“Women basically already have equal rights in the West”

[Ethelfleda]

I’ve heard this statement from a few people over the past year or so, always from men.
I know they’re wrong but I so rarely know how to tell them they’re wrong.
I want to tell them they’re wrong without patronising them because it is my belief that once you do this, you alienate your audience and they won’t ever come around to your way of thinking.

What do you say to this statement??

Keep digging, old chap.

Oh, trust me, they will. It's like death and taxes.

I think it’s likely rooted in evolutionary programming more than fairy stories, and I’m not just saying that to disagree with you.

If it's evolutionary programming, how come both of us are child-free? Surely, evolutionary programming would apply to everyone because we would all inherit it from our parents?

And who gives a shit about these messages anyway?

Absorbing them isn't a deliberate choice.

there’s also a lot of social programming about the hero getting the girl.

There is, and it's part of male entitlement to women's bodies. "I did all the heroing stuff, what do you mean you don't want sex with me?"

You realise that these things called "trade unions" and "employment tribunals" exist?

I’m a member of a union and it doesn’t stop management prioritising those workers that are prepared to sacrifice their work/life balance for company profits - this is why people brownnose. If you’re non confrontational like my friend it’s difficult to be the only one in the team who says no.

Similarly, the equality act doesn’t stop people discriminating against women of childbearing age (how can you prove this?).

Surely this is all basic knowledge?

If it's evolutionary programming, how come both of us are child-free? Surely, evolutionary programming would apply to everyone because we would all inherit it from our parents?

Who knows? I’ve got ADHD, OCD, and Dyspraxia so I’m not really neurotic typical. Besides, I changed career in my early 30s and was never really happy up until then - I hated the corporate life.

I’m only now enjoying my life like most of my friends were 15 years ago and I’m not prepared to sacrifice it all for kids tbh. I may regret that but I can hardly have kids on principle.

There is, and it's part of male entitlement to women's bodies. "I did all the heroing stuff, what do you mean you don't want sex with me?"

Well, it works. Loads of women love a rugged hero. I’d wager a lot of it comes down to survivalism, like in that study above where women associated ‘sexist’ men with being better resource providers.

I’m a member of a union and it doesn’t stop management prioritising those workers that are prepared to sacrifice their work/life balance for company profits - this is why people brownnose. If you’re non confrontational like my friend it’s difficult to be the only one in the team who says no.

I get all of that and have left jobs over similar mistreatment. Which is why I don't understand people putting up with it as a long-term situation: I looked for a job with a less shitty employer and managed to land a job where you aren't expected to work ridiculous hours.

That your friend is female indicates that overwork isn't a purely male issue. You said how many women actually want to be breadwinner? and i mean actually do it, working 70 hours per week plus 12 hours for commuting to work? and then went on to illustrate that it isn't about wanting to work such hours but feeling (accurately or otherwise) that one must work such hours. I don't think that men want to work 70 hours/week. Whereas I am extremely happy working 40 hours/week with the safety and independence that comes from having my own money.

That your friend is female indicates that overwork isn't a purely male issue. You said how many women actually want to be breadwinner? and i mean actually do it, working 70 hours per week plus 12 hours for commuting to work? and then went on to illustrate that it isn't about wanting to work such hours but feeling (accurately or otherwise) that one must work such hours. I don't think that men want to work 70 hours/week. Whereas I am extremely happy working 40 hours/week with the safety and independence that comes from having my own money.

I didn’t make the comment you’re attributing to me, but I agree it’s not solely a male thing.

However, it’s normally technical etc jobs that pay overtime (as opposed to set salary) so that probably explains in part why men do more overtime in addition to more being in FT employment.

My partner certainly wouldn’t do it if he wasn’t getting paid 1.5x his hourly rate for overtime. My friend OTOH works 60 hours a week for £27k which she used to get for working 40ish hours - no way I’d be entertaining that!

Loads of women love a rugged hero. I’d wager a lot of it comes down to survivalism, like in that study above where women associated ‘sexist’ men with being better resource providers.

And none of this excuses male sexual entitlement. None of it excuses men raping and beating women and children. Women's sexual attraction doesn't cause male violence and, judging by the number of women leaving their abusive "D"Ps on these boards in the last few weeks, I'd wager that women don't actually find male violence attractive.

neurotic typical

That is a fantastic typo.

