I'm starting to hate men

[Mamaka]

I posted this on relationships but didn't get any response:

I've noticed recently that I've become more and more anti men - I think since having my first child. So many factors that I could mention and probably many deep rooted issues contributing to this but the long and short of it is why do women have to suffer and sacrifice at every turn?!

I don't really want to feel like this. I have a son who I want to bring up/am bringing up to be a feminist but I'm worried about how my hateful feelings towards men are going to rub off on my dc.

I suppose I am asking if there is a way I can combat these feelings and start to feel more positively towards them.

Buffy, you and others were talking about whether male violence is biologically determined or socialised.

And I don't want to define the peramaters of the discussion.

Tbh I don't get what the discussion is really about. We either assume that men are innately predisposed to rape and violence (which as a feminist I assume you don't); or we assume that there are sociocultural reasons for men behaving the way they do. If the latter is the case then the OP need not entirely despair because theoretically men can change.

That just seems like a logical way to proceed.

I talk about sexual politics because that does seem to have become the main focus of Western feminist debate - and the issue of sexual violence is seen as central to female oppression.

You then think 'well, what kind of sexual equality do we want in the 21st century?'. And that is where things get problematic.

I could just simply agree or disagree with the OP but what wouldnt be a proper discussion would it? And this is a discussion forum about feminism isn't it?

Like it Buffy

at what’s happened to this thread.

I totally know what you mean, OP. I think that I’m heading the same way and I’ve no idea how to combat it. Small example: I was just listening to a comedy podcast; someone said something sexist and I was just like “FFS”! I had previously been enjoying it, but now I’m just annoyed.

I work in an office in which all but one of our managers are female (probs because it an admin-type job with very good flexi terms and, of course, women are responsible for childcare so flock towards it), the one male manager constantly complains that he’s a minority and makes unfunny quips about it. He hasn’t a got a CLUE but sent out an email the other day asking us to remember to say that when we tell a customer that someone will phone them back that that person could be male or female so to make sure we’re not just saying ‘she’. Well, since the few male staff couldn’t possibly deal with phones since they’ve all been placed on the post room team (very complicated post machinery, us women couldn’t cope), he can fuck off!

"heteronormative values"

I have no idea what heteronormative values are.

I also have no idea what you think heteronormative means.

LMGTFY:

denoting or relating to a world view that promotes heterosexuality as the normal or preferred sexual orientation

Fair point, that was nonspecific. I guess I meant courtship, romance, monogamy.

BTW I am in no sense saying heteronormative are necessarily a good thing; just that when they were rejected capitalism exploited the absence of moral constraint to create, and hugely profit from, a culture of sexual commdification. As I said earlier, one form of oppression was supplanted for another.

Despite the acknowledgement if your first paragraph, you are STILL using heteronormative incorrectly in your second.

Are you looking for the word "traditional"?

Again, it's pretty impolite to ignore posts or to wilfully misread them. Viz: "Returning to the OP's original point: it is certainly true that lots of women do want some kind of long term relationship with a man"

The OP's original post was about bringing up a son. When Buffy called you on this, you decided that the above sentence actually meant "returning to the OP's point that men are bad" - which was also a misrepresentative summary.

Words mean things. Not just what you've decided they mean.

Sorry, when I said returning to the OP's point..I didn't meant to suggest she wanted a man - I just meant returning to the more general point about whether men can be loved and trusted by women. And that got me trying to think about relationships.

And yes I should have said 'traditional'. My bad.

lipto that reminds me of an office I used to work in. Very high up female manager, very impressive, not on the board but often asked to speak / give views to them. She preferred to mentor women and given the male-dominated environment made no secret of the fact she thought it was important for her to encourage, mentor, and put forward women.

The men in the office couldn't cope with that at all. Went on and on about positive discrimination. Pointed out that I - a woman(!) - was being mentored (gasp) by a man. The men are mentoring men and women, the woman is only mentoring women, SO UNFAIR etc etc.

No attempt to point out that way over 50% of people mentored / put forward for promotion were men, and that one woman in a whole office - nay a whole industry - of men having the advantage was unlikely to ruin the life chances of every man in the office would convince them that her behaviour was acceptable.

That made me hate men for a bit

We don't need to keep going over the same speed bump? Interactions between men and women are not restricted to, nor defined by sex and/or romantic relationships.

Also John word to the wise sometimes some empathy goes a long way. You don't have to sally forth with opinions, ideas and solutions. Sometimes just a simple "I hear you, and it sucks." Is a bit more useful.

I did say I empathised. I've said that many men are horrid to women. I've talked about my sister's experience which troubled me greatly.

