F**king PC Whingy Feminists...

neuro-praxis

I got very annoyed by this thread where everyone seemed to be busily rushing to deny the horrid accusation of being a feminist. Ugh! Imagine being someone who advocates equal rights for women and men.

I however am proud to be one.

1. Feminist does not mean man-hater.

2. You do not need to be a woman to be a feminist.

I am married to a feminist. I could never have married a man who did not desire for me to share the same rights and privileges as him.

Let me share with you some familiar facts about women in the world. Thanks to Amnesty International for the info.

*1.3 billion people in this world live in unimaginable poverty. 70% of these people are women.

*Women work two-thirds of the world's working hours, produce half of the world's food, and yet earn only 10% of the world's income and own less than 1% of the world's property.

*Women hold only 12% of parliamentary seats worldwide. In the least developed countries it can be as low as 8.5%.

*Women hold only 1% of executive positions in the world's biggest international corporations.

*There are 876 million illiterate people in the world - two thirds of them are women. Two thirds of school-age children in the developing world without access to education are girls.

*Approximately 80 per cent of people displaced by conflict or human rights violations are women and children. Displacement, internally or across borders, is disruptive and dangerous. It deprives women of the security of their community and exposes them to hunger, disease, violence and sexual assault.

*During armed conflict, women and girls are continually threatened by rape, domestic violence, sexual exploitation, trafficking, sexual humiliation and mutilation. They are at heightened risk in all settings, whether at home, in flight or in camps for displaced people.

*Forced prostitution, trafficking for sex and sex tourism are growing. Studies on the trafficking of women and children estimated 500,000 women entering the European Union in 1995.

*Worldwide, a quarter of all women are raped during their lifetime. Depending on the country, 25 to 75 percent of women are regularly beaten at home. Over 120 million women have undergone female genital mutilation. Rape has devastated women, girls and families in recent conflicts in Rwanda, Cambodia, Liberia, Peru, Somalia, Uganda and the former Yugoslavia.

In light of this, damn right I want to see women protected in the world. We are obviously more vulnerable than men and those of us who are privileged should be looking out for women who are not.

This does not mean we ignore the plight of men, or we ignore the injustices doled out to single fathers, or we blame men for all of our problems. I LOVE the men in my life and want every good thing for them too.

Oh and I'll keep my maiden name if I want to...

Sincerely,

An unashamed feminist

Dudess

neuro-praxis wrote: »

I got very annoyed by this thread where everyone seemed to be busily rushing to deny the horrid accusation of being a feminist.

Wo... hang on there n-p. Ya've got us all wrong.
Me not wishing to be associated with feminism? LOL

What I and others were objecting to was the way feminism was cheapened by a bunch of men on that thread (and it was only men - that's not to say there aren't, sadly, anti feminist women... and happily plenty of feminist men), the way it was the key term whenever "women being irrational" was touched upon, the way refusal to change our name was seen as a man-hating stance... hence it's "feminism" :rolleyes:

That's all

And thanks for the rest of the points - great post.

neuro-praxis

Well ya see, when I said "everyone" I didn't mean "everyone".

MagicMarker

I hate the term feminist tbh, and I can't help but roll my eyes when someone brings it up in person.

I'm all for equal rights, but the fact is men and women will never be truly equal. Sometimes women get the larger piece of the pie, sometimes men do, it sucks but that's life.

neuro-praxis

MagicMarker wrote: »

Sometimes women get the larger piece of the pie, sometimes men do, it sucks but that's life.

This is not a challenge, but a genuine question. IN what areas of life do you think women get a larger piece of the pie?

MagicMarker

neuro-praxis wrote: »

This is not a challenge, but a genuine question. IN what areas of life do you think women get a larger piece of the pie?

Parental rights, pretty big piece of the pie if you ask me.

MarkR

neuro-praxis wrote: »

An unashamed feminist

You'll never hear a feminist at two a.m. when there's a noise downstairs...

Dudess

To be honest, anyone who hates the term "feminist" doesn't know what it means - that's not me being a smart-arse, it's simply because they immediately associate it with negative connotations. It's actually a very positive thing, but has been distorted through the years because of would-be penis-slicers hijacking it.
It's not even about equality in everything (we're built differently - we can't be equal in everything) - it's more about a woman not being held back because of her gender. It saddens me how much people (women especially) take it for granted - girl, you've got a career? Thank feminism. You've got an education? Thank feminism.

tribulus

MarkR wrote: »

You'll never hear a feminist at two a.m. when there's a noise downstairs...

I fail to see what that has to do with equal rights/choices tbh.

dlofnep

I love wimmens.

neuro-praxis

MarkR wrote: »

You'll never hear a feminist at two a.m. when there's a noise downstairs...

