Feminist pub XIX: The Bluestocking meanders into May

[YonicScrewdriver]

We're running at about six weeks per pub at the moment! So if you want chat with a feminist flavour, or with fellow feminists, or just want to admire our patriarchy blaster cannon and goat - welcome!

Last pub Here

Even before we had children, I still didn't like evening social events because of the actual pleasant nature of spending the evening with my husband as opposed to my colleagues.

Things are not helped though by quite a number of my colleagues who do have children having either non-working wives or in a couple of cases wives or husbands who work very close by - in a couple of cases in the next building. We don't have that many no-notice 5pm social events but I can't really do even with-notice 5pm events whereas most of those with children can if they can bear to

drspouse Was there any obvious reason why people stop going to the Ladies Who Lunch?

Not massively obvious, it wasn't even really part of the "must be at my desk to be seen to be working" issue; we just kept not finding a time when everyone could do (or, if setting it for a regular time which we also tried, nobody turned up).

Errol - it makes a massive difference IME if even one C-level type says "I leave at 4 on Tuesdays and Thursdays, got to pick up my kids."

Re: fitting in work socials, it's tricky isn't it? There's always the risk of it turning into a really cliquey thing of only 20 year old singles etc. OTOH it does oddly make such a difference to spend even a fairly short time nattering with people outside a work environment. Just needs to be enough variety (not all about booze, evenings etc).

I agree that it's good that people at higher levels take up parental responsibilities visibly. But the pessimistic side of me says that when a man does that it's "Aw! Isn't he good?" and when a woman does that it shows a lack of commitment to work ... I would like to be wrong though ...

Or you could have a work ethos that means it's OK to chat a bit during the day,as long as the work gets done. I think some work places almost make it a crime to exchange pleasantries with work mates. We tend to gather and chat over lunch, and that includes higher ranking people, who encourage collegiality. No one would dare to question us having 45 minutes of chat over our lunch, it's seen as part if the day.

But I have worked in schools where the head complained about teachers spending 20 minutes of their (unpaid) lunch break in the staff room, even though many of us were working and eating or talking about work.

Work can definitely run more smoothly if everyone had the time to talk about things. Less resentment builds up and potential problems are spotted more quickly.

LordCopper - agreed, it can work like that. But think IME it helped set an acceptance of "having a life" that helped me get promoted after mat leave, so I guess it's that, plus absence of vigorous misogyny that helps. I mean tbh, some misogynists are so deep-dyed that no evidence on earth would persuade them IYSWIM?

You're right, of course, LordCopper, but the (sorta)flip side is that if a man does this people are maybe going to take it on board as a Good Thing for people in general, whereas if a woman does it... well, that's just her doing it out of necessity. (yes, I know, I know!) So in terms of altering the ethos a male is probably going to be more effective

Oh I agree that it's a Good Thing. Of course it is. Sorry for being so negative!

S'ok - we all know it's bloody annoying and unfair.

Have you seen this? I think it's a brave thing to do. For some reason, questioning slut shaming always seems to attract enormous ire.

Very brave. I'm sure she knew the sort of shitty comments it would provoke but they only make her case the stronger.

That's a beautifully angry article and rightly so. Victim blaming and slut shaming really belong in the past.

I saw that on facebook - and all the horrible comments.

www.telegraph.co.uk/women/womens-health/11646385/Contraception-Male-Pill-is-coming-and-its-going-to-change-everything.html

I read this while the kids watched RaaRaa this morning. There's some wierd disjointed bits in the article itself

eg.
in a 'what is a condom' sidebar they say 'Effectiveness?98% if used according to instructions (82% for the average woman)' which seems a little odd - surely it would be 82% for the average man what with it being his penis and all (I do see that they're talking about pregnancy.. but still, it's a slightly odd way to put it)

and

Not every woman finds the more effective contraceptives, such as intrauterine (IUS or IUD) or implant devices acceptable, possibly due to hormones or their unpredictable effect on menstruation. as if he couldn't actually be bothered to have a quick google as to why many women don't want them.

The comments below are chilling - lots of MRA stuff about ungrateful women.

The male pill has been "coming" for one hell of a long time.

Interesting that the male pill is I. The "women's" section!

Ha - I didn't notice that Yonic! Crazy!

It was illustrated with a picture of a bloke holding a sign saying that women wouldn't believe blokes who told them they were on a pill - which rather misses the point, that it's about being responsible for your own fertility - and that men need to wake up and realise that they shouldn't be relying on a woman's contraception either (which is for her benefit, not theirs)

Yes the man holding the sign... Lovely. It's your fault if you get pregnant even if I had contraceptive options other than condoms because I can't use those options since you wouldn't believe me (despite the fact that you don't need to believe me for me to avoid fatherhood - belief doesn't make babies). So rather than taking 50% of the responsibility since I'm providing 50% of the DNA I will keep seeing this as a woman's problem.

Someone just described the perfectly nice name "Audrey" as fusty, frumpy and whiney in baby names. Nice!

But it's FWR that is a "hostile environment" of course.

And would you believe a man who you were not in a long term committed relationship with? I wouldn't have.

Lass, I would probably have my own contraception covered with the Pill anyway or other "non-spontaneous" methods. Then I'd want a condom for STIs. So whilst I might believe him, it wouldn't necessarily impact my behaviour.

I agree the most likely use will be in relationships.

I have baby names hidden. It may well be the nastiest part of MN. I find it's the best way to avoid snarky comments about names being "too American" and to avoid the terms "chav" and "trailer trash."

That's my point. If both parties use contraception no one has to believe anyone. So the premise that believing someone is relevant, per his sign, implies that contraception is one person's job only. In the vast majority of cases that means women. It's a mindset issue.