I have probably mis-read this discussion. Probably it was intended more as an exchange of personal experiences rather than a more wide-ranging debate about gender politics. I am diagnosed as autistic and look at the world in a very conceptual, theoretical way. So I admit maybe my approach has been innapropriate.

Don't just say you empathise, follow it up. Saying you empathise and then dominating the discussion anyway suggests something crucial has been overlooked.

In a way I agree Dervel. Gnder relations have become sexualised to a ridiculous degree, because sex has become a form of currency. We need to desexualise our culture in a big way for things to improve for women and men. IMO.

What is it you think I should empathise with? What is the premise that I am supposed to be agreeing with here? If anyone has been mistreated by men then that's terrible (I have been mistreated by powerful men myself); but what can I say to that in the context of a critical discussion?

Tbh, I find this aspect of social media quite weird - the way it demands intimacy from anonymous exchanges. But I don't know any of you. I haven't met any of you.

Plus, I'm not a woman; I don't have any of those experiences to share. So all I can do really is put forward an analysis of how we might collectively, men and women, create a more gender equitable culture from my perspectove. If you disagree with my analysis, no biggie.

Maybe if this was in the 'feminist theory' rather than 'feminist chat' section my views would be more appropriate.

In a way you agree? The implication being in a way you do not agree? Or you agree with me but my depth of thinking is not sufficient and I am missing something?

Alternatively "In a way I agree Dervel" = dismissive hand waving away, before diving straight back in to what you wanted to talk about anyway.

If your autism really is that much a barrier to communication and socialisation for you, might I recommend a board specifically tailored to create a space to make you feel welcome and safe, as this one is designed for women/feminists?

You can do more than put foward an analysis on here, you can listen too...

If you disagree with my analysis, no biggie

But is IS a biggie. It's a biggie because you've crashed right in with it whether it was wanted or not. And when you were told that it was not wanted, that it was not appropriate, you decided that the only arbiter of that was YOU.

I don't know how this relates to your autism. When people around you are made uncomfortable by aspects of your behaviour that are difficult for neurotypical people to understand, can you have a think about what you would normally do to lessen that discomfort (I'm assuming there's something) and do that now, please. I am hoping the answer is "stop talking/typing and reflect", BTW.

PS, I have absolutely no expertise with autism, so I hope that's a reasonable suggestion- I just assume that autistic people need to have some strategies for coping with the neurotypical world when they clash with it.

What should I reflect on? What would you like me to think?

Dervel: I did 100% agree with that comment you made. 'In a sense' was just a habitual way of starting a sentence for me.

I don't understand what I have said that is so terrible. I am now, almost neurotically, trying very hard not to make anyone angry. None of my sentiments have attacked anyone personally or have been against feminism in any general sense. In particular I think almond and buffy have some interesting things to say. You are right that maybe I didn't pay enough attention to what people are saying. My bad.

It does seem that people don't want anyone to in any way challenge some kind of tacit consensus. And when you do they pile on you. I can't imagine that if this topic was more directly pertinent to what I have been saying that the situation would be any different.

Isn't that bad for the debate? I certainly don't expect everyone to agree with me.

It's a bit like turning up at a Momentum rally and saying Jeremy Corbyn isn't 100% perfect. Ha ha ha.

I am more used to commenting on the Guardian where everyone is disagreeing with one another willy-nilly. I mistakenly thought mumsnet was like that too.

I don't expect anything to be indulged; but it would be nice if it were engaged with.

I have really not assumed ANYONE holds particular views (apart from yourself and one or two others I cannot work out what views they have). When I have ascribed views to people they have not been to anyone in this forum.

Looking back I see I have have droned on a bit - sorry. When I said I said think you had interesting things to say it was because 1) I genuinely meant it (your comment about biological determinism was bang on IMO) and 2) I was trying to calm things down. I in no way meant to give you a patronising pat on the head...

Everything I say get twisted around a bit.

Back to the question: are men inherently bad - and if not are they reformable, and if so how?. If no one wants this discussion to be about then I will go away.

What do you mean by the 'mundane minutiae' BTW?

John, to get to brass tacks here, and because I couldn't give a shit if people think I'm clever or not:

This thread isn't about you.

It's not written for you to hold forth in your own particular way.

It's not your job to decide who speaks and how they speak.

And to paraphrase Derval...

Sit down, pipe down and listen to what's being said for a while.

My DS has ASD as well, and he appreciates it when people are blunt and to the point.

Sorry, I'll back off and read some others responses more carefully. Sorry for causing any upset. My bad. Respect to all.