seek out and abuse those of another, which they must at some level feel entitled to do, then you have a gender issue. What am I saying.....it seems like women suffer because of their gender, men do not, I think it is as simple as that.

I think its more than wilful ignorance markhiem going off your description (which I think is chillingly accurate), it is a realisation that society benefits them and they either don't want to do anything to change the dynamic or don't have to do anything to keep the dynamic. And I think it is just above the sub-conscious i.e. they can push it down into their sub-conscious when it suits and bring it out when it suits. Basically society suits them just the way it is.

"...it seems like women suffer because of their gender, men do not, I think it is as simple as that." Yep. Gender is a hierarchy with women at the bottom.

Oh it's definitely just above the sub conscious which is why it comes out after alcohol is taken.

Hard to believe anyone would actually think that, especially as a young man. I mean, what had you created, won or defended when you had those thoughts?

Quite.

Well, what can i say, i'm not defending it. I think it was largely due to the physical thing, the feeling that underpinning all of society was men's ability to organise violence. Perhaps i expected to be drawn into that as an adult knowing that I wouldn't be if i were not a man.

Think you're not wrong that this underpins male domination of society. It's unusually honest for you to say that you felt the class privilege that flows from that and you viewed women as subordinate. I agree with you that many men also feel this way. Many women also understand this which is why they adjust their behaviour to avoid male violence and domination. However when women want to talk about this, suddenly all men are individuals and are not acting as a class nor benefitting as a class from violence enacted by other men. Except they are.

buffy: Funny how these men are so keen to associate themselves with men-as-a-class when that class is doing something they're flattered to be included in. Yet when it's things like sexual abuse, not so much. Men are all individuals then hmm

How can you be so sure it's the same menL seems more likely that it would be the men who didn't think like that who objected to "men as a class".

Personally I find Mark's views very alien and would question how widespread they are outside of the ruling classes. I can't imagine considering that I "created or won society" on the basis of my gender and certainly wouldn't begrudge equality to women on the back of such a misperceived status. I support equality because it's right, plain and simple, same as I oppose and would not engage in any sort of violence against women or anything similar. It's on that basis that I find "men as a class" to be one of the single most infuriating phrases I've ever come across.

snow I would, and indeed did, think 'great - my boyfriend is totally cool with condoms which means I don't have to fill my body with artificial hormones or undergo invasive medical procedures, and we won't get pregnant'.

We discussed contraception as a couple early on and agreed what would work for us both.

I was so happy that he was taking his part in contraception, amongst other considerate and mature behaviours, that i married him and we continued to use condoms until we together decided to TTC, and we now have two planned sons and are trying for a third child.

My DH has always been careful about contraception in earlier relationships, as have I always insisted on condoms with my previous partners (taking the MAP twice when I wasn't sure it hadn't split) and oddly I've never been pregnant without wanting to be and he has never got a woman pregnant before me. Neither of us has had an STI either.

He made it clear he didn't want a baby before he was in a long term relationship/married, took responsibility for his part in contraception every time he had sex, and got his wish.

His care over contraception didn't cost him any relationships, didn't have any negative physical or emotional consequences for him or his partners (as far as he knows) and on the contrary has always as far as he tells me been well received by his partners.

Ultimately, if a man really doesn't want to get his partner pregnant he has options: no PIV sex, or use a condom. If a man does not either abstain or use a condom, he is consenting to the risk his partner gets pregnant as even if she's on the pill if she has been ill or missed a dose or taken it late, it may still be possible for her to conceive.

Women can't get themselves pregnant, it always takes two. If a man is casual about pregnancy risks he has no one to blame but himself.

I find "men as a class" to be one of the single most infuriating phrases I've ever come across.

Oh dear. Poor you. From all the inequity that has occurred as a result of male violence against women, this is the worst phrase yiu have come across? Poor, poor you.