I didn’t make the comment you’re attributing to me

Sorry, my mistake, rereading it was Bundevac.

Care work is often hourly-rate and so there's "overtime" in the sense of "you work more, you get paid more". It's female-dominated. I think that overwork is a problem better ascribed to capitalism than to sexism.

And none of this excuses male sexual entitlement. None of it excuses men raping and beating women and children. Women's sexual attraction doesn't cause male violence and, judging by the number of women leaving their abusive "D"Ps on these boards in the last few weeks, I'd wager that women don't actually find male violence attractive.

Surely nobody needs to read feminist theory though to know that rugged men don’t have an excuse to rape women (”what do you mean ‘no’....look at my manly beard!”) or to work out that women don’t find violence attractive.

But it’s certainly a nuanced debate. Women might not like thuggery, but there’s evidence that they prefer assertive, sexist, and traditional men, and these men almost certainly display greater tendencies towards violence. It likely depends who the violence is directed at.

It can also be argued that sexual attraction does influence male violence, although likely less in developed society. It’s proven that men become more competitive in the presence of women and that their testosterone rises - a hormone associated with increased fight/flight response and more prevalent in both violent men and women. Fighting over a female mate is extremely common in the animal kingdom and likely still affects male humans in some manner even if largely suppressed. However, it’s not an excuse, just potentially a biological factor affecting things.

I think that overwork is a problem better ascribed to capitalism than to sexism.

I agree, although it becomes a little circular when you consider that men largely created capitalist society. But in individual cases money is almost certainly the driving force.

I was so disappointed to get to the end of this thread and realise TehBewilderness has yet to post a photo of the cat.

The one round our end is all black and sounds like a bloody air raid siren all night at the moment.

9449008205496278989876

Women might not like thuggery, but there’s evidence that they prefer assertive, sexist, and traditional men, and these men almost certainly display greater tendencies towards violence. It likely depends who the violence is directed at.

You should read “A Woman in Berlin”. It’s a really good insight into this phenomenon which is mostly about protection (from other men).

If you sought the approval of the top dog (ie. the most feared / respected soviet soldier) the other soviet soldiers didn’t rape you. Not because they respected you but because they were afraid of the person you “belonged to”.

Honestly. I hate reading books but but I read it in about two days.

I’m only now enjoying my life like most of my friends were 15 years ago and I’m not prepared to sacrifice it all for kids tbh. I may regret that but I can hardly have kids on principle

Pregnancy and children really are the crux of the issue in many respects....because for a woman these experiences change & impact their life in far more profound ways ( obviously), than they do men.

This is inevitable, to a large extent, in my view & my experience. And not all of that is down to social conditioning, as goes some of the dogma.

If one has not had children then it ca be very difficult to appreciate the profound shift and change this creates, not just practically, but emotionally and instinctively. Unless a woman fails to bond with her child at all.....some pretty potent feelings kick in. Add to that the whole view of the world and the value system tends to shift too......often leading women to make quite different choices and decisions.

Men/fathers can be quite profoundly impacted to...and in positive ways. Not all men are violent, woman hating bastards; but, clearly, males can also more easily walk away.

Rejecting motherhood or having children is quite a common choice or strategy for many women theses days..as they instinctively sense how profoundly it would change their life, even as many others actively desire to have children; while others end up 'falling into' motherhood, through unplanned circumstance.

What interests me more and more in recent times, is that if a 'feminist' rejects motherhood because it is seen as an oppressive construct & prison ( in our society).....what is it they think womanhood is actually about? Genuine question.What is it that differentiates, if at all, women from men - apart from the obvious physical body?

Is feminism primarily about celebrating femaleness and being a woman, or is it about rejecting 'patriarchy' and male aggression? Are women being viewed as inevitable victims, and men seen as being inevitable aggressors, or is there something positive and celebratory and different about being a woman? If so, what are these differences?

"The overwhelming majority of at-sea ship evacuations do not follow the Birkenhead Drill and men have a higher survival rate than women and children, with the crew faring best of all. Have a research paper proving this and a layperson's summary."

here you go: "However, it is most difficult for the non-evacuated inhabitants of the village of Bistrica, which is still cut off from the world. Women and children have been pulled by helicopters and men are still in the village, sleeping in the forest and appealing to the Zenica authorities to help them because, as they say, after the helicopter leaves, they have been forgotten despite a very difficult situation", from this link: . do you have example that says men and children are evucuated? do you think it's high status of these men that left them stranded in open field?

