Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Feminism: chat

Original poster

Can we talk about liberal feminism?

528 replies

JigglyTuff · 26/08/2017 23:20

It's late and I've had wine and so this is probably a bit disjointed. BUT liberal feminism seems like a complete clusterfuck to me. It's all about 'reflecting on things' and apologising. God, so much apologising. I don't think white heterosexual lefty men spend their lives saying 'mea culpa' do they? But white het women seem to be on a mission to self-abase. It's really fucking odd and quite disturbing.

Is anyone else seeing this or do I need to start wearing a tinfoil hat or something?

OP posts:
C8H10N4O2 · 28/08/2017 18:00

I agree, because a female pm endorsing anti-women policies not only validates them, she is used as justification by patriarchy that as it's a woman's decision, then feminists should shut up.

Indeed because what one woman does is 'typical' of the clone group that is women, whilst what one man does is individual. Which is as good a reason as any for considering the patriarchy to be the fundamental and first problem.

BertrandRussell · 28/08/2017 18:36

"Indeed because what one woman does is 'typical' of the clone group that is women, whilst what one man does is individual. Which is as good a reason as any for considering the patriarchy to be the fundamental and first problem."

Oh, absolutely this! A woman does something badly- women can't do that thing. A man does something badly - he's crap at that thing.

Ereshkigal · 28/08/2017 18:51

Yes I agree.

DioneTheDiabolist · 28/08/2017 19:21

Why are feminists judging Theresa May more harshly than they would a male, Tory PM? I find this absolutely ridiculous.

BertrandRussell · 28/08/2017 19:30

Dione- you obviously haven't read what people have said.

It is not a matter of judging May as an individual more harshly than a man. It is a matter of the impact she, as a woman, will have. She is obviously not an effective prime minister. That will reflect on,other women. It will be used, by those who prefer women not to be in positions of power as evidence for their beliefs. The fact that she is a woman will be used as endorsement for policies which disproportionately impact on women.

Rufustherenegadereindeer1 · 28/08/2017 19:38

That will reflect on,other women. It will be used, by those who prefer women not to be in positions of power as evidence for their beliefs.

Yep

BertrandRussell · 28/08/2017 19:45

And it is not her fault. It is the fault of the patriarchal society we live in. If we lived in a fair and equitable society, May would only be considered responsible for her own actions, as a man would be. Not as a proxy for all women.

DioneTheDiabolist · 28/08/2017 19:48

I have read what people have said. You say in your post, that because she is a woman it is about the impact that she will have and the reflection of this on other women. No, the fact that she has a vagina has no impact on her (in)ability to be a good PM, nor is it any sort of reflection on other women's abilities to run the country.

I expect to hear this sort of backward bullshit from the ignorant and anti-woman brigade. Surely feminists recognise that women are individuals and try to move away from the damaging notion that what one woman does is typical or even a reflection of women in general.

DJBaggySmalls · 28/08/2017 19:51

DioneTheDiabolist Youp;ve misunderstood what Bertrand said. She was pointing out what other people would say, not endorsing it. Look at her earlier post for clarification.

BertrandRussell Mon 28-Aug-17 18:36:51
"Indeed because what one woman does is 'typical' of the clone group that is women, whilst what one man does is individual. Which is as good a reason as any for considering the patriarchy to be the fundamental and first problem."

Oh, absolutely this! A woman does something badly- women can't do that thing. A man does something badly - he's crap at that thing.

EyesUnderARock · 28/08/2017 19:53

Dione, I did wonder if I was holding women to a higher standard when I wrote that, but then I thought that a male Tory PM would push through policies that were advantageous for his gender, that prioritised their wants. If May had done that, then she might have been a good thing for women, but she hasn't and she isn't.

BertrandRussell · 28/08/2017 19:54

Dione. I can only assume that you are "misunderstanding" on purpose. Frankly, I can't be arsed to explain again.

DioneTheDiabolist · 28/08/2017 20:06

I actually think that a woman Tory is worse than a man Tory.

Anyone who implements policies that damage women is shitty, regardless of their chromosomes. Judging women more harshly than men for the same behaviour is one of the issues in society that feminism seeks to address. No?

Moussemoose · 28/08/2017 20:35

As feminists one of our complaints is that women are held to higher different standards. A women has to be twice as good to be regarded as half as good.

We should therefore strive not to hold women to higher, different standards.

BertrandRussell · 28/08/2017 20:48

"We should therefore strive not to hold women to higher, different standards"
I agree. But we are talking about the actual impact of May's behaviour, not her actual behaviour.

