Do you personally believe there is a war on women?

[XXHelenaXX]

I've seen the expression "war on women" twice on the net today, and I don't recall ever seeing it before. The reason it caught my eye and intrigued me is, I have been telling my close friends for a few years now that if you "join the dots" * of what men are doing to women, worldwide, non-stop, it amounts to just that: a war on women.

The few people I have told think I am either imagining it, exaggerating, paranoid or a conspiracy theorist.

I'm wondering how many Mnetters would now agree with the statement that the present state of affairs amounts to "a war on women"?
--------------
(*e.g. the violence depicted in porn, sexual harassment and assault everywhere from Hollywood to primary school, trafficking for prostitution, FGM, domestic abuse and murder, and now the angry trans agenda).

A few months ago I would've thought you were paranoid. Now, I totally agree with you. When a 19 year old boy became a woman's officer, I finally realised how bad things were getting for us. Everything that's happened since has just cemented that thought for me.

Patriarchy is a violent system for the oppression of women which operates during peace and war and which is structurally different from war. But given the levels of violence and the number of women who are dying and being harmed, I don't think 'war' is an unreasonable metaphor. We are, in some sense, under occupation.

The book war on women by Sue lloyd Thomas is a very interesting and worryingly read.

It's hard to believe on a personal level and hard not to believe on a national and global level.

Yes. I think online porn needs to be sorted first. We can hardly go forward when our youth are being brainwashed with this degrading violence on tap.

Yes I do.
It seems deliberate and co-ordinated; for example Women's Studies have been replaced by Gender Studies, and universities have changed out of all recognition.

No.

Fifty Million Missing on FB - have a look at that, and you realise that yes - it's global - timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/kolkata/at-government-hospitals-women-being-given-iuds-without-consent/articleshow/63021211.cms?from=mdr

LassWiADelicateAir

As yours is the dissenting voice, could you please elaborate, tell us what is going on re men and women, globally, if it's not a war?

I think there has always been a war on women where the goal has been to control them for the purposes of sex and reproduction. Misogyny is the oldest prejudice.

700 sexual abuse victims from one region in the uk. How long did this go, not unnoticed, but uncared about. Yadnbu op.

The war on women has been heating up the past twenty years.
It had seemed like a cold war that only Feminists were paying attention to until then.

Yeah, agree with MyBrilliantDisguise. I'm in a good relationship with dh, have brothers I love and 2 sons who I hope I am bringing up to respect women but I look at what's happening in the world and I despair for my daughter's future.

I believe we live in a patriarchy that happened and now we're trying to dismantle it, but that's going to take a while. I think most of what we are dealing with is the fall out of that patriarchy created rather than a current concerted effort to fuck over women. I think most men think they are doing the right thing and we're all equal because they live as privileged males who just don't get it but that they think they want everything to be equal.

I think what's happening in this country is proof that people can be utterly fucking stupid on a massive scale when they let the politics they think they should have replace the politics they should have. Also I'm not sure war on women is the right term when actually a lot of women are leading the way on this bullshit.

Just consider the WEP.

Around the world though? Yes. Christ yes. Females are aborted, baby girls are murdered, girl children are mutilated, forced in to sexual slavery, child "brides" etc. There's no doubt really.

Yes, there is a war on women, there always has been. But in the past it was more of an 'occupying territory' because I think many women accepted it. Now that women are fighting back more and more it is more obvious.

Once you see it, you can't see un-see it.

No.

I've just popped onto BBC news, here are some of the stories at this random moment:

Nigerian president apologises for Boko Haram schoolgirl kidnap (Parents have told the BBC that at least 100 students have not been found.)

Joanna Demafelis: Employer of Filipina maid found dead in freezer arrested (male empoloyer, female maid)

'Groped by Holy Mosque guard during Hajj' in Mecca (A number of women have taken to social media to say they've been sexually assaulted during the Hajj pilgrimage.)

One French woman in eight has been raped, study says

Other stories include

Donald Tusk: UK Brexit plans 'pure illusion' (Person talking about something important - male)

Florida shooting: NRA-linked firms hit by consumer boycott (perpetrator - male)

Syria war: UN Security Council truce vote delayed (Picture of girl with face covered in blood and a woman in Islamic dress - not for a moment saying all victim of this violence will be women or girls but some will. What sex will most of the fighters be?)

Facebook drops shooting game demo at conservative event

UK weather: Spring 'postponed' as cold snap hits UK

Labour's general secretary Iain McNicol resigns (about a man in politics)

Do people agree with Kylie Jenner on the Snapchat update? (Something about a woman)

Somalia al-Shabab: Deadly double car bombing near presidential palace (pictures show male victims of the bombing)

Of the 12 stories, 4 are specifically about violence and assaults on women and girls.

I think that is what I would call a war.

We do live in a global patriarchy that benefits men, and women are both violently and subtly opressed.
Men are either active oppressors or passive bystanders. The thing about bystander apathy wrt women is that patriarchy is so normal, so constant that it's impossible to see (until you do see then you can't unsee) so just not seeing is enough to be complicit.

Women can also be oppressors of women, eg it's mostly women who perform fgm on girls, female jurors who buy the "rape myth" and let off a rapist on trial, buy into their own opression eh by "choosing" glamour modelling etc... because patriarchy rewards women for their compliancy with limited financial rewards and the promise of a good husband, and general acceptance in society/family.

However, I can't see it as a "war" as such, it isn't exactly organised centrally and most women get on in life perfectly fine, most people can't see this "war", it only references two extremes of the opressor-opressed spectrum.

Because of the Internet we have access to infinite information much of which points to the extremes of patriarchy which have always existed. So it seems like things are getting worse but I think things have always been worse for women it's just now we see it more.

