Dickpandering in feminism

[SwearyWhitehouse]

Is anyone else a bit nonplussed at this? Feminism is surely by women and for women. In order for it to have any hope of succeeding it must centre women and be women led. We keep saying that men cannot come into women’s spaces, even if they identify as women, yet we seem to be championing men who do the bare minimum or who speak over the top of talented, diligent, hardworking women and take all the credit. Who silence women using block lists or by muscling them out of groups for disagreeing with them or pointing out that theyre speaking for women rather than elevating our voices.

Why is Glinner, for example, being lauded for writing a piece on Challenor when women shared all that information months ago? He’s busy kicking women out of working groups whilst taking credit for their work. If he called himself a woman whilst doing this we’d have no truck with it.

Just because these men don’t claim womanhood doesn’t mean they’re not infiltrating women’s spaces. We need to pay attention.

Can you point us towards those you consider to be dickpanderers on this thread?

I've been guilty of dickpandering and I daresay I will be again. I'm grateful that feminist analysis helps me recognise the pattern.

I'm aware that I give men much less leeway than I give women. But I try to be fair, and not allow my bias to influence me.

God me too Outandabout! I'm automatically suspicious of men's motives, Nanna broom at the ready in case my suspicions prove correct..

I've been guilty of dickpandering and I daresay I will be again. I'm grateful that feminist analysis helps me recognise the pattern.

Same

So as I say , as a rule of thumb, if men are okay with what you're saying then you're probably not feministing right

I'm sure the pimp and punter lobby will be delighted to hear that you think there is no difference between marriage and prostitution.

I've been guilty of dickpandering and I daresay I will be again. I'm grateful that feminist analysis helps me recognise the pattern.

Indeed.

I've been guilty of dickpandering and I daresay I will be again. I'm grateful that feminist analysis helps me recognise the pattern.

Totally agree with this. But I still dislike the term. I think to me it sounds like a bad choice women make but in reality I think more often it is women conforming to expectations without seeing alternatives.
Of course some women do deliberately pander to male whims, either to keep themselves safe, or to get something in exchange. I find the fact they feel they need to appalling rather than the fact they do. The term 'dickpandering' just sounds a bit too much like a criticism of women to me.

However this might just be my lack of knowledge in linguistics.

Outanabout a failed attempt at snark on my part, sorry, I’m not the one calling out dickpanderers here especially given, in some eyes, I probably am one since I don’t think giving praise or thanks where due to a man (aka fawning) is necessarily anti-feminist.

LangCleg not asking for a roll out of the red carpet and a parade but let’s not pull the rug out from underneath the mostly other women who come here either. No, we don’t have to ‘be kind, nice and welcoming’ but we don’t have to be arseholes either. And to me calling other posters ‘dickpanderers’ is being an arsehole as is saying women aren’t feminist or GC enough or feminist or GC at all because they haven’t met whatever lofty bar that has been set somewhere else.

well apparently my pimp (DH) is treating me quite well. Just this week alone he's taken me out to lunch and shopping for luggage for an upcoming European trip. Also tonight out for dinner since neither of us could be bothered to cook (both DS out).

Clearly I have the skills to pay the bills. Not bad for someone with their 20th anniversary coming up.

This continual judgement and denigrating of women that are married is not really new. It's decades old and frankly quite boring. It's always implying the woman is weak, not always the case. Any relationship is a complicated mix of common beliefs, understanding, some compromise, differing opinions... a learning curve and balancing act. I could add in sexual attraction but I'll refrain because my example is meant to actually be an example of interpersonal relationships.

Talk like this is not helpful to lurkers or women that are trying to feel comfortable posting here. So many posters, too many to name are patient and helpful and encouraging. Seems there is a recent influx of posters that are critical and judging.

For this lurker, this is very very sad to see. Especially after the beautiful thread yesterday inviting lurkers to share their thoughts. Many of us were inspired by the power of sisterhood. This thread is potentially the opposite. Perhaps that is the purpose.

I don't call myself a feminist. I don't like labels -- any labels. But I have very much appreciated learning the nuances between different types of feminism from the ladies here, and I have respect and love for everyone. I want every woman to feel safe and encouraged and empowered to be the woman they want to be. There is no right or wrong way to "do" woman or femininity.

If feminism isn't about protecting and promoting all women and their rights to autonomy, then maybe "feminism" is a misnomer. If one group of women is oppressing another group of women because they aren't "woman enough" or the "right kind" of women, it is still oppression. This is what men do to us. We have to do better for ourselves and each other. This is what we need to fight. Together.

Women uniting to stand and fight together for each other and our daughters and granddaughters is a beautiful thing. Our numbers give us strength and courage and power. We need more of it, or we become our own worst enemies.

Men can be friends and allies, and should be. Men have just as much right and reason to want to protect women as we do. Men have mothers and grandmothers and daughters and sisters and wives -- so many women that they love and respect. We can give credit where credit is due without sacrificing our autonomy. Or dickpandering.

Okay. I'll slide back into the shadows now to lurk and read and learn. Please keep being your own beautiful and amazing selves, Ladies.

Clearly I have the skills to pay the bills

That made me smile but I expect it will be taken out of context to show the point has been proven.