"Don't be silly, of course everyone with a penis commutes for precisely 12 hours per week!"

how about this: Don't be silly, of course everyone with a vagina is stranded in a kitchen, barefoot and pregnant?

who ever said everyone?

..and if there are 'differences' between men & women, from what or where do they originate. Are these differences purely socially constructed, or are they 'natural'?

"If you work 70 hours/week, that's on you for not having a spine to tell your employer to give you a manageable workload."

or maybe you need to put bread on the table in order to be breadwinner?

Just feminism is about women's liberation and the end to reproductive exploitation and control. Womanhood isn't about anything; it's just personhood in a female body.

These are not tricky questions, unless you've some residual unconscious sexism re what a woman is.

The cat is beautiful, TehBewilderness. That was just the tonic I needed, ta.

Just feminism is about women's liberation and the end to reproductive exploitation and control. Womanhood isn't about anything; it's just personhood in a female body.These are not tricky questions, unless you've some residual unconscious sexism re what a woman is

It is far too easy to spout mantras rather than engage in thoughtful discussion, or to look closely at your automatic positions and claims. There is no virtue in that, however...It's like the TRA " no debate" stance.

I posed some considered questions...you just come back with stock phrases and petty insinuations.For example, who says having children needs to be exploitative? The female body, which you suggest is the only difference between men and women, is predicated on childbirth. That is not a minor thing. It is driven by biology, nature, hormones, and has implications and consequences for our lives

That's not to say you must have children ( and sounds like you maybe don't...maybe due to particularly negative associations or experiences), but once you do, life takes on a different quality and shape.

It sounds like you have plenty of residual issues of your own. Best deal with those before you go pointing at others. There are many ways of defining what feminism means, and there are certainly some who would call themselves feminists who believe that living one's life in a female body and celebrating some of what that implies is entirely possible.

These are not tricky questions, unless you've some residual unconscious sexism re what a woman is

They seem to be for you, though..as you seem to have mainly residual negative associations with being a woman.

I've been examining my own position and experiences with regard to feminism for most of my life, Just.

We can talk about how the patriarchal system of male dominance is founded in their need to control our reproductive capacity to suit their own need to ensure paternity and inheritance rights, but if you're going to accuse me of being an idiot spouting buzzwords just because I'm using accurate terminology that you haven't yet come to grips with, I'd rather not bother. Instead I direct you to Gerda Lerner and Lierre Keith, among others.

I'm using accurate terminology that you haven't yet come to grips with, I'd rather not bother. Instead I direct you to Gerda Lerner and Lierre Keith, among others

I'm not sure why so much hostility and assumption of 'superior' credentials? All I was trying to do, in the first instance, was pose some questions for discussion....none of which you really engaged with. My experience of life is that one changes and so does one's view of life...over time, subject to circumstance, and event. Life, and all human life, on earth is multi-faceted, nuanced and often complex.

We all live our lives, and view that life, through the lens of our own experiences and our reflected understanding of those experieneces I don't imagine you are any more experienced than me - but it clear your experiences and your 'learning' have taken on a different shape according to your nature, and your circumstance.

I could, similarly, point you to all of my inspirations and influences, but what would be the point of that, and how would it help...except to re-affirm one's own bias, and maybe to share some of your self with others. That requires an element of collegiality and trust, though. But quite a few times on this forum I feel like, somehow, I've strayed into 'enemy' territory...with some making hostile, personal or sarcastic comments - for the sin of disagreement or for not kow-towing to dogma of one sort or other.

If your version of feminism really is just about women's inherent victimhood, and the idea that the female body and its natural functions are somehow in need of rejection, or that motherhood automatically means subjugation, then it is not a version of feminism that I share.

I don't automatically distrust or hate men, either.

I do think we have to acknowledge our biological differences because when you say they don't matter or don't exist you get ridiculous "gender theory" that claims that being a woman is divorced from our objective bodily reality. And of course, who suffers most when that is accepted - women and children.