So, what you're saying is, because women are physically weaker and more vulnerable than men, they shouldn't seek to have the same rights as men?

kizzyr

MarkR wrote: »

You'll never hear a feminist at two a.m. when there's a noise downstairs...

I live with my partner and whenever there is a noise downstairs (or upstairs closer to us for that matter;)) I am the one who wakes upon hearing it, gets up and investigates. This isn't because my boyfriend is a coward but because I hide behind no one.

bronte

MarkR wrote: »

You'll never hear a feminist at two a.m. when there's a noise downstairs...

I have actually gone downstairs to investigate bumps in the night with my electric guitar raised over my shoulder ready to thrash whoever woke me up. I don't appreciate having my sleep interrupted.

MagicMarker

Dudess wrote: »

To be honest, anyone who hates the term "feminist" doesn't know what it means - that's not me being a smart-arse, it's simply because they immediately associate it with negative connotations. It's actually a very positive thing, but has been distorted through the years because of would-be penis-slicers hijacking it.
It's not even about equality in everything (we're built differently - we can't be equal in everything) - it's more about a woman not being held back because of her gender. It saddens me how much people (women especially) take it for granted - girl, you've got a career? Thank feminism. You've got an education? Thank feminism.

I do associate it with negativity tbh, I admit I probably shouldn't. But if I hear a woman talk about feminism it's like a yawn fest. I personally don't believe in this day and age a woman is persecuted against because of their gender any more than a man is in everyday life. To associate having a career or an eduction with feminism is beyond my comprehension, this is the 21st century, not the 50's!

I think the sooner we move away from this kind of thinking the closer we'll get to equal rights.

neuro-praxis

MagicMarker wrote: »

I personally don't believe in this day and age a woman is persecuted against because of their gender any more than a man is in everyday life. To associate having a career or an eduction with feminism is beyond my comprehension, this is the 21st century, not the 50's!

Have you read the original post?! Unbelievable.

Fremen

So what's the difference between a feminist and an egalitarian?

MagicMarker

neuro-praxis wrote: »

Have you read the original post?! Unbelievable.

Care to elaborate?

Pherekydes

MagicMarker wrote: »

Care to elaborate?

*Women work two-thirds of the world's working hours, produce half of the world's food, and yet earn only 10% of the world's income and own less than 1% of the world's property.

It's in the OP.

MagicMarker

Pherekydes wrote: »

*Women work two-thirds of the world's working hours, produce half of the world's food, and yet earn only 10% of the world's income and own less than 1% of the world's property.

It's in the OP.

Does that statistic, or any listed in the original post effect the OP directly, or in fact any women posting in this forum?

Dudess

Why should the women here only be concerned about themselves/other women in the west?
The reasoning that it doesn't affect us directly just seems like going against the grain for the sake of it, tbh...
Would you not agree it's rather sickening to anyone what the Taliban has done... and for a woman here there's an added dimension - namely "that could have been me"?

Fremen wrote: »

So what's the difference between a feminist and an egalitarian?

Well there's no reason a person can't be both - I'm both.

neuro-praxis

Does that statistic, or any listed in the original post effect the OP directly, or in fact any women posting in this forum?

Ah, so because I as an Irish woman am only marginally impacted by the lingering patriarchy, this topic is irrelevant.

metrovelvet

neuro-praxis wrote: »

Ah, so because I as an Irish woman am only marginally impacted by the lingering patriarchy, this topic is irrelevant.

No. According to some feminist theory you are not marginally impacted by lingering patriarchy, you marched straight into its shackles by getting married.

MagicMarker

Dudess wrote: »

Why should the women here only be concerned about themselves/other women in the west?
The reasoning that it doesn't affect us directly just seems like going against the grain for the sake of it, tbh...
Would you not agree it's rather sickening to anyone what the Taliban has done... and for a woman here there's an added dimension - namely "that could have been me"?

Well there's no reason a person can't be both - I'm both.

Fair enough, is there anyone here who is taking steps themselves to fight for gender equality?

The Sparrow

neuro-praxis wrote: »

Have you read the original post?! Unbelievable.

I presume he means in Ireland. I always roll my eyes when I hear the term feminism too. I just think that it is a poorly concieved name for a movement that I presume to be about equality.

In my immediate world, women have exactly the same opportunities as men. And if you take paternity rights into consideration, they may have more rights.

Of course there are areas of society both in Ireland and abroad that this is not the case. But at the same time there are a lot of men around the world and in Ireland that are discriminated against for lots of reasons beyond their control. And I'm against all instances of people being discriminated against for no other reason than their gender, race, religion or whatever. But I certainly would never call myself a feminist.

