I'm so cross

[Yolandafarthing]

Just need somewhere to vent. My local parent's Facebook group had a post from a woman complaining she has hardly any help from her husband WRT housework/childcare and asking if others struggle too. Cue loads of other women commiserating.

Then the bloody admin shuts the comments on the thread down, because "it feels pretty negative to men, and I know that many of us have fantastic, pro-active and supportive partners, many of whom go to work as well as parent, and some of us are two Dad or two Mum families. If you swap the word 'man' for other descriptors like ethnicity or religion, it becomes clear that sweeping statements are unfair and inaccurate....I don't want [group name] to be a place where we perpetuate sexist stereotypes."

I'm fuming. This is a woman speaking. A woman silencing other women, because poor men.

Thoughts?

Knowing the causal links, as well as the statistic, is more helpful towards truly understanding and applying preventative measures.

Well that's fine, but I'm not an analyst and neither am I in the criminal justice system. Investigating the reasons for rape is not part of my remit.

Avoiding it is.

Datun but if you are involved in the socialisation of children perhaps it would be good to seek to eliminate some of the factors that lead people to commit these crimes?

That's what feminists are trying to do.

I'd rather not have to 'be prepared' clarity. I'd rather men would stop attacking women.

I'd rather not have to 'be prepared' clarity. I'd rather men would stop attacking women.

But in reality you have to be. We'd all rather there were no attacks.

I know I have to be clarity. I'd love to just have fun and go about my business but I can't.

coddiwomple wrote - "Please feel free to quote any legal rule stating that men have more rights or privilege than women."

Women face legal restrictions on medical procedures on their bodies, that men do not face. (1967 Abortion Act). In other words, the law gives a woman or girl less control over her body than it gives to a man or boy.

Even though men do not get pregnant so a direct comparison of pregnancy-related surgical procedures is not appropriate, male-dominated patriarchy ensures that men have not had their male privilege of bodily autonomy restricted by law to the same extent as women. For example, currently, there is no law that sets a time limit for surgery that is applicable only to men e.g. a law that would ban men from having prostate surgery more than 24 weeks after diagnosis, under which a man could be prosecuted with the possibility of spending many years in prison if found guilty of breaking the law.*

It may seem weird and/or absurd in this patriarchal non-feminist world that such a law could exist in future. At the moment, most people probably think that such a law is not needed because the man is not harming anyone except perhaps himself, but that absurdity actually highlights my point. Laws are usually made because the dominant group in society wants them, not necessarily because they are needed for the smooth running of a just society that respects democracy and the freedom of the individual. The absurdity of such a prostate surgery time limit law is absurd at the moment because of lawmakers' current values. I think it is theoretically possible to have such a law if the viewpoint of lawmakers changed e.g. the man could be treated as a waster of taxpayer's money because delaying surgery is almost always more complicated and more expensive - the doctor treats fewer people causing difficulties for other "more deserving" patients, illness deprives the government of future tax payments from workers etc. In other words, the man could come to be seen as harming other people, not just himself. If social values changed in this way, it would be much easier for a government to introduce a draconian law that prioritised its interests over the man's interests. The law would reduce the male privilege of bodily autonomy to a level closer to the current level experienced by women.

• I am definitely not proposing such a prostate surgery time limit law, just imagining it as a theoretical example!

That's what feminists are trying to do.

Sparrow, you say this as if you think I'm not a feminist?

claritytobeclear

I am, and I do.

I do understand what you are saying. Socialisation needs to change. That's exactly what feminism is trying to do.

Meanwhile laws are being enacted to make women's spaces unsafe.

The only way I know that is because statistically men commit violent crime more than women.

If I didn't know that, I may be completely happy about this law.

In fact, I think a lot of women who have, fortunately for them, had a life free from sexism or assault, are quite happy about it.

There is a tendency to view male violence as isolated incidences. As an experiment, in the last few days, I have added up how many stories of male violence are in the newspapers. On average, each day it's seven. For women, none so far.

And whilst I completely agree we need to stop it, (which is a large aspect of feminism) the first part of doing that is to highlight it.

And whilst I completely agree we need to stop it, (which is a large aspect of feminism) the first part of doing that is to highlight it.

And all I am saying is there needs to be balance in this. If we don't acknowledge how far feminism, and gender perceptions have come, recognising victories, realistically of course there is still a long way to go, we can just end up complaining about abuse and oppression rather than stopping it.

zephyr

You're on a feminist board advising feminists to do things they already do. If you are a feminist then I wonder why you don't already know that feminists already work to eliminate the factor that people to commit violent crime? It's one of largest parts of feminism.

In fact, I think a lot of women who have, fortunately for them, had a life free from sexism or assault, are quite happy about it.

I have not had a life completely free from sexism and assault. However this law does not really scare me. I support people wanting safe women only spaces but I really do not feel threatened, particularly, in unisex spaces, which most usually offer much better privacy. It's just the way I feel. (Not a criticism of anyone else). I just don't think fear is always that constructive. If I dwelled on every fear that crossed my mind I would be an anxious mess!

I have no interest in celebrating victories because I find the fact that we still have to fight fucking horrifying. Every 'victory' has been an utter humiliation.

You're on a feminist board advising feminists to do things they already do. If you are a feminist then I wonder why you don't already know that feminists already work to eliminate the factor that people to commit violent crime? It's one of largest parts of feminism.

So you are criticising me for saying what feminists say, on a feminist board? Right - would you prefer I said something sexist and misogynistic?

Why do people think that just because something doesn't scare or bother them then everyone should feel the same way?

I'm not scared of dogs, doesn't mean I think no one else should be either.

I have no interest in celebrating victories because I find the fact that we still have to fight fucking horrifying. Every 'victory' has been an utter humiliation.

Life will be very hard for you then. I enjoy celebrating the smallest victory. I'm not humiliated easily.

Women having to starve themselves and ending up being force-fed before men will allow women to vote isn't a victory to me. It's sickening. I'm glad we got a vote but I'm furious that women had to go to such lengths to get it.

Why do people think that just because something doesn't scare or bother them then everyone should feel the same way?

I don't. I was just explaining my perspective.

It's sickening. I'm glad we got a vote but I'm furious that women had to go to such lengths to get it.

There are lots of sickening things in this world. I just find it difficult to sustain being angry, all the time. I don't want to be. I will do what I can but if I ceased to function, through constant anger, how would that help?

I don't cease to function so that's not a problem for me.

There is a tendency to view male violence as isolated incidences. As an experiment, in the last few days, I have added up how many stories of male violence are in the newspapers. On average, each day it's seven. For women, none so far.

Considering that any incidence of female on male violence is guaranteed to end up in the newspapers (just like a "man bites dog" incident would be more likely to be reported than "dog bites man") that's quite impressive.

I don't cease to function so that's not a problem for me.

Good. But maybe you've never been angry enough. I've seen very angry people who have ceased to function. It is not a pretty sight.

Ok.

I just took a look at the fatal injuries at work data.

133 male workers died from accidents at work in the UK 2016/17.

92 members of the public (doesn't specify sex) were also killed due to work related activity.