Moussemoose · 28/08/2017 20:52

Bertrand
This is the quote I was responding to....

"I actually think that a woman Tory is worse than a man Tory"

A woman is being held to different, higher standards.

DeleteOrDecay · 28/08/2017 21:02

*"I actually think that a woman Tory is worse than a man Tory"

A woman is being held to different, higher standards.*

It's clear what the poster meant by this statement and it's not that at all.

This post by eyes explains it well:

she is used as justification by patriarchy that as it's a woman's decision, then feminists should shut up.

Look at the wider picture. It's not that she's held to a higher standard, it's that her decisions reflect on women as a whole. We all get tarred with her brush. This doesn't happen with men. I don't like her but It's not her fault. It's the way things work as they currently are.

Ereshkigal · 28/08/2017 21:05

Dione you are completely failing to grasp the point being made by people about female politicians.

DioneTheDiabolist · 28/08/2017 21:47

Delete, the poster could not have been more clear. She actually thinks that a woman Tory is worse than a man Tory. We know that's what she thinks because she said it.

Anti-women polemicists may try to use the fact that the PM is a woman to tell women that it is their decision (it's not) or tell feminists to shut up, that doesn't mean that we accept it. Instead it should be challenged for the bullshit that it is. Not reinforced by feminists who think that out of two people who hold the same view the XX one is worse.

Eyes, the anti-women policies put into place by successive Tory PMs, male and female are not advantageous to men as a class or even a sex. They damage the men in my family and my neighbourhood. They are only advantageous to the privileged. Men and women like TO, DC, BoJo and their friends.

DioneTheDiabolist · 28/08/2017 21:48

That should be TM, not TO.

Moussemoose · 28/08/2017 21:58

I actually think a woman Tory is worse than a man Tory. Because so many Tory policies affect women disproportionately

That's the whole post. I can't see any ambiguity. The poster may not have 'meant' but she said it. A woman is being judged more harshly because she is a woman.

Yes TM and her policies will be used to justify mistreatment of women by the media and politicians who choose to behave like that. But we know better and so should hold ourselves to higher standards than Tory politicians and the Daily Mail.

BertrandRussell · 28/08/2017 22:30

"That's the whole post. I can't see any ambiguity. The poster may not have 'meant' but she said it. A woman is being judged more harshly because she is a woman."

One last try. I am nor judging a woman more harshly because she is a woman. I am acknowledging that a woman prime minister- or any other woman in a position of power will be thought of as a proxy for all women in a way that a man prime minister, or a man in any other position of power will not be considered a proxy for all men. But feel free to pretend otherwise. Lots of women sincerely believe that women do not face structural disadvantage. If you can believe that, you can believe anything.

YetAnotherSpartacus · 28/08/2017 22:51

Deep breath Bertrand .... I admire your patience. The thread and the meaning re May is crystal clear to me. I'm not sure why it isn't to others.

Moussemoose · 28/08/2017 22:54

will be thought of as a proxy for all women

Yes she will be thought of as a proxy by the mainstream media - but she isn't. Therefore to say "a woman Tory is worse than a man Tory" is judging her by a different standard. Judging her by their standard.

Perhaps you mean a woman Tory does more damage or causes more harm?

It could be implied that as a woman is seen as a proxy any woman who is not perfect does more harm than good. Any woman in a position of authority is a proxy and therefore unless she is beyond reproach you could say " a woman doing xxxx is worse than a man. "

The more women in the public eye the less unusual they become the less of a proxy they are. So TM as a woman in power dilutes the power of the proxy argument.

I believe woman face structural disadvantage and no part of my argument implies otherwise.

Rufustherenegadereindeer1 · 28/08/2017 22:58

I thought the post was part of an ongoing conversation

So the surrounding posts made bertarands post make 'sense'

If that makes sense...so its taken out of context and dissected as a single sentence

quencher · 28/08/2017 23:11

I why do I feel like labour has more of a problem with women than tories, including, their lack of female pm or leader?
I don't think it's a coincidence that the Troy party has had two female MPs already. I believe that there is this acceptance from its followers and those who vote for them. The middle class women who had the time and money to fight for women's liberation, so it's expected and accepted by the middle classes. (I am in no way ignoring working class women, i.e. The ford Dagenham women, or nay other groups that have done great work).

To me this seems to be the opposite to labour. Labour might have more female MPs and ethnic minorities, but it comes across like there are issues with acceptance and has male centricity at its core. (I do believe that Tony Blair should be excluded from this because he was different kettle of fish from the same pond).
I also, wonder whether labour prioritises its voters at the expense of women when it comes to leadership.