Yes. I think online porn needs to be sorted first. We can hardly go forward when our youth are being brainwashed with this degrading violence on tap

DP and I were talking about this yesterday!
Yet another high profile male had to resign for sexual misconduct, we were talking about how sexualised the working atmosphere must have become.
I mean, I'm sure men didn't always try to so blatantly get sexual favours from a woman he worked with, the public fallout would have been too great a risk.

But men have constant access to a huge variety of porn on tap. No doubt most are taking up the offer. Now they seem to be completely unable to restrain themselves.

Apart from the fact, how can you not be psychologically effected by constant exposure to women taking what they're given in a sexual context, groaning and whatnot over being basically hurt, watching other men act as the aggressor... getting off on it... I mean it would be impossible for this NOT to shape your view of women.

(Before the "but men also watch women being dominant", this dynamic will never appear in the top 20 or even top 50. We know men prefer to watch women taking rather than enjoying sex. And before the "women watch porn too" this accounts for less than 5% porn consumption so it's hardly worth mentioning)

Unfortunately you can't control or "sort out" internet porn. So what can we do.

No.

But there is certainly a polarisation of views, especially among the younger generation.

If you talk to teenage boys/young men, many of them feel disenfranchised. They are told st schools that they are rubbish and that they should be ‘more like the girls’, told that they are sec pests for being teenagers and told that they are responsible for the violence in the world.

If they try to express a view, they are told that they cannot even say them as they are encouraging patriarchal ‘myths’ or corrupting ‘safe spaces’.

So you see the kickback, the disgusting violent porn, the whole ‘trans’ thing. Both of these are not right but they are a reaction to something. They did not emerge in a vacuum. The whole ‘transphobia’ thing and silencing tactics are taking their playbook directly from the radical feminist movement.

Men and women (and especially young ones) need to be able to talk honestly to one another. There should be no banned subjects or off-limit ideas.

At the moment we have a dialogue aux sourds,with no winners.

The thing is, it's almost like it's so endemic that people don't notice. There are so many stories in the news about male violence, specifically violence against women, but no one ever seems to pick up on the sexes of the perpetrators and victims. Some people think that their sex is 'irrelevant', I think, I have seen people say it on here. But if you by ignore the fact that nearly all these crimes are being perpetrated by men, you will never get to the root cause of the problem and you will never solve it.

Whenever there is a terrorist attack or mass shooting, the first thing most people are looking for is the race of the perpetrator, as that will be a huge factor in the discourse afterwards, and how we can stop this sort of thing. But people already seem to know that the perpetrator will be a man. And they just seem to accept that without question.

Meanwhile, people are giving anyone who calls themselves a feminist a hard time and taking the piss out of them for this, that and the other.

Violence targeted at children is getting worse too. From mass abuse eg Rotherham to child soldiers, abductions, targeted in war, to the targeted advertising and violent games, social media and the elitism vein running through their education system.

I feel that all vulnerable groups have had it hard in an increasingly violent patriarchal culture.

Unicef has stated as much. They've also said that there are many trying to help those affected but it is after the fact and not preventing it. Sadly, Unicef's own deputy director has now resigned due to his inappropriate behaviour to women during his time at save the children. So even the charity that reports on the scale of abuse for vulnerable people has problems with their male staff. At the very top.

This is the problem. We know all this violent aggressive language, images and physical acts are happening to women and children worldwide and that many charities are meant to help with the aftermath but we aren't doing anything to stop it happening in the first place and even the charities helping after the fact are infiltrated or run by the very same people doing the damage.

The whole system is looking to me like jobs for the boys causing the problem then being paid to clean it up.

The only solution is more women in power. In Rwanda 60% of their parliament are women to prevent repition of their atrocity. Similarly there is a police force in South America that only employs women as the vast majority of male officers were corrupt.

Power corrupts but women have more to lose through corruption and so are less likely to do it imo.

Yes, on a personal level and a global one. What truly opened my eyes to how much men ( as a class ) hate women ( as a class ) was the recent murder and rape of a woman involving a car jack.

The whole ‘transphobia’ thing and silencing tactics are taking their playbook directly from the radical feminist movement

If you look more clearly you will see how TRAs have appropriated the language of all opressed groups, eg those suffering racial opression under apartheid, opression of African Americans, religious opression, sex based opression, class based opression, for their own ends. Not just the language of feminist movements.
The difference between TRA "liberation" and those movements they appropriate is that theirs is built on hijacking other causes such as LGB/Women's rights, rather than fighting their own cause.

They don't half love to hijack the feminist movement though that's granted. Even calling them selves the new suffragettes! You think there's no limit to appropriation? You're wrong.

I agree that young men can end up feeling disenfranchised and that is behind some of the violence we see in America. However, I disagree that it's down to them being told men are shit. I think they are getting a very confused and mixed up message that on the one hand masculinity is power but that you can only reach that point if you are rich and part of the system. So it becomes horribly confusing. Same with sexual conduct. Here is porn freely available showing abuse of women and children. But in real life you are not to do it unless you are a powerful male and then it's ok. It's a contradiction.

Then you have those clubs for young men that are likely to network and become powerful like the Bullington set. They have initiation tasks aka pigs head weirdness. They do it so that they all have something on each other so that when they get into power they don't whistle blow eachother as they know if they do the guy they ratted out will reveal what they did at the club when they were 19.

I believe some of the abusive behaviour happens to keep people in check. A bit like taking pictures of women in sexual situations to use against then later on. These male clubs all do weird shit in order to hold each other to task and stop members from calling each other out for abusive behaviour.

Ronan farrow said he could help the weinstein victims because everyone already knew about his skeletons and so there was no fear of being outed plus he had insider knowledge from his childhood and hadn't been initiated into Hollywood as an actor or worker dependent on keeping his mouth shut.