How can feminism in the UK be more inclusive? Striving for equality for all women

[isequalityamyth]

I have spent 40 plus years pushing, fighting, scrapping at times for equality, fair pay, calling out sexism, even the every day minor crap...if you call me girl I’ll call you kid all day long (apparently that is really annoying). & no I’m not sitting on your lap or taking a ride in your "fuck mobile".

The reality is though that I’ve been fighting from a very white privileged middle class standpoint. I had the privilege of having a feminist father who encouraged my education, encouraged my promotion.

When I went for entry jobs post graduating I was met with a phew by the male interviewers. My name and hobbies are not necessarily reflective of how I look. I got told once in an interview they were relieved I wasn’t a heffer, I looked and sounded english (seriously yes this was stated). This was the normal.

Yes I’ve fought my way up through the glass ceiling, but I was given a ladder.

I'm not demeaning my own battle nor those of others, I am just conscious that I had help, I had a tool set, I had support, I had the right skin colour, I had privilege.

How does one take a different perspective, not all women are the same, we all have different experiences. We are not starting from the same position, as a white Middle class woman I definitely had a head start in the equality stakes.

So my long winded question - how do we make feminism more inclusive? Not so white MC centric. As surely feminism needs to be more inclusive and it doesn't feel that way right now.

The irony of equality arguments is that equality is mostly achieved when people's differences are honoured, not obliterated.

Which is what "intersectionality" is trying to do. It isn't succeeding.

I think it is sad that women are divided. I think feminism is for all women, but obviously black women also face additional challenges due to racism. I wish there was an easy way for us all to work together.

I do think that we need to be very open to listen to other point of views. The problem with the FWR is that we are so used to trolling and having to twist ourselves in verbal knots that many are quite harsh on people we perceive to be trolls. In the only way we are allowed to as to say what we really think about certain things would get us banned.

I just looked at a feminism thread on Black Mumsnetters where the FWR was discussed. I have seen perceptions as

1. FWR uses micro aggressions like picking people’s grammar apart instead of listening to the point they are making.

2. FWR is very right wing .

3. FWR thinks that Lawrence Fox is great, which “says everything about FWR”.

I didn’t comment as I don’t feel that the Black Mumsnetters board is a place I should be intruding on.

I don’t know what the solution is. I do wish that they were to come over here a bit more and hopefully get point 2 and 3 refuted quite quickly. As for point 1, maybe we should be extra sensitive when it has any racial intersection and assume that all posters are black women trying to make a point (unless it is a frequent flyer whom we know is trolling)?

But even if we only put down the obvious trolls, won’t some new black poster think that we put down one of them?

What do people think?

There are tens of millions of women in the UK. There's no way one board on one forum would suit everyone. I don't think that's desirable anyway.

Women are capable of independent thought. Lots of people say this board is an awful place. Women come and see for themselves. Some hate it. Some love it, decide the naysayers were wrong, and stay (like me).

You don't have to be liked by everyone.

There are white non FWR fans stirring on that thread too, predictably. Who jump on any time any poster makes a negative comment about the feminist board. But it's not a thread I would feel right commenting on, women on the BMN board have the right to discuss why they feel alienated from feminism.

Women are capable of independent thought. Lots of people say this board is an awful place. Women come and see for themselves. Some hate it. Some love it, decide the naysayers were wrong, and stay (like me).

This. I think that is all you can aim for, allowing everyone to speak freely, and calling out prejudice where you see it, without stopping people expressing themselves up to a point. Where the line should be drawn is a matter of opinion.

I am glad women on that board are actively discussing women's rights. This is board is not the owner of women's rights. Different ways suit different people. I am glad MN has all these different microcosms.

Resist the temptation to become a one size fits all blob of huns.

Yes, I agree.

Believe me, I am the last person to feel that I need to be liked by everyone. I don’t have a problem with people thinking that this board is awful either.

I do have a problem with unfounded assumptions and I would hate for anyone who would actually enjoy being on this board to avoid it due to a misconception about FWR and never look in.

I saw the white posters stirring Eresh. I was tempted to ask one particular poster about how they felt about a white trans woman appearing in posters/Twitter/articles pointing a gun a the camera where the police district was under investigation for brutality against black people. They defended the trans woman vigorously on FWR. I would actually be interested the the black feminists view on this.

I am happy that they discuss feminism as well and of course this board doesn’t have a monopoly. I think this thread has been great in terms of highlighting what can be done in different communities.

I just believe that women are stronger together and even if we discuss in separate spaces and work on different things, we all (hopefully) have that in common that we prioritise women and girls. I think there will be areas where we could work together as well. Unfounded prejudice doesn’t help.

There is sharing.

You went to the other board.

Regulars on that board come here sometimes too.

The boards are open, anyone can read. Some choose to post.

Nobody on either board knows who is who or where they regularly hang out. It is normal to have different user names for different topics. We are not required to display our race.

I don't understand the neverending drama around feminism needing to be 'more inclusive' which translates into some snide comment about how feminism is 'white'.

Feminism by default includes all women!

In a white majority country, most of the feminists will be white and the general focus will be on issues that affect many of the white women or ones that many white women can relate to.
In a brown majority country, most of the feminists will be brown and the general focus will be on issues that affect many of the brown women or ones that many brown women can relate to.
This seems difficult for some people to grasp.

