Threads

Topics

Usernames

Mumsnet Logo
Please
or
to access all these features

non-men
36

peppermintteadrinker · 21/11/2020 08:24

I'm a regular reader in here but don't usually post in FC. But just read a tweet by someone involved in my industry to do with diversity in which he refers to non-men. So sick of this shit.

I run a work based account and therefore I can't challenge or unfollow. In principle I want to support this group this man represents to do with racial diversity in the industry but fgs. Non men is just offensive.

Why have we ended up in this minefield that means supporting one under represented group means by default we have to tie it to other groups and all that bloody mess?

I am perfectly happy to support anyone in a minority and firmly believe we should all be treated with respect and dignity but not like this. Why should saying the word woman be so hard and now a political statement?

OP's posts:
Please
or
to access all these features

BraveBananaBadge · 21/11/2020 08:33

I have been pondering this too. A women’s group I know of has started appealing for “fmale identifying” people to get involved. FMALE IDENTIFYING.

I’ve not seen that anywhere else and am frankly too afraid to ask. With benefit of the doubt, I’m wondering if they’ve got a bit confused in their bid to be inclusive and it’s some kind of accidental riff on ‘womxn’. At worst they’ve started picking off letters in the word female so as not to offend... who exactly??

Please
or
to access all these features

ThatIsNotMyUsername · 21/11/2020 08:35

Non men = all not male humans over the age of 16 then?

Please
or
to access all these features

SophocIestheFox · 21/11/2020 08:41

Urgh, non men is horrible. Sympathies, OP.

Can you challenge in person at all? I find it’s much easier to take the heat out when it’s offline. I go for the questioning approach: “I wonder if this language actually discourages women from feeling included?” Sort of thing.

Please
or
to access all these features

peppermintteadrinker · 21/11/2020 08:42

@ThatIsNotMyUsername which is... women? Surely if trans women are women then... it's just women? How is women not inclusive? Who else are we missing if we say women and not non-men? Some people who perhaps identify as neither sex/gender? Why can't we say women and non binary? Non-men is just awful. Are men non-women?

OP's posts:
Please
or
to access all these features

GCAcademic · 21/11/2020 08:47

I can’t imagine that transwomen want to be described as non-men either. It’s just offensive all around. Defining people by what they are not is inherently othering and implies a deviation from a norm or superior entity.

Please
or
to access all these features

ThatIsNotMyUsername · 21/11/2020 08:52

@peppermintteadrinker

*@ThatIsNotMyUsername* which is... women? Surely if trans women are women then... it's just women? How is women not inclusive? Who else are we missing if we say women and not non-men? Some people who perhaps identify as neither sex/gender? Why can't we say women and non binary? Non-men is just awful. Are men non-women?

Hush now silly... we don’t get to make these Bug Decisions now do we.

Now I must get back to knitting fluffy kittens and making throw cushion jam...
Please
or
to access all these features

Aesopfable · 21/11/2020 08:56

@ThatIsNotMyUsername

Non men = all not male humans over the age of 16 then?

And all children of both sexes
Please
or
to access all these features

StanfordPines · 21/11/2020 08:58

I kind of see where this is coming from. A company is wanting to ensure diversity from the standard white man. So by saying you want more applications from non white people you are looking towards black/Asian/Chinese/mixed race etc. Non white covers a whole host of people.

They have then just applied the same logic to the man part of the problem. Non white and non man. Sadly they haven’t thought this through for more than one minute and realised that if they want transmen to apply then saying non man is very off putting to them. It also reaffirms the idea that make the the default, the correct way to be, and that everything else is simply faulty kind of man.

Please
or
to access all these features

Aesopfable · 21/11/2020 08:58

Does his group refer to non-whites too?

Please
or
to access all these features

firedragon101 · 21/11/2020 08:58

Shouldn't it be non men and non women though? I think it's fine to have non men providing you have non women too...! It's all such a load of codswallop isn't it?

