Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Question about equality

85 replies

wnsdkfl · 29/11/2017 21:19

For a long time, me and my friend used to discuss about the women's rights for a long time. Being the devil's advocate, I would try to prolong the talk for arguments' sake. But then, it slowly developed into a solid argument (in my opinion). Now I am curious what you all think about my thoughts. If you're willing, can we start a civil discussion?

There are many problems that females face, and there are many problems that males face. Many major groups of rights activists easily overlook, ignore, and deny the other side’s problems and arguments and continue to press on their side of the argument. This happens because of their personal benefit. It is convenient for them (let it be males or females) to have more rights in the future, so the rights activists continue to struggle to this day. I believe that it is necessary for people to open up and reach an agreement that men and women are to be equal, and that they all are entitled to a power to reach an agreement in deciding the distribution of the rights, merits, and responsibilities within the society.

If people want to argue that men and women have the same capabilities, then should the responsibilities of each sex be distributed 50% each? If so, should 50% of the fathers in child custody issues be given a chance to take care of the baby? Should there be no required economic support from the fathers’ side with the assumptions that women are equally capable?

For the wage difference between males and females, is it appropriate to take the maternity leave and other vacancy of the working forces due to some other inevitable female burdens into account when we look into their wages? If so, do we pay them for their times away from work as well? If not, how will you take this approach?

What is the limit that you all are comfortable to set and say that “this is equal” to everyone? Is your ideals for equality something that is entirely 50:50, or something that is derived from each sex’s “roles” within the society? Is it a mix of both? Or is it something entirely different? Do women need more rights over men because in the past, it was other way around? I am very curious.

When confronting these questions, it is very important to question yourself if you are arguing for sake of your own convenience. If you are going to make an emotional appeal for your argument, take into account what the opposite sex will go through emotionally when something similar happens to them. If you are going to make a statistical report, question the source’s biasness from their research, as it is easy to remove the parts that are inconvenient for them and still tell the truth. It will be truly hard to argue in a impartial manner.

OP posts:
FizzyWaterAndElderflower · 29/11/2017 23:33

If you read those threads, you'll see that that was mentioned more than once - that it would be better to make the whole carpark safe, rather than leave those that don't get the privileged spots to the wolves.

wnsdkfl · 29/11/2017 23:33

Then the main problem would be enforcing them into practice...

OP posts:
CocoaXx · 30/11/2017 07:20

The point about residency for a child after divorce is that the legal basis is the best interests of the child, NOT the equal rights of the parents.

The best interests of the child are judged on an individual basis in the context of other factors (who has previously been main career, school arrangements, friends, additional needs, and so on). You don’t divide up the child’s time like you divide up a CD collection.

There is a whole area of family law with a massive scholarship around it. The best interests of the child are arguably not served with 50/50 shared care, but a stable base home and consistent and amicable contact with the NRP. It is quite rightly decided on a case by case basis.

Try the UN convention of the rights of the child as a starting point. Children are not property, but sentient beings with their own set of rights. Lawyers and the courts (and parents) should be considering these, not their own rights. Parents have responsibilities.

CocoaXx · 30/11/2017 07:21

Main career, not career, sorry

QuentinSummers · 30/11/2017 07:44

sonic I bow to your mumsnet genius.

Does anyone remember toffypops? I used to love those.

CocoaXx · 30/11/2017 08:04

Plus wtfnsdkl have you actually ever looked after a child? I doubt it. Are you a family lawyer? I doubt it. Have you got half-baked ideas about equality in divorce based on hearsay and male entitlement? I suspect so.

Have some more Biscuit

When you have been the primary carer of a child with additional needs, and in litigation, then come back and talk to me about equality.

Biscuit

You are pontificating about actual real life people’s lives. Are you trying to be annoying or have you got so little awareness of life beyond your own bubble that you think passing uninformed judgements on situations you know nothing about is a good idea?

So custody favouring the mother bugs you? Does it also bug you that many separated mothers live in poverty after divorce because they have had caring responsibilities for most of their child’s lives? Does it bug you that women have lower pensions than men on balance because of their caring responsibilities?

Engage your brain, please. It is not rocket science. Start with the Fawcett Society for some statistics about (in)equality and then go from there.

Biscuit again.

makeourfuture · 30/11/2017 08:05

inevitable female burdens

This turn of phrase....

QuentinSummers · 30/11/2017 08:14

wnsdkfl what biscuits are popular in Korea?

TheGoalIsToStayOutOfTheHole · 30/11/2017 09:57

The parent who does most of the childcare should have residency following separation or divorce

The parent who doesn't sacrifice their career to childcare should provide maintenance

Yup. This is how it works anyway isn't it? Much is made online of how mothers apparently have the courts skewed in their favour in divorces..but its nothing to do with them being mothers as far as I am aware, its about who did the lions share of child rearing to start with. If me and DH divorced tomorrow, I am fairly sure if we could not sort out stuff between ourselves and we went to court, he would be awarded main custody. Because he is the one who does most of the childcare due to my illness. Its not about favoring the mother, its about favoring the children and disrupting their lvies as much as possible.

TheGoalIsToStayOutOfTheHole · 30/11/2017 09:58

disrupting their lives as little* as possible.

Obviously Grin

New posts on this thread. Refresh page
Swipe left for the next trending thread