Interesting article on sexism and patriarchy

[Ambroise]

This has been rattling a fair few men on Twitter and Facebook:

conatusnews.com/new-left-sexism-patriarchy/

I think they are having difficulty accepting a man calling out male behaviour and attitudes.

I love that, thank you for sharing. The illustration of benevolent sexism at the end is particularly helpful

I particularly enjoyed the ‘testerical’ men in the comments and on Social Media who have a massive issue with the article but can’t articulate what it is that troubles them about it.

Thanks Alex, needed some sarcasm to wake me up this morning! :)

the concept of ‘gender’; rather than explaining this difference purely in terms of biology, postmodern interpretations rely on the invention of some kind of male & female ‘essence’ which can, though an accident of birth, be transferred into the ‘opposite’ kind of body. This is a very standard way in which ideologies become more flexible in order to maintain their hegemony– the creation of release valves which justify the existence of people outside common social norms. This is so common that it can be found in cultures all over the world–a box in which to put people who do not neatly fit into the ordinary boxes. For some reason, this approach, including the examples from other cultures, is being touted as the progressive solution to sexism, whereas in reality it is merely sexism’s response to progressive critique.

This my favourite excellent part of an entirely excellent article.

I did rather enjoy the petulant 'Rubbish!' comments at the end in a way. They serve as useful contrast to the articulate nature of the article content.

Oh, that's an interesting article.

Yes. I'd not come across this website before, it looks like it may have some other interesting stuff eg there's a podcast- which I've not yet listened to myself -
'Julie Bindel’s Fifteen Years of Hell'
conatusnews.com/19181-2/

I did rather enjoy the petulant 'Rubbish!' comments at the end in a way. They serve as useful contrast to the articulate nature of the article content

I expect having wasted time reading it they couldn't be bothered wasting any more time on a finely honed critique when "rubbish" says it all. I admit I gave up about halfway through but the comment "Grievance studies" seemed accurate.

MargueritaPink, considering your contributions to this board, both in this nickname and previous ones, are usually ones I respect and even learn from, that's a somewhat disappointing response from you.

I found nothing in it except a general lefty whining about capitalism and connecting that to purchasing women's bodies.

I thought the whole article was over-egged to the point of being wholly inedible. Nothing in it resonated for me or my experience of being a woman. There was so much in it I disagreed with it would take an article of similar length to respond to.

Really? I wouldn't particularly peg myself as a political lefty when it comes to capitalism et al, but I thought it was a reasonable piece and the bit I quoted was an excellent summation of the fatal flaw in the Genderist-as-progressive notion.

Nothing in it resonated for me or my experience of being a woman.

There were parts which did not resonate with my own experience either, but which I can recognise from what other women describe. E.g.

It works in part by exploiting the differences in strength and size between many men and women. In order for men and women to be equal, women must be able to fully trust men to never use that inherent power differential to coerce them. Even if the man ultimately possesses only good intentions, a tiny amount of fear can be enough to make the interactions between a man and woman potentially unequal. The awareness that the man could potentially do her harm may affect the way she approaches the interaction, even between equals or subordinates. As long as a woman believes she does not enjoy full, unconditionally guaranteed rights to her own bodily autonomy, she is vulnerable to potential exploitation.

That was the bit that most resonated with me. Knowing that in any interaction, there is the potential for a man to turn nasty. Not knowing who will and who won’t. It can impact on how I approach interactions with men.

Just watched the Julie Bindel pod cast on her "fifteen years of hell" posted at 11.17.39. Thanks Errol .

It never ceases to amaze me just how measured, level headed and insightful Julie is. The river of horror she must have witnessed and to some extent experienced over the years is unimaginable. But is she like the bitter, hateful TRAs ? No. Outstanding person.

I'm surprised anyone thinks there isn't a relationship between capitalism and increased genderism, even amongst right-wingers. Forty years ago, kids all wore similar clothes for playing and had similar toys (barring dollies for girls and trucks for boys). Our Lego was all the same, our cuddly toys were all the same, our bikes were the same - they had to be, as brothers, sisters and cousins all used the same toys and clothes passed down umpteen times.

Now stuff is cheap (thanks, China!), so everyone has the option of pink everything for baby girls and blue everything for baby boys. There is three times the amount of clothing available for baby girls, and even the tshirts have flowers and sparkle on them practically from birth while the boys get more utilitarian wear. (Which is hilarious given that young babies all still just lie around trying to roll over and push up, as they always have since time began.)

I mean, if this hadn't happened in order to get people to buy more stuff and have two sets of everything to push profits up, then what exactly is driving it?

Forty years ago, kids all wore similar clothes for playing and had similar toys (barring dollies for girls and trucks for boys). Our Lego was all the same, our cuddly toys were all the same, our bikes were the same - they had to be, as brothers, sisters and cousins all used the same toys and clothes passed down umpteen times

I see the MN rose- tinted glasses have been put on. I was alive in 1978- life was not like this. I grant you lego only came in primary colours and white but the rest of it? No.

I don't remember anywhere near the level of pinkification that there is now. Me and my friends wore all kinds of colours, things like roller skates where in primary colours and so on. But perhaps I'm remembering false memories Marguerita.

I was a kid in the 60s/70s - there wasn't the same 'pink aisle' effect but quite a lot of toys were quite gendered. I'm not sure whether if I'd not had older brothers whether I'd have the same range of playthings or not. As now, 'proper' bikes were different in shape because boys had crossbars but not so much in colour.

Lots of toys were gendered in the 60s and 70s. Action Man was marketed for boys in 1966 and was very popular in the 70s. I wasn't allowed to have a Barbie (or the UK version Sindy) in the 60s although my brother, who is much younger, had an Action Man.

Dolls tea sets, doll houses, those paper dolls with paper clothes you got on the back of comics like Bunty and Judy were all marketed at girls in the 60s and 70s. Toy kitchens marketed at girls existed.

Googling images of "children in the 70s" brings up results which show less pinkification but does not support the assertion that boys and girls all wore similar clothes for playing.

Re bikes- every one had a bike but the idea that a girl would be happy to have a boy's bike with a crossbar (or vice versa) was a non-starter (certainly in my village)

Am I the only person who had an Action Girl in the 70s? I had Sindy too, but I wasn't allowed a Barbie.

No. I was too old for dolls by the early 70s but judging from these pictures of Action Girl I doubt my mother would have found her any less unacceptable than Sindy or Barbie.

www.flickr.com/photos/37546968@N08/sets/72157619147377338/

I had a Bionic Woman in the seventies....I LOVED Lindsay Wagner! She knocked Lee Majors into a cocked hat!

Bring back the 70s!!!

I see the MN rose- tinted glasses have been put on. I was alive in 1978-

Yes, there were gendered toys but there were also lots of unisex toys and equipment. Very few parents in the 70s would have bought, for example, a pink pram or a pink tricycle - they would have bought or been handed down a neutral one that could be used what they would have assumed would have been one of a few children. (Mind you, I come from poor people - richer kids may well have had the same toys and clothes repeated for every family member in gendered colours. It wasn't my experience in the 70s, though.)