Why don’t women riot?

[SixtySevenLabubus]

Not looking for a specific discussion on this week’s events, but a broader one.

Basically, why do so few women riot? Arguably, they have far more to be angry about than men do!

The actual reading of the riot act hasn’t been necessary for over 100 years and the Riot Act is no longer law. It’s the Public Order Act now that applies.

Women DO riot en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Women_led_uprisings,

This. Testosterone makes people more aggressive.

Men just absolutely love to smash things up. They just do. And women don't.

Woman have previously I remember reading as a child re the protests in the 70s, you have the recent marches in March but now they are much more peaceful akin to the suffragists rather than suffragettes.

Because women are generally smarter than men.

Or actually include any of the women involved in the riot in the report. Apparently 79 women rioted but the reporter couldn’t find 1 to talk to.

Because intersectional feminism still has a way to go.

Black women or working class women etc historically have not had enough common cause with white, middle class women who often assume leadership or define the movement.

https://www.unwomen.org/en/articles/explainer/intersectional-feminism-what-it-means-and-why-it-matters-right-now

Personally I probably have more 'reason' to organise according to geographical region right now.

There is also the issue, which Gerda Lerner describes in her book "The creation of Patriarchy" where women are the only oppressed group "distributed amongst our oppressors". This, she explains, creates a divide between women, not only practically and physically, which impedes our ability to engage deeply and organise, but also psychologically and materially, where we are dependant (to varying degrees) on representatives of the oppressor class (partners) making it personally dangerous or risky to openly fight against them. I think this concept is a solid one, as it also goes some way to explaining the Haidmaiden effect, where some women, and most to some degree (owning up to thismyself here) accept/concede patriarchal rules because the alternative is frightening, unknown, potentially dangerous to us, and probably our children.

The fact that there is one specific wiki page for this shows how very rare they are across history - they are the exception rather than the rule. Can you imagine the entry for ‘male lead uprisings’?

N.b.- the link above doesn’t work, it’s got an extraneous comma
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Women_led_uprisings

We're generally busy with everyone else.

I can’t see the logic of destroying other people’s property when something totally unrelated has happened. I don’t see the appeal of breaking the law or being associated with violent people. Most of the people rioting are just using the excuse of recent events to riot, they don’t actually care about the people impacted in the event or the people harmed/impacted by the riots.

I think Intersectional Feminism is more of a social justice project than actual feminism. It does speak to how issues impact women in unique ways, but it asks women to solve problems that are beyond the remit of women-centred feminism, which depletes our resources, and diverts our attention. Environmental issues and racism are real and significant problems, but the reason they impact women uniquely is because all women are treated as second class citizens globally, and resolving that is the project for feminism, not fixing the planet, or solving racism more broadly, if you get what I mean. Of course we must personally call out racism and not participate in it, and take other actions, but racism as a whole subject area is seperate to feminism. I have found that difficult to articulate, so I hope my opposition to racism, and my recognition of it as an evil societal ill is apparent. Also, intersectionl feminism includes men pretending to be women, so, not feminist in my humble opinion.

I respect that opinion but can't really agree.

"Black women’s experience of racism, sexism, and classism are inseparable.
Their needs and worldviews are distinct from those of black men and white women.
There is no contradiction between the struggle against racism, sexism, and all other-isms. All must be addressed simultaneously."

nmaahc.si.edu/explore/stories/revolutionary-practice-black-feminisms

Because it doesn't actually achieve anything. It is just typical brain dead male logic. How does burning down the homes of your neighbours help your cause.

Nor does "having a go" at the police achieve anything.

More interestingly is why do men riot.

9 times out of 10, it is no different from those who go to football matches with the intention of getting drunk and picking a fight.

We should protest to the media and say stop calling male hooliganism "rioting".

It isn't it is just a mass expression of men who think violence will win their point, assuming they even have one.

A riot as a political act is more likely to be when a political protest or march is suppressed by which ever regime the protest is being held against.

However I think in France (and maybe Italy) riots have a rather different history.

Not sure the UK has had a "riot" since the campaign against the poll tax.

Not always acknowledged, or encouraged, is the role women have played in resolving conflict. eg the Northern Ireland Women's Coalition, and of course Mo Moland.

Perhaps not surprisingly as it is more likely than not that women have helped build communities.