What's wrong with having a mix of broad and specialised women's groups that focus on different issues and campaigns?

If I'm worried about women's rights in the UK in general, I can find solidarity and support in a broad feminist group that will mostly consist of white women.
If I want to look for support or expertise in issues that affect South Asian women, I would look to a feminist group specifically for those issues and try to network with other South Asian women.
Is that not a normal approach?!

Why should I be deeply upset and offended if a predominantly white feminist group isn't centering South Asian issues? Sure, many of the women will be very sympathetic, but lots will feel it's not an area they know much about or feel confident in commenting on. It's not something that affects them on a personal level so it's only human to gravitate to issues that resonates with you the most. That doesn't make white women racist any more than it makes brown women racist for not being interested in issues that they feel aren't particularly relevant to their lives.

The whole issue seems intended to constantly guilt trip white women into apologising profusely and denigrating themselves at the altar of diversity and inclusion. I guess some white women enjoy feeling like they have to repent for their sins, but as an Indian woman I think it's wrong and deeply misguided.

The whole issue seems intended to constantly guilt trip white women into apologising profusely and denigrating themselves at the altar of diversity and inclusion.

Agree. I think it is drives division by making people act weird in case they show ignorance of difference, which messes with our ability to debate.

I am reminded of the IT Crowd "Act Normal" scene

I would go further nonny, not only can the issues brown women face be less obvious to white women , there are people who don't want white women meddling in brown women issues .. I certainly would rather a brown woman, as an expert in being a brown woman , took the lead in such issues ,

The whole issue seems intended to constantly guilt trip white women into apologising profusely and denigrating themselves at the altar of diversity and inclusion.

It's also predicated on the notion that white, middle class women are privileged and their problems aren't worth focusing on. Makes it easier to ignore the discrimination, sexism and misogyny all women face. It undermines attempts to address those issues. It's very useful to patriarchy.

Honestly, I think the answer is just to include all women in the conversation. And stop thinking about diversity as being about race or finding a few working class women so you can have a PoC view of feminism, or a WC view. Have a discussion that includes all women, with all different viewpoints, and take them seriously and respectfully as themselves.

It's also predicated on the notion that white, middle class women are privileged and their problems aren't worth focusing on.

White women generally, I find. There is nothing whatsoever wrong with being middle class and financially comfortable, but not every articulate poster came from that background. I find the divisiveness and dismissiveness of this type of identity politics depressing. There needs to be space for everyone to have a voice. No woman's voice is more important, and we shouldn't try to tone police people so they are made to feel they are walking on eggshells, as long as they are not showing prejudice or being rude or abusive.

YY SmokedDuck

Feminism by default includes all women!

I think this is actively not true. It includes women who sign up to certain base assumptions, typically from a liberal progressive POV or leftist progressive POV. It often deliberately excludes other women.

Which may be ok , that may be the only way feminism can have the discussions it wants to. I tend to think it's made it vulnerable in a variety of ways, given it some significant blindspots that we can see being exploited now, but that's just me.

But plenty of women who are among the ones excluded find it pretty enraging when feminism says it includes all women, or speaks on behalf of women.

3) FWR thinks that Lawrence Fox is great, which “says everything about FWR”.

Not looking at the thread. But. If I didn't like FWR and also lacked the incredibly binary moral framework I have, I could imagine seeing the opportunity to sow a bit of dissension. I wonder how much that goes on?

Not something I would ever do, whatever my views, because I can't stand deceit. But it's painfully clear that my scorn isn't universal and people think it's fine to lie about philosophical opponents. They think the end justifies the means.

I have skimmed the fox thread and in conclusion there is no evidence that the inhabitants of FWR all love him, or even in majority love him

There is evidence that some/many approve of some of his recent statements , but it's clear many do not in general like him as a person

If "FWR" thinks that "Laurence Fox is great", then I dread to think what we'd call anyone we thought less than great, because we've already used up "knob", "wanker" "tosser" and all the rest of it on Lozza.

'Feminism by default includes all women!

I think this is actively not true. It includes women who sign up to certain base assumptions, typically from a liberal progressive POV or leftist progressive POV. It often deliberately excludes other women.'

Bollocks.

Rape
DV
Treatment by the medical establishment
Treatment by the lawmakers and enforcers
Poverty
Attitudes to and issues of lone parents who are mainly women
Sexual violence in schools
Etc etc
And much more around the world of course

Yes women who have additional axes of oppression have it multiplied. And have other issues as well. Related to eg religion, or higher rates of abuse for those with learning difficulties.

But the idea that the core issues of feminism are not fundamentals is really odd.

If it wasn't for all women then why would feminists fight for things that will help all women?

Irrespective of who they are.

And that's kind of the point. It is about all women whether they are left or right, young or old, etc etc. Any improvement in eg the way grooming girls is seen, recognised, handled, is for all girls who may be targeted.

Yes there is a gap when it comes to other stuff- all humans are guilty of that. EG disability, if it's not you how can you know? Why would it be high on your priorities? Hence people who share experience make their own groups as well and the thing to do is listen, learn, help if you can, if it's wanted, and in the way they want you to.

I also think that there have been many angles over the years to discredit this board/ and MN in general.

A lot of people don't like women talking
And a lot of people hate feminists

There's been a fair few OPs recently saying oh look < random person said X isn't he great!> or