These women have no idea what feminism is really about, do they?

[Cerseirys]

I'm not sure why the Indy felt the need to go down this route for IWD. Some of these women sound like MRAs

www.independent.co.uk/voices/international-women-s-day-2016-we-spoke-to-the-women-who-won-t-be-celebrating-a6917506.html

What a coincidence.

nice - "I know whats best for you women, and if you don't agree with me you're thick", only a feminist would get away with saying that without being picked up on it by, err, feminists.

"nice - "I know whats best for you women, and if you don't agree with me you're thick", only a feminist would get away with saying that without being picked up on it by, err, feminists."

Oh, for goodness sake, why do you do this all the time? Whst's in it for you? That is not what anyone said!

Someone said it made non feminists look thick, which was immediately followed up by a sarcastic comment to the effect that that was a coincidence. Either it genuinely is a coincidence, or it was said because the poster believes that non feminists look thick most of the time, because they are.

Perhaps you can further patronise by explaining how it is supposed to be read ?

I was the one who said the article made non feminists look thick. And it's true. They have chosen women who clearly don't understand feminism, and the young woman who think feminism is bad because it increases divorce isn't exactly displaying major intellect is she?

I didn't say all non feminists were thick. And I didn't mean that either.

There are a fair few attacks on women on this thread.

I don't think that's true. I think there have been a number of attacks on what women in the article have said. You're allowed to take people to task for their words.

Feminism isn't an organisation, it's a political movement.

Not sure that's relevant, but still... the women quoted in the article aren't against certain parts of feminism, they are attacking the political movement. In an article written on IWD. Which is odd.

Not being a feminist does not mean anti-woman.

Kinda does. However, even if your premise was correct, the women quoted came across as anti-women.

I don't think it's at all clear that none of them "understand" feminism, but out of interest, does it worry you that women don't understand it ? Would any reason other not understanding it suffice as a reason to reject it ? It seems to me that you're basically saying the reason these women don't get feminism is because they don't understand it. What i read was that at least some of them have spent time with, or reading the opinions of, women who say that feminism informs their thinking, and they don't like it. Since peoples definition of what feminism means is so divergent, it's not obvious what exactly it is you would be aligning yourself with if you said you were a feminist.

It worries me that women who don't understand feminism are invited to write about why feminism is wrong in a national newspaper.

There are some women who actually understand feminism and reject it (women can be misogynists too). So it's by no means a given that understanding feminism means a woman will agree with it.

"It seems to me that you're basically saying the reason these women don't get feminism is because they don't understand it"

Nope. It might seem that way to you for some unfathomable reason of your own, but nobody said anything of the sort.

Mind you, some of the most vociferous anti-feminists do actually have no idea what feminism is all about. It's one thing to understand something and choose to reject it. But too many reject it "because a feminist said something nasty to me once" "because feminists all hate men" and stuff like that.

Argh! wrong thread!

Wrong thread, but good to know you're still fighting the good fight, WWA

Bertrand It might seem that way to you for some unfathomable reason of your own, but nobody said anything of the sort.

I fail to see how you can seriously claim it "unfathomable" given the dialog on this thread, give over. I see you just ignored me when I asked how "it makes non feminists look thick", "what a coincidence" was supposed to be taken ? Care to have a go now ? I expect not.

I hope none of the women in that article do anything so anti-male as vote, own property, sign contracts in their own names, choose when to have children (or not), etc etc.

Can't say I'm sorry that The Independent has fallen flat on its face either, tbf.

yes, and by extension no one who ever needs to use the NHS must ever vote for any other party than labour right ?

It might seem that way to you for some unfathomable reason of your own, but nobody said anything of the sort.

Bertrand have you read the thread title?

And comments about their having less self-awareness than a 14 year old? And this Yes Bertrand. It makes non-feminists look quiet thick, if you base your opinion of them on that group

What is that saying if not, they don't understand feminism?

WWA said "It worries me that women who don't understand feminism are invited to write about why feminism is wrong in a national newspaper"

Bertrand to itllallbefine "nope nobody said anything of the sort"

By extension I think if you vote Tory you should not moan about cuts.

Nice to see the same posters tirelessly attacking feminism.

A quote from one of the women in the Independent's article:
"Rape statistics are constantly being misrepresented to frighten women and make them believe they live in a “rape culture”. In fact, successful rape prosecutions are on a par with other crimes at over 50 per cent."

Some examples of England and Wales conviction rates (percentage of charged defendants found guilty in the court system):
fraud ................................... 85%
burglary ............................... 85%
race hate crime ..................... 85%
disability hate crime ............... 82%
all crimes average .................. 82%
rape ..................................... 57%

Although all the rates in my list are above 50%, the conviction rate for rape is far below the average conviction rate for all crimes.

Which other crimes does the quoted woman think have conviction rates on a par with the conviction rates for rape? I don't think they can be any of the crimes that I've listed, which cluster very closely around the average for all crimes.

I think that the rape conviction rate needs to improve to over 80%, putting it on a on a par with the average for all crimes, before I'll accept that rape prosecutions are being taken seriously enough by the police and courts.

(Note for any statistics pedants: the figure I found for all crimes referred to the average, but I don't know if they really meant the mean rather than the average.)

I think anyone who says feminism is a recipe for ruining lives, as we see in divorce statistics IS thick.

So shoot me!

I think anyone who says "feminism is a recipe for ruining lives, as we see in divorce statistics" IS thick.

It's the type of thing MREs say. And they're not noted for their intellectual prowess.

I think that the rape conviction rate needs to improve to over 80%, putting it on a on a par with the average for all crimes, before I'll accept that rape prosecutions are being taken seriously enough by the police and courts.

It'd be nice to see the no crime rates for other major crimes as well, see how they average out compared to the high rate for sexual offenses.

It's interesting how the women in the article criticising feminist beliefs are an attack on women, yet criticising the beliefs of the women in the article is not.

It'd also be interesting to see what % are 'no crimed' and what % are taken forward by the cps for various types of crimes.