I'm giving up.

[GarlicShake]

This is more of a despairing rant than an invitation to reply. Sorry! I feel like I've nowhere else to put it.

I am 61 years old. I'm facing ageism & ableism as well as sexism. I have a corner to fight.

I went on strike for maternity rights, for equal pay, even for the factory to have a women's toilet. I forged a career in a world that was predominantly male, argued for my pay rises and trained younger people up to be non-sexist. I've been blamed and misconstrued, beaten up, raped, and carefully answered the gamut of sexist assumptions. I battled for my pension rights and I threatened the bank with legal action when they refused to take my salary into account on my first mortgage. I am still fighting.

But I just can't hack fighting for younger women any more. They're throwing away all that we, and the two generations before and the one after mine, won for them. I can't even tell whether they don't give a shit or they think all their rights are safe so they needn't bother.

I'm not going to argue the transgender thing any more. I'll stick to supporting the handful of FB friends who get it, but I'm not arguing in my own voice from now. I'm giving up on explaining why "Ms" matters - it's been around for 50 years, for crying out loud! People can figure out why the Nordic model's a better idea for themselves - or, most likely, not. Women can congratulate themselves on being financially dependent on husbands, and figure that out for themselves too.

And I think this country's going to vote itself out of Europe. That'll wake a few people up in short order, I fear, but I shall be needed to stick up for older & disabled people like me as our rights will get shredded. I am tired.

I am very tired and disappointed. Thank you for all the brilliant discussions, MN feminists! Good luck.

So you accept that women were treated worse than men all other things being equal?

"I specialised in the Later Roman Empire at university but totally missed the bit where it became a matriarchy. Could you fill me in?"

You're looking at it in a vaccuum and out of context. I am looking at it in the context of and relative to other societies of the era.

"The late Roman Empire was as matriarchal as any society has ever become."

To amend what i said, with the obvious exception of the modern Western world..

Maddy, but we make choices based on what is right for us? If it was wrong for you and made much more sense to do it the other way round, would you change due to norms? Garlic started this thread saying how hard she fought to change norms. If anything, your answer is surprising on this thread?

Madly, further thought, really glad you raised this as I suddenly see something I hadn't put my finger on.

The reason I get puzzled with feminists talking about being forced to align with norms is that..we wouldn't have feminists if everyone felt that forced to stick with norms. Which goes back to a pp from earlier wondering what happened to just saying "no".

There were some cool women nuns in the later Roman Empire, it's true. And a couple of feisty empresses (married to emperors rather than empresses in their own right. Apart from my namesake Irene of Athens in the 8th century, though I'd call that the Byzantine period rather than the Later Roman Empire).

Not sure this really makes a matriarchy, though.

lorelei.. its the issue of peoples expectations.. not my choice, if that makes sense?

I wanted to take care of my DS, it was a no brainer for me to do that, and i would never have done any different... yet when you talk to people about it, they EXPECT me to have made that decision based on the fact i'm his mom and its normal for mom to take care of the kids.

Its one of those, not sure what the right word is, juxtaposition? Paradox? things

I raise the point that I decided to, because i wanted to, but i didn't HAVE to.. and people are like 'well, why make a fuss over it?' because they don't get that the EXPECTATION based on my Sex annoys me.

This is making me think of the Star Trek TNG episode about a matriarchal planet. They were doing pretty well.

No fault divorce news.stanford.edu/pr/91/911203Arc1041.html

Is the primary reason why ancient rome can be considered a matriarchy for the purposes of this debate.

The ease at which marriage could be dissolved lead to the breakdown of the family unit, which caused decline in civillization.

"Oh Ffs
When have men ever legally been the property of their spouse? Legal property is the definition of chattel."

Women were not property, as men had legal obligations towards women's legally protected humanity.

And as for your foul mouthed rant, add that to the list of reasons why women are shunning feminists. The pejorative level of your discourse.

Garlic, I hope that you reconsider and stay. I have been enlightened by many like you on mn, please stay and debate.

"This patriarchal system evolved over the centuries, and in later periods women could marry without entering their husband's legal control. In fact, some women married and only later chose to put themselves under the power of their husbands, probably for reasons of property and inheritance, Treggiari said. "

Yup, sounds like a matriarchy to me.

Why argue with an obvious MRA? You're allowing him to derail the thread into oblivion.

Are these your knitters, slugs?

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taquile_Island