Do women have the right to say they feel uncomfortable over a name?

[SarahNade]

I hope this is as safe place to ask this. I am on a discussion on another thread, and it seems many think that a woman has no right to ask not to be addressed by a colloquial term, and if she does ask, she is the one being unreasonable for daring to stick her neck out, she is the one overreacting, for merely asking. Yet the male who went politely asked, gets offended that a woman dares utter her discomfort, and gets abusive with her. So why is it the woman who is 'overreacting' by merely asking not to be called something, but the man is not seen as overreacting by taking offence to her request and getting indignant?

Do women have the right to ask politely not be called something, without being told they are 'overreacting'? Or should women accept being called a term they don't like, shut up and put up with it in case she gets the male in trouble?

Intent is always revealed when the man is challenged. A man who intends no harm doesn't get angry or abusive if asked to stop what he's doing that is causing discomfort. On the other hand men who are exerting misogynistic power get furious when women call them out on it.

This is the entire point people are missing, in their 'in my opinion it isn't sexist so that OP was wrong' spiel. After all these pages on both threads, people still don't get it, they focus on the word only, not the actions of the man who got defensive because a woman asked him to stop calling her a word. As I said before, put aside the 'is-it-or-isn't-it' debate over the word. The crux of the issue is that a woman felt uncomfortable. Stated her boundaries (so to speak). And is told by other members of the sisterhood on here that SHE is in the wrong for 'saying anything' at all.

Tbh I think a lot those mumsnetters use that argument because if they didn't they'd have to stop and think who exactly calls women and men what, realise the discrepancy and ask themselves that exact same question. Which leads to an uncomfortable answer/realisation.

So it's easier to claim and pretend that every pet,duck,love etc is used equally by men and women towards men and women.

... Women feel these experiences differently. It's about the intent and use of those words. They're not blanket 'bad'. I'd feel intimidated by a drunk man shouting 'all right love' across the street but not a bus driver saying 'thanks love' when I pay. There isn't one easy black and white way of defining this.

There is in fact, a very easy and simple way of defining it. Do they do it to men? If they don't it's sexist. Clearly you're not going to pull up every bus driver but the OP of the other thread was being made to feel uncomfortable by a man on her own doorstep. She had every right to say something. Do you think she was wrong.

Just like some women marry, some don't, some wear high heels, some don't, some don't mind or even like bring called 'pet' by a non-threatening male in a helping situation. Your tone is rather patronising in suggesting that those in disagreement are blind victims of the status quo. You aren't hearing the experience of other feminists who see this differently.

Weirdly you sound quite patronising yourself. I'm disagreeing with other women. It's allowed.

WhiskeyLullaby that’s such a good point about delivery men.

I often think that deliver men have the real insight into how women actually are: dishevelled, no makeup, un-bra’d and floppy-boobed.

That’s why I love the Pizza Guy so much. He sees me as I really am and yet he keeps returning.

I've never felt more powerful in my life.

But you did have some power of him because you could have made a complaint to his employer about his conduct. What he did in that instance was unequivocally wrong but in the case of the grocery delivery man I don't think it is clear cut.

There is too much ambiguity to come down on one side or the other. We know literally a couple of sentences that were said. What else was said by all.aprties that contributed to the atmosphere? It's very weird if all the op said (politely) was "please don't call me love" that the driver immediately accused her of being abusive. So that makes me question what else had been said, whether the situation was escalating, whether the customer was starting to get irate about her missing chicken and was raising her voice etc.

I have never known an interaction with a customer to go from being cordial to immediately leap to a retail worker accusing the customer of being abusive. Ime that doesn't happen and so I'm reading between the lines, particularly given her demand that she absolutely had to have something to roast for lunch on Sunday - that sounds like she was becoming belligerent about her missing item.

Funnily enough all the class warriors on this thread haven't come out battling for me. I was in a subordinate position (very subordinate) to my boss and he hounded me out of my job. All because I asked him politely not to call me darling. I also didn't receive the annual bonus that literally everybody in the company got because he decided I didn't deserve one, so I suffered materially too.

The delivery driver, got what? A woman asking him politely not to call her love. He got to walk away whilst calling her abusive.

If we're talking about class differentials and power over, my boss definitely abused his over me. So where's my six page or whatever it is now thread defending me? Or is there a difference in status between the delivery man and me which makes what happened to him very very important, whilst my experience can be ignored? Even by people who claim to care so much about classism (that they ignore sexism and misogyny).

So that makes me question what else had been said, whether the situation was escalating, whether the customer was starting to get irate about her missing chicken and was raising her voice etc.

But surely that makes his actions more malevolent! If you’re in the middle of a dispute with them you wouldn’t continue to call them “love” unless you were deliberately trying to belittle them.

Also, did we miss the bit where her husband came to her defence? Did the delivery man call her DH love as well I wonder?

It is routine for men to use these to women they don’t know, barely know or work with. Why do people think this might be?

It is also routine for women to address men and women that they barely know as love, pet, duck etc. Why do think that would be?

If the motive behind men doing it is always sexist what is the motive behind women doing it?

But you did have some power of him because you could have made a complaint to his employer about his conduct.