Please
or
to access all these features

StanfordPines · 21/11/2020 08:59

*male is the default

Please
or
to access all these features

wonderstuff · 21/11/2020 09:04

Green party do this. They've currently got someone running for a 'non-men' post who is a male who identifies as non-binary. I feel the women are erased when we have people who identify as men and people who don't instead of sex based categories. I'm hoping this trend will eventually go as more people not involved in fringe politics realise how daft it is.

Please
or
to access all these features

CaraDuneRedux · 21/11/2020 09:09

@Aesopfable

Does his group refer to non-whites too?

That's what I was going to ask.

Play him at his own game. Say he's reinforcing the idea that "men" are the norm and everyone else is an amorphous undifferentiated group of "others."

FFS, it's just so offensive.

Women. Women. Women. You can say our name. We're not fucking Voldemort.
Please
or
to access all these features

ThatIsNotMyUsername · 21/11/2020 09:10

I think it includes wombats too. And cats.

Please
or
to access all these features

TyroTerf · 21/11/2020 09:25

Non men = all not male humans over the age of 16 then?

It's worse than that, it's everything in this universe that isn't a sufficiently manly adult human male.

My cat is a non-man. The pile of sick my cat just left in the yard is a non-man. Asteroids and turnips and ducking-stools - all of these things are non-men.

Sometimes I wonder if they realise that for years, men have been trying to tell us that we're not allowed to be annoyed to be referred to under the umbrella term 'man' because it explicitly covers both males and females of the adult human variety.

Man meaning male and also man meaning human, apparently.

And now the new generation of patriarchal twonks are telling us "no, no, of course we don't conflate man and human any more, that would be dreadful. No, we've separated it out, all sorted now, you're a non-man and don't you dare complain about it."

How on earth is that any better?

Please
or
to access all these features

peppermintteadrinker · 21/11/2020 09:25

He represents a group that aims to support people of colour in the sector.

OP's posts:
Please
or
to access all these features

peppermintteadrinker · 21/11/2020 09:27

@CaraDuneRedux "Women. Women. Women. You can say our name. We're not fucking Voldemort"

GrinGrin

OP's posts:
Please
or
to access all these features

StanfordPines · 21/11/2020 09:29

@peppermintteadrinker

He represents a group that aims to support people of colour in the sector.

Is he a person of colour or non man himself?
Please
or
to access all these features

peppermintteadrinker · 21/11/2020 09:37

He is a male person of colour.

I think he has good intentions but he's tied himself in knots. He was referring to international men's day and how it was good to see it becoming a more positive conversation. He said that in looking at issues that affect men in society it also highlighted how those issues contribute to ” inequalities that affect non-men”.

If I rephrased it to say non-women and women would that be ok?🤨

OP's posts:
Please
or
to access all these features

Pahrump · 21/11/2020 09:47

So we are now describing things by what they aren't now, except male/man trumps everything?

Please
or
to access all these features

ThatIsNotMyUsername · 21/11/2020 09:49

Yes. The universe now comprises 2 things and 2 things only:

Men
Everything else

Please
or
to access all these features

TyroTerf · 21/11/2020 09:55

Can we counter by divvying up the entire universe into feminists and non-feminists?

Please
or
to access all these features

ErrolTheDragon · 21/11/2020 10:03

He said that in looking at issues that affect men in society it also highlighted how those issues contribute to ” inequalities that affect non-men”.

I wonder if you could agree with him but invert the language - something like, 'yes, it's unfortunately true that the inequalities which affect women are contributed to by those affecting non-women'.
And then give a hopefully uncontroversial example eg differential expectations re parenting negatively affecting both dads who want to be more engaged parents but also mums who are assumed to be the default main carer.

Please
or
to access all these features

Aesopfable · 21/11/2020 10:06

He is a male person of colour.

Surely yoi mean he is a non-white non-woman?

Please
or
to access all these features

peppermintteadrinker · 21/11/2020 10:47

@Aesopfable

He is a male person of colour.

Surely yoi mean he is a non-white non-woman?

Well no I don't mean that because I don't like this labelling other people business. I'm happy to refer to people as they prefer but don't give me your labels. I'm not cis nor am I a non man.
OP's posts:
Please
or
to access all these features
Please create an account

To comment on this thread you need to create a Mumsnet account.