A few questions about modern feminism (Q3 might trigger, I don't know if it will)

[Burke1]

Hi Mumsnet I'm a man in my early 20's and I was hoping to ask you a couple of questions about feminism and gender equality.

1. Do you feel that men and women are equal in terms of opportunity, and legal/social rights in society today?

1. What is your opinion on quotas such as "This company aims to increase female recruitment by 10% over the next 2 years", or all-women shortlists?

1. I've noticed on mumsnet that some women view all men as potential attackers because something bad has happened to them in the past. Why is this?

I personally wouldn't describe myself as feminist, because to me the "fem" part suggests it's a one-way thing that only covers female rights and not male rights. Personally I just believe in "people" having rights because that's who we are, the fact that some of us have a dick and some of us have a vagina shouldn't factor into what rights we get. I know some people will consider that what I've just described is feminism, and while it's fine for you to have that opinion, my equally valid opinion is that it's not feminism. I'm not interested in an argument over who thinks what is defined as what, but I would quite like to see some answers to my questions because I am interested in this topic. Thank you to anyone who decides to talk

I totally disagree with 2. It devalues the hard work that that women had to do to reach that position, and opens the door for unqualified applicants who make a career out of that (unfortunatelly i have seen examples first hand regarding quotas). Instead offering more family friendly policies benefit would make it easier for women to stay in the workforce.

Women get accused of getting on via unfair means even when quotas aren't in place.

When a woman/ethnic minority gets a job usually reserved for white middle class men, the "token" argument is often raised, arguing it brings less talented people into a role.

Firstly, unless you think white middle class men are always the better option then that makes no sense, there as are many talented women/people of colour as there are men.

Secondly, there are plenty of really really shit men in posts. No one bangs on about that though.

So yes there is a place for positive discrimination.

You're a man aren't you?

Are you talking to me last night? No, i am a woman and a minority.

Why exactly do you think it's other people's job to educate you? You might consider that this sounds a bit entitled. But I'll try.

1. It's not about 'feelings': women aren't equal. We're paid less, we do more childcare and housework, and we don't get the prestigious jobs to the same extent.

1. Quotas and shortlists can be useful, but wider structural change is needed too.

1. I think you've misunderstood here.

What do you think about all of these things?

How do you feel about men getting more rights than women - both in the UK, and worldwide?

What do you feel about the statistics on incidence of men killing their family members?

How do you feel when you look at how many women are raped, and how few rapists are convicted?

Do you agree that there's a crisis in school education from young men, and that it comes from giving our young men dangerous and unpleasant stereotypes of what 'masculinity' is?

Do you think men should be worried that they're not doing enough to help?

What Jeanne said.

FYI, for most jobs, if your CV shows the right kind of experience, that gets you the interview. If, say, 10 people are interviewed, probably at least 8 of them are capable of doing the job. Beyond that, it's often about how the interviewers think they'd fit, whether they know someone the interviewer knows so that a quick informal reference or two can be taken etc. The decision making is subjective.

Quotas or targets (which is what your example sounds like) can help people recognise their subjectivity and perhaps to a small extent set it aside. There are other ways of doing this of course - an orchestra in Germany had never hired a female tuba player until interviewees sat behind screens for the musical tryouts. Their internal subjectivity told them women couldn't handle such a large instrument as competently as men; the screen cut off that unconscious subjectivity

HTH.

"Q3 might trigger "
Use of that word on an internet post indicates you are probably under 20yo ;) and so my advise is don't worry to much about these things and have a read in the feminist section if u r so interested.

No Nolim the OP - sorry for the confusion.

Hi OP, there's a couple of places where you'll be able to find all the answers to your questions on feminism. I've linked to them here and here.

HTH.

if I wanted to offend you I'd have already done it

This reeks of a false sense of superiority on your part, I doubt you have much to offer feminism. Perhaps you should study something else.

Also, you are unlikely to offend people who care very little about your opinion.

1. Nothing to do with my feelings, we are not equal and anyone who has access to the internet and is not determined to explain inequality in terms of "women's choices" (while ignoring men's choices) can see that, it's nothing to do with our feelings.