That's like saying that women who are being harassed,assaulted,raped abused etc have power over the men that did those things because they can report them to their boss or the police.

It is also routine for women to address men and women that they barely know as love, pet, duck etc. Why do think that would be?

The difference is MEN AND WOMEN.
You said it yourself.

So where's my six page or whatever it is now thread defending me?

Start your own thread to discuss it then.

I have never known an interaction with a customer to go from being cordial to immediately leap to a retail worker accusing the customer of being abusive.

When men are being sexist in a sweet cordial way and you call them on it, they immediately get very angry. You'd need to do it to experience it though. Men accuse women who stand up to them of being abusive all the time. It's called DARVO and it's commonly reported both in Relationships and FWR.

hahaha, not even the tiniest droplet of sympathy.

Yes I'm going to HH.

@WotchaTalkinBoutWillis Calling someone love round these parts is completely normal, and nothing to do with being sexist.

Completely normal to you maybe, not to the rest of the enlightened western 2019 first world. Using the 'n' word may be still (and is from my research) 'completely normal' in America's deep south. That doesn't make it right. Just because something is 'completely normal' somewhere, does not make it morally right or socially acceptable.
Many people are resistant to change and progress. Because a country is backward/behind the times and still think a man calling a woman love or an 80 year old man of his generation calling an African American the n word, doesn't make it right. When we know better, we do better. Well, at least that's what I thought......

The difference is MEN AND WOMEN.
You said it yourself.

So why do women call other women, and men, pet, love, duck?

Are you honestly saying that men can never use it towards women in the way that women use the same words towards other women or men eg a friendly greeting?

I would agree that it's sexist if the delivery man addressed the op as love and then when her husband turned up he called him sir. Clearly that's sexist. However, if he called her love and him mate then to me, he's just using an informal form of address. That's the difference to me.

Yes, men could use "love," in a sexist way just as women could use it in a demeaning way towards other women and men.

Equally it can be used in a friendly way by anyone.

Completely normal to you maybe, not to the rest of the enlightened western 2019 first world.

Completely normal throughout the UK. Are you honestly telling the citizens of another country how to speak?

Yes I'm going to HH.

Please don't address my by my initials. I find that rude. I would like to be addressed by my full name. Thank you.

@SarahNade Britain may be 'behind the times' in many respects but as a Black female if I had to choose between living in Australia and Britain...well let's just say it would be an easy choice.

Is this really the hill you want to die on HH? You said yourself you don't like being called names like that, but you're still trying to gaslight women when they don't like men calling them and only them, not men, love.

Why doesn't he call them both "mate". Where I live some men call everybody they talk to 'pal'. I like it, it's friendly. "Love" isn't.

I won't use your initials then. No problem.

Oops sorry, typed the other reply before I saw your post.

@PlanDeRaccordement I have not said my class. Why do you assume mine is higher than yours?

Did you just say that with a straight face? You've been assuming the class of the OP of the other thread, when for all you know, she herself could have been a delivery driver on her day off. The irony is you are bringing class into it, when class is not an issue in this day and age, you make assumptions about an OP's class, but then say "why do you assume mine is higher than yours?*

Why do you assume the OP of that thread's class is higher than the delivery driver? Just because she got some groceries delivered on what may have been her day off? You insert class by suggesting a delivery driver is 'lower class', yet you don't know the occupation of the recipient. Did it not ever occur to you that she recipient may have been a toilet cleaner merely getting groceries delivered on her day off? No. You made assumptions about them and their class. Dunny cleaners or plumbers or road workers can get groceries delivered, too, you know.

I would agree that it's sexist if the delivery man addressed the op as love and then when her husband turned up he called him sir. Clearly that's sexist.

But that happens all the time! The men I hang out with are often called sir when being served whilst I get called nothing or “darling”. By the time DS was 15 he’d had his hand shaken far more times than I had in my whole life. ok slight exag. He’d been called Big Man too. Which is cringe. No girl ever gets called Big Woman do they? Because to do so would be to imply she’s unattractive, so bound are women by the tyranny of appearance.

However, if he called her love and him mate then to me, he's just using an informal form of address. That's the difference to me.

But mate is lovely and inclusive and comradely. I want to be called mate!

My friend who is Brazilian calls everyone “my friend”which i love. Gender neutral. I might adopt that. People will look at me a bit funny at first but it’ll catch on I’m sure.

Is this really the hill you want to die on HH?

So I politely asked you not to use my initials and yet you persisted. According to you this is refusing to accept boundaries, to assert dominance, to belittle.

So basically you are no better than the delivery man in trampling boundaries and respecting a request to address someone in a manner that they find acceptable. Interesting.

But that happens all the time! The men I hang out with are often called sir when being served whilst I get called nothing or “darling”.

Then that is sexist. But that doesn't mean that the incident in the op was sexist nor that every other time a man calls a woman love he is being sexist.

Sometimes a man using "love" is being sexist. Sometimes a woman using "love" is being patronising or demeaning. Sometimes both are being friendly.

But mate is lovely and inclusive and comradely. I want to be called mate!

Well, then ask people to call you mate.

Personally I don't like it and I would take offence if I were called mate.

Horses for courses I guess.