I'm not saying fuck off (see above) but we need to acknowledge that not everybody here is posting from a feminist perspective

I'm not academically trained on the feminist perspective and I have found this board extremely useful as a learning tool, though I have considered myself a feminist my entire life, but I do wonder at what the ins and outs of the feminist perspective are? Are some of us, unconsciously, posting non-feminist opinions, for example?

I posted about an item on the BBC about a "shortage" of lapdancing clubs and really did not present the topic properly, but was still surprising at getting the recipe treatment.

If feminism isn't about protecting and promoting all women and their rights to autonomy, then maybe "feminism" is a misnomer.

Feminism is about fighting for all women.

That doesn't mean we're always going to agree or even necessarily like each other very much.

Women uniting to stand and fight together for each other and our daughters and granddaughters is a beautiful thing.

Absolutely it is. But first we have to collectively decide what the issues are, what our goals are, what tactics we will use, how it will be organised, who's doing what, whether it will cost, how to get the money ... what pub we're going to afterwards ...

And there will be disagreements and sometimes arguments. And sometimes people will fall out. And we carry on

I do wonder at what the ins and outs of the feminist perspective are?

Are you here primarily because you're interested in feminism/women's rights? That's literally it! It's not meant as some sort of purity test.

I clarified in a later post: Are you posting from a feminist perspective as opposed to - a conservative religious perspective, a transsexual rights perspective, a free speech perspective, a fairness in sport perspective, a child focused perspective ... (as I said there are lots of overlaps with some of these)

If you're posting here primarily because of an interest in feminism then you are posting from a feminist perspective.

That's all. No ins and outs, nothing clever, no hidden traps, no reading required

Thanks Pencils. Got it now. And many thanks to all the brilliant women who post here everyday.

But why does the gender critical movement need to be from a feminist perspective? It affects everyone, from all walks of life. It doesn't just affect feminists or women generally. Therefore, we should be encouraging all opinions.

I read that comment as saying that FWR is intended for specifically feminist perspectives. And that broader “GC” input from other perspectives, while also valid and important, might be better placed elsewhere.

I think I understand where the longer term members are coming from on this. Eg, I’m a lone parent on the Lone Parents board. Sometimes married mothers whose husbands “are always working away” feel like they are lone parents. Fair enough. But if they all flocked to Lone Parents I might be non-plussed - there is some overlap on issues (as with feminism / GC). But they are not the same, and sometimes might actually be in conflict.

On the other hand, some posters on “Lurkers” have said they do not feel smart or worthwhile enough to post here. And personally I would value hearing more of their perspectives - even if they are not strictly “feminist” per se. That’s why I wonder if a specific “GC” board might be useful - although as Pencils notes upthread, many GC topics could also fit into existing boards.

(PS Marion, Coy and other lurkers, for example, I certainly don’t think anyone would want you to “slide back into the shadows,” as someone put it!)

2BthatUnnoticed so you think trans issues should be off the FWR boards to allay the concerns of those who think they’re not quite clever or articulate enough to participate here and because they might feel less intimidated in another space?

Nah. I’m not buying that. It’s about keeping the purity of this space unsullied by the presence of those who are not feminist enough or just ‘not our kind of feminist darling”. Who exactly is in charge of deciding that btw? I’ve come across enough meangirls in my time to recognize “you can’t sit with us” when I hear it, no matter how it’s couched.

But hey, lobby for that if that’s what you think is the way to go, though frankly, sliding back into the shadows is precisely what will happen for those who have recently dipped a toe in the waters here yet are now deemed not quite good enough to interact. Let’s face it, how fucking degrading to be shunted off to the B stream. Who’s signing up for that kind of public humiliation?

Goodness no MagneticSingularity - I’m not a purist at all - I’d probably be over on “GC” myself! I’m still new and working things out.

Was thinking my own perspective might not be feminist enough! Because my own first concern is child protection. So if I see a man with 13mln followers speak up - yes, I’ll pander to that, inherent sexism notwithstanding.

Because I am desperately worried about child safeguarding. And we live in a patriarchy where children are only as safe as women can convince men they should be. And many men will not listen to women - no matter how brilliant. But they may listen to a male comedian.

I’m aware of the problematic dynamics (and I try to centre women where I can). But I grew up in the Church and saw the catastrophic impact of a small no. abusive males + removal of safeguarding. I see the same thing unfolding now.

But I can also see how galling it must be for hardworking feminists to see a man receive accolades for a few laconic tweets - when they have been slogging away for years and nobody listened.

I didn’t mean to offend anyone - apologies if it came across wrong.

I’ve come across enough meangirls in my time to recognize “you can’t sit with us” when I hear it, no matter how it’s couched.

I would regard myself as one of the purist feminists and I am definitely not welcome here. I do, however, plan to stick around for a bit. The discussions I've had have born enough feminist fruit for it to be worthwhile

But why does the gender critical movement need to be from a feminist perspective? It affects everyone, from all walks of life. It doesn't just affect feminists or women generally. Therefore, we should be encouraging all opinions.m

It doesn't have to be from a feminist perspective. It would be nice, however, if everybody recognized that it was radical feminists who recognized it as the problem for women that it is, to the extent that Janice Raymond wrote The Transsexual Empire in 1979, and was of course ignored by everybody. Maybe she deserves a bit of respect.

Other than that I think it's nice if all sorts of people from all walks of life protest against trans.