1. They're a step in the right direction but they don't tackle systemic inequality

1. All men are potential sexual attackers, just as all people are potential murderers (with caveats for disability etc.). We're also all capable of being altruistic and kind. I think you may be over-interpreting something here. I fully expect somebody to take the first clause of this paragraph and quote it out of context here without quoting all the other things I've said in this paragraph, to prove that feminists think all men are rapists. That's what anti-feminists do all the time.

I recommend "The Equality Illusion" by Kat Banyard if you want an intro to feminism. And also this website may be helpful.

if I wanted to offend you I'd have already done it OP you've just outed yourself as a mysogonist.

There's a thread on the feminist boards called 'men who parade how feminist they are can fuck right off', go and read it, you might learn something.

Feminism already has a definition, kiddo, and it's not the one you gave it.

If your gran was mugged at the door a couple of times, would you censure her for saying she wouldn't open her door to strangers again?

Her door, her choice.

Burke- surely you've taken part in enough discussions on here in the past to answer your own questions?

I was simply letting you know in advance that you don't need to as I am already aware of that argument, I just disagree with it but our opinions on a definition of a word aren't important. While my questions do involve feminism, you don't need to actually define the word to answer them.

If the definition of the word isn't important or needed to answer, then why did you need to give your definition to ask them?

It's a bit arsey to give a whole paragraph on your ideas and then dismiss every ones else by saying "I disagree, but our opinions don't matter" it comes across as you giving your opinion then telling everyone else (women mostly) that theirs isn't important.

It's also ironic that you say you're aware of that argument so don't it repeating, while asking questions that, had you bothered to research, you'd see have been answered at various places and also don't need repeating.

It's usually a good idea, when you are interested in something, to do a little research yourself first, or you come across as someone ( a man) who expects others (women) to do your work for you.

Q3- IME it's often anti-feminists who give the impression that we should treat all men as potential attackers. It's depressingly common to see comments like 'Well, what did she expect? She shouldn't have got drunk/worn that/gone back to his place.' Those kind of arguments suggest that men are animals who can't possibly be expected to control their based instincts, poor dears. Therefore us women must always be on guard.

In contrast, I believe that the vast majority of men are decent people who ate fully capable of checking for consent before sticking their penis in someone. I think that those who don't check first should be punished, rather than having feeble excuses made for them.

1. Look around you and ask yourself this. Are 50% of stay at home parents male? Are 50% of MPs female? Are 50% of nursery staff male? Is 50% of Sky Sports coverage female? Are 50% of page 3 models and lap dancers male? Are 50% of newspaper editors female? That should answer the equality question.

1. I support those initiatives.

1. Because society tells us that all men are potential attackers. Police forces print posters telling women not to get drunk because they will be raped. TV runs adverts telling women not to let their friend get minicabs because they will be raped. Women and girls are told not to wear certain items of clothing or behave in certain ways because otherwise they will be attacked. It is mainstream society is telling us that men are potential attackers and we should modify our behaviour so as not to inflame them. Not feminism.

Oh and assuming you're in good faith, you might be interested in the concept of Schrodinger's Rapist.

1. There are sexist attitudes out there. To deny it would be fantasy.
2. It is sad we need rules such as this, but due to sexist attitudes (not just in recruitment but what happens after maternity for example) sometimes needed so those responsible can't just do wrong again and again.
3. In a PP you cite this is about a specific woman, but in your OP it's phrased like it's all women. Quite interesting as we are talking feminism and sexism here.

Firstly: of course that particular woman will be wary of men. Of course. If you were attacked in that way would you not be? It's entirely consistent with her horrible experience - of course most men aren't attackers but any with an ounce of empathy would get why she felt that way. Second - unfortunately there are some men who cat call, or attack women. They don't look like stereotype pigs. They look normal. In the past it was common to disbelieve or blame female victims ... and in many cases it still is. So it does take some women a while to suss out and trust men when they might immediately trust women, depending on their past experiences. I am extremely lucky in that most men I know behave sensitively to this (eg respect personal space, never cat call etc) so i feel sage enough by day out and about - but I've had nasty pieces of work grab my boobs/bum/crotch in clubs and cat call, and I've seen flashers. They don't go round with a neon sign and so many women are cautious.

YY to Jeane too.

The idea that "masculinity" is thuggish, sex obsessed and lauds a lack of kindness is key to the issue.

Oh, you've been moved to FWR.

Welcome to the dark side, young Skywalker