Femsplaining

[MissyMelMo]

I got accused of femsplaining today. I asked what it meant and he said something about boorishly converting everything into feminist explanations and expecting everyone to accept it without question.

Well he can fuck off :)

But I've googled this term since coming home and can't make out where it sits - some groups seem to use it positively. So I thought I'd ask someone!

Thank you :)

ifyourehoppyandyouknowit

But it's still not 'femsplaining' because we're still not considered an authority on these issues. We still have little power even if we do the majority of the work. As Lucio very clearly explained. It is not an equivalent phrase.

I feel that women are still assumed, as a result of patriarchal prejudice, to have a greater expertise in the sphere of child care and therefore within that sphere the phrase would be apposite. However I do not dispute that this area is 'sidelined' in present society, and that therefore the use of 'femsplaining' beyond the areas I suggested would be inappropriate.

But when discussions around gender relations have an impact on law and policy and feminism is the dominant discourse within it, I believe that labelling the phenomenon in such as way as to link it to the non-equivalent male counterpart is valuable.

Buffy

That would be fascinating, thank you.

I find it a little confusing that masculinism would be considered part of womens studies, as that sounds like a department of exclusively men claiming to be a centre for womens studies, but I'm sure the article will enlighten me.

Ah, my misreading, I apologise.

I also share feminism assumption that women suffer oppression, or the reasons why. I simply tend to disagree on the best approach to combat it.

If men are considered "default" we don't really need a system or a space to share our experiences, as wider society kinda fulfills that function. Besides we've had and indeed still do have a fuck tonne of exclusively male spaces on top of that societal default.

I think Leslie Knope says it best:

screen.yahoo.com/leslie-knope-takes-mens-rights-132923802.html

Just taken a glance (I'll read it in ufll once I'm home) but I have to say that after being exposed to feminist writings online and in the guardian, it is so unutterably pleasant to read an article so careful and precise in it's language that it doesn't feel like paper cuts on the scrotum.

Dervel

I do not disagree.

btw, sorry for being short with you upthread, Meph - I've now remembered that you explained why sometimes your posts come across as the sort of unnecessarily nit-picky sort which make my hackles rise - but it's because, as you've explained in the past, you sometimes struggle with expressing the distinction between detail and overall issue (if I'm remembering you right from other threads). I do think you are genuinely trying to engage, even though it sometimes goes awry (as it does for all of us).

It's the same as mansplaining - a derogatory way of shutting someone up and minimising their point of view.

That's fine, Lurcio, I do understand how I can come across. I do want to engage, because these issues are important to me, and I don't want to antagonise anyone on here inadvertently.

Having thought about this a bit more, and read some of the very good points on here (and some of the not so good ones!) I think the vital bit is that men have no right to assume authority and knowledge and mansplain. Women have right to femsplain. It's women that are oppressed and women that suffer at the hands of men. Men do not suffer at the hands of women.

MissyMelMo

I very much hope you're talking of men as a class and women as a class, as I can assure you that some men can and do suffer at the hands of some women. It is feminists who claim they solely can speak on the subject of gendered violence who undermine the efforts of such victims to seek assistance or services to provide it. Indeed, it is an example of the impact femsplaining can have, despite the fact that it can only be a viable concept in the field of gender relations.

Why are you so sensitive to talking about men as a group when you are happy to tell us what all feminists do and say and think?

Where is the evidence that it is feminism that stops men accessing support when they experience domestic violence? My reading and contact with people who work with men who experience DV indicate that it is patriarchal ideals of masculinity that serve to perpetuate this, which is something feminism also works against.

99% of domestic violence is men against women. All the work that is done calling to prevent this rightly focuses on the 99%.

It's typical of men to want something to focus on them even though they are 1%.

PetulaGordino

Two profound failures of communication in my part. I wanted to indicate that I accept the majority of violence is from men towards women, but in an individual level gendered violence can still go the other way and to minimise that experience to its rarity is unfair. The other failure was an honest 'some' in front of 'feminists'. I know that feminism includes a huge variety of individual and collective perspectives.

MissyMelMo

I would not question the morality of the division of resources, but I would question the division of empathy and compassion.

All the feminists I know are entirely empathetic to violence that men experience

I'm just not sure why they should be expected to prove that every time they want to talk about the gendered violence that men as a group mete out to women as a group

How dare you think you can question anything!? Men are not in a position where they can question women's attempts to crawl from under the boot of male oppression. If you had any sort of appreciation for women's rights then you would simply listen and try and see through the fog of male privilege. The fact that you think you can question feminism just displays the natural assumption of superiority.

MephistophelesApprentice

I'm with MissyMelMo.

KNOW YOUR PLACE, MAN.

MissyMelMo

It the DV figure British or world wide?

PetulaGordino
You are fortunate in the feminists that you know. I automatically assume that most feminists are sympathetic towards victims of violence. Sadly I've been proved wrong in the past.

MissyMelMo

I am here to learn. Learning without questioning leads to poor outcomes. But questioning is a search for clarity, not a criticism. I consider myself to possess an inferior level of understanding and I'm therefore forced to question more.

Not that fortunate, all the feminists I know are also sympathetic to men who have been victims of of violence.

The problem comes when men (as a class, NAM) espouse how I , as a feminist, should be spending my time and energy to making sure that male victims of violence are supported and violence against men is given as much attention. While sitting and pondering their own navels. Demanding women solve mens problems. Male on male violence is a huge problem, as is male suicide. Perhaps if all the men diverted the energy they spend telling feminists all the things they are doing wrong, on actually confronting the issues and their root causes, something would actually change.

ifyourehoppyandyouknowit

I do not disagree with anything that you say. However, I would point out that a woman's perspective is unlikely to be a good position to establish whether or not someone has an antipathy towards male victims. That is somewhat implying that you know better what it is like to experience such antipathy, which brings us back to the original subject of the thread.

Right meph, lay out the hoops you wish feminists to jump through, and what you deem to be proof enough that they have jumped through them, before you think them worthy of being listened to. And then any feminists reading can decide whether they have the time and energy to prove themselves worthy of educating you as you wish.

PetulaGordino

I am not asking anyone to jump through hoops. I'm listening and learning all the time and many people on this thread have already been educational and informative. I don't understand the offence I have given.