MagicMarker

neuro-praxis wrote: »

Ah, so because I as an Irish woman am only marginally impacted by the lingering patriarchy, this topic is irrelevant.

Are you even marginally impacted?

neuro-praxis

metrovelvet wrote: »

No. According to some feminist theory you are not marginally impacted by lingering patriarchy, you marched straight into its shackles by getting married.

Sure, we've all read French and the rest - it doesn't mean all feminist theory is right. Marriage has very few shackles when you're hitched to a Christian egalitarian.

pretty*monster

MarkR wrote: »

You'll never hear a feminist at two a.m. when there's a noise downstairs...

Yeah, we women who live alone (or with other women!) just hide under the covers until it goes away.
/sarcasm

eoferrall

Not too cause a stir or belittle the stats in the opening post but I would take them with a pinch of salt (as with all stats).

For example the women working thirds of the hours one. When I was in Africa with a charity working there I saw what would probably skew the stats. one of the guys I worked closely with, his wife ran the village store and looked after the kids at the same time (so would be classed as working for these stats, which is fine) and the husband was involved with the local council and also working with the charity voluntarily devoting A LOT of time to it. but this would not be classed as work and also probably would be classed as him having the politicians role also (another stat) but I know for a fact the relationship was equal (some would say she was in charge) it was jsut the way this village ran - the guys were out building each others houses and so forth (and harvesting each others crops at that time of year) and the women worked in the shops and so forth.

So in that example technically the woman works for a full year and the man a half year (harvesting) but the all the other parts (house building, voluntarily etc) was unpaid and most likely would not appear as "working".

Definition of working is in paid employment.

Just wanted to post this just to highlight the slant any entity can put on stats to to highlight the which ever area they wish.

(hopes doesn't get annihilated and that the above made sense!!)

neuro-praxis

MagicMarker wrote: »

Are you even marginally impacted?

Yes, and so are the women in my life. Allow me to give two examples of how I and most Irish women are affected, one small and one fairly significant.

1. Irish women on the whole still face the reality that at family events the women will be expected to serve the men food while the men relax together, especially at times like Christmas. Women will typically prepare the meal, cook it, serve it and clean up afterwards. The households where this does not happen are the exception to the rule.

2. Women can expect to not rise as high in their careers as men. You have a choice - children or career. If you are, as my sister in law is, a qualified solicitor, you cannot expect to have children and still make partner in an Irish law firm. Men do not have to make any such choices.

Like I say, these are marginal impacts. I could list many more. But they are real.

The Sparrow

neuro-praxis wrote: »

1. Irish women on the whole still face the reality that at family events the women will be expected to serve the men food while the men relax together, especially at times like Christmas. Women will typically prepare the meal, cook it, serve it and clean up afterwards. The households where this does not happen are the exception to the rule.

Well lots of women would choose to do this. Lots of men are expected to fix and paint things. It's hardly discrimination either way.

Fremen

I'm all for equal rights for women, but there are schools of thought within feminism which take it a lot further than that.

This is an essay on slasher movies I read recently. It points out that the last surviving character in horror movies is inevitably a non-sexualised female, and attempts to analyse the reasons behind this fact. I thought it was a fascinating article until...

"The young men in the audience legitimately enjoy all of the torture, terrorizing and murder of what are almost invariably young women in these movies. What’s more, these women are usually the types that the males in the horror movie audience want and cannot attain: 'hotties' of any and all varieties, usually ones who have rejected men like those in the audience in the past. So there is an impetus there to see these types of women 'get what they deserve' by being tortured, raped, murdered… or all three."

This is what I would call the "dark side" of feminism. Penis-slicing as dudess put it. It gets mixed in with the egalitarian message, and that's what some people (myself included) find so distasteful about feminism.

The_Minister

neuro-praxis wrote: »

*Approximately 80 per cent of people displaced by conflict or human rights violations are women and children. Displacement, internally or across borders, is disruptive and dangerous. It deprives women of the security of their community and exposes them to hunger, disease, violence and sexual assault.

In fairness, thats not because all the men are off sunbathing, it's because all the men are dead.
Hacked to bits by machetes.
And many of those children are the younger males who aren't big enough to be used as child soldiers.

neuro-praxis wrote: »

*During armed conflict, women and girls are continually threatened by rape, domestic violence, sexual exploitation, trafficking, sexual humiliation and mutilation. They are at heightened risk in all settings, whether at home, in flight or in camps for displaced people.

Again, most of those who actually die are men.

This is why people get annoyed at "feminists" (as opposed to feminists such as yourself).
Yes, women have it tough in war.
So do men. We get Killed, and forced to kill, and forcefully mutilated.
War is bad on everyone, and while the effects of war are generally different for women as opposed to men, I don't think you can realistically argue that women have it worse in war then men.

