Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Feminism: chat

Original poster

What do men think feminists should be focusing their energies on?

552 replies

PetulaGordino · 08/02/2015 21:31

It's pretty clear that there are many men with constructive criticism to offer feminists in terms of what feminist issues they should be focusing their energies, activism and outrage on.

This vital advice is at risk of being lost, spread as it is among myriad threads in this section. Perhaps it would be a good idea to collect it together into one thread, for ongoing reference when posters in this section consider their feminist activities and whether they are really focusing on the right issues.

Obviously it should be borne in mind that feminists are only able to focus strictly on one topic at a time in terms of activism and outrage, so don't overload us with too many issues at once!

OP posts:
Thread gallery
6
JeanneDeMontbaston · 09/02/2015 14:35

I do like cunt, as a word. It's cute, and it has a nice etymology.

King1982 · 09/02/2015 14:36

Petula - but these gender roles are so important to feminist theory. They are used to validate this theory.
To not recognise gender roles really goes against the theory

JeanneDeMontbaston · 09/02/2015 14:37

Eh? Confused

How are gender roles validating feminist theory, king?

King1982 · 09/02/2015 14:38

I don't mind it jeanne. It's just there was a thread which spoke about it on here. The majority view was that the word 'cunt' was deeply sexist.
I'm glad it is not the case on this thread

ifyourehoppyandyouknowit · 09/02/2015 14:38

Surely the point is that patriarchy imposes gender roles on people, and that they aren't innate. Hence feminism not recognizing gender roles as a valid or fair system?

Original poster
PetulaGordino · 09/02/2015 14:38

that sounds a bit chicken-and-egg there king

i see the gender roles, i do not accept that they are valid

OP posts:
JeanneDeMontbaston · 09/02/2015 14:39

king - yes, I've seen loads of such threads, and they vary depending who's posting. Some like it; some don't.

King1982 · 09/02/2015 14:40

Jeanne,
Look at most of the threads on here will touch on 'gender roles'.

JeanneDeMontbaston · 09/02/2015 14:40

Yes, and?

Can you explain a bit more why you think this is feminist theory? Because I can't see how your posts relate to what people are saying about it.

King1982 · 09/02/2015 14:41

Yes petula, you reject them.

JeanneDeMontbaston · 09/02/2015 14:42

I mean, you might as well observe that many of the threads on a forum for atheist discussion touch on God - it doesn't mean atheists are recognizing God as a central organizing fact of their existence. They think he's a crock of shite, but if you're talking specifically about your atheism, you are liable to do so with reference to other people's belief structures.

Original poster
PetulaGordino · 09/02/2015 14:42

ok i think it's an acceptable use of the word recognise, but we can agree to differ

OP posts:
ifyourehoppyandyouknowit · 09/02/2015 14:42

Recognize also means giving validity, so not recognizing = rejecting in this context. Basically you're arguing semantics?

King1982 · 09/02/2015 14:43

Jeanne, petula said she doesn't accept them. If they weren't recognised then they can not be 'rejected'.
Gender roles are very important to feminism

JeanneDeMontbaston · 09/02/2015 14:43

I actually think recognise is a better word than reject, in this context.

You are not just saying 'I don't fancy that, thanks'. You're saying you don't accept the validity of the concept.

JeanneDeMontbaston · 09/02/2015 14:44

Cross post. No, you've misunderstood her use of 'recognize'.

Original poster
PetulaGordino · 09/02/2015 14:47

i've been thinking about the word "recognise" too much now

i'm now imagining myself going up to gender roles saying "haven't i seen you somewhere before?"

OP posts:
King1982 · 09/02/2015 14:47

Yes I get the different definitions, but to say gender roles aren't valid. Then you spend half your life discussing them and getting very worked up about them. Can you see that is difficult one.

JeanneDeMontbaston · 09/02/2015 14:49

No, I can't see it's difficult at all.

Why do you think it is?

ifyourehoppyandyouknowit · 09/02/2015 14:53

Discussing how we're often forced into roles.

FloraFox · 09/02/2015 14:55

We get "very worked up" about them because they are enforced upon women even though they are not valid. It's really not difficult at all.

King1982 · 09/02/2015 14:55

I think you have to recognise (in either sense of the word) to consciously ignore them, disband them, analyse them, live your life in a gender role free way.

Original poster
PetulaGordino · 09/02/2015 14:55

the atheism analogy is a good one. atheists don't acknowledge the validity of god's existence as a concept. but as long as there are other people going around behaving as though he does, and this has an impact on society and their lives as they view it, they are going to discuss it as a concept

gender roles exist in the sense that people believe in them and perform them and that has an impact on how i live my life. but i do not acknowledge it as a valid concept

OP posts:
Original poster
PetulaGordino · 09/02/2015 14:58

king you make it sound as though we are deliberately going against something that is innate

OP posts:
JeanneDeMontbaston · 09/02/2015 15:00

I don't think we can live our lives in a gender role free way. Which is precisely why 'don't recognize' is better than 'reject'. We don't actually have the power to reject these roles - they are forced onto us. But we can refuse to recognise their validity.

And thanks, petula.