Morgans

Having read the OP, I think the feminism fight is one worth fighting in third world countries and theocracies. There is clear discrimination there which really shouldnt be tolerated. In many cases, they are immature societies which hopefully will grow up quickly. I don't think the figures quoted in the OP relate closely, if at all, to experiences in the first world. They definitely dont tally with the girls do better in the leaving cert reports that are produced every year for as long as I can remember.

I dont see how any one could have a problem with a philosophy which espouses that men and women are treated equally (as equally as possible given their physical difference). However, the monopoly of victimisation that many feminists seem to enjoy enveloping themselves in does them no good. Some feminists seem to believe that the lack of progression in their career down to the glass ceiling, when plenty of men fail in getting promotions also.

Some women choose to stay at home and mind children and possible forego career progression, some women do prefer to go for the caring rather than the engineering professions. It is their choice, and it should be abhorred if its a decision forced upon them by males, but it is their choice. Despite the Minister for Health as well as the last two Tainaiste's being female there is a decrease in the number of women in the Dail. This caused much gnashing of teeth after the last election, when again in many cases, it is a result of the choices made by women.

Again, I dont think there would be any problem if feminism simply meant the equal treatment of men and women. The more militant feminists do seem to dominate the movement.

eoferrall

neuro-praxis wrote: »

1. Irish women on the whole still face the reality that at family events the women will be expected to serve the men food while the men relax together, especially at times like Christmas. Women will typically prepare the meal, cook it, serve it and clean up afterwards. The households where this does not happen are the exception to the rule.

This is not the case in any family I know - I share christmas for example with cousins (alternating houses each year) and I know the aunts do a lot of the cooking but the husbands do the cleaning and getting the tables out and clearing the rooms and so forth...christmas (and many family events) has many tasks that need to be done. course focusing on one area will make things look biased and maybe they are. But each of us can only ensure our own families are working equitably, and by extension everywhere else follows.

fly_agaric

eoferral wrote:

Not too cause a stir or belittle the stats in the opening post but I would take them with a pinch of salt (as with all stats).

yes, there are some stinkers in there and some things that are accurate (or seem so to me without checking). This one leave out the other side of the picture...

"Approximately 80 per cent of people displaced by conflict or human rights violations are women and children. Displacement, internally or across borders, is disruptive and dangerous. It deprives women of the security of their community and exposes them to hunger, disease, violence and sexual assault."

- but what are the men doing during this - having fun?
Getting pressganged? Being exterminated?

edit - sorry - I see The Minister posted this already while I was dozing!

Boston

neuro-praxis wrote: »

1. Irish women on the whole still face the reality that at family events the women will be expected to serve the men food while the men relax together, especially at times like Christmas. Women will typically prepare the meal, cook it, serve it and clean up afterwards. The households where this does not happen are the exception to the rule.

When there's manual labour needing to be done the male is expected to do it. Households where this isn't the case is the exception.

neuro-praxis wrote: »

2. Women can expect to not rise as high in their careers as men. You have a choice - children or career. If you are, as my sister in law is, a qualified solicitor, you cannot expect to have children and still make partner in an Irish law firm. Men do not have to make any such choices.

And thats the fault of men how? Who'll be closer to your off-spring, you or the sperm donor? Simply fact is that it requires a huge commitment to rise to the top, how many of those men have truly balanced home life's? This notion that men can have it all and women can't has no foundation.

I'm not going to get into yet another of these feminist arguments, you're clearly the type of woman who likes to blame men for all the short coming in her life, of which I can only guess there are many.

The_Minister

Fremen wrote: »

So what's the difference between a feminist and an egalitarian?

Egalitarians care about both sexes, feminists only care about injustices to women (and some extremes want to increase and maintain injustices against men).

It's a question of priorities.

MagicMarker

neuro-praxis wrote: »

Yes, and so are the women in my life. Allow me to give two examples of how I and most Irish women are affected, one small and one fairly significant.

1. Irish women on the whole still face the reality that at family events the women will be expected to serve the men food while the men relax together, especially at times like Christmas. Women will typically prepare the meal, cook it, serve it and clean up afterwards. The households where this does not happen are the exception to the rule.

2. Women can expect to not rise as high in their careers as men. You have a choice - children or career. If you are, as my sister in law is, a qualified solicitor, you cannot expect to have children and still make partner in an Irish law firm. Men do not have to make any such choices.

Like I say, these are marginal impacts. I could list many more. But they are real.

1. In my family my brother does the cooking. If the women in your family share your idea of feminism then why don't they insist the men do their part? There's no one forcing them to do anything.

2. Is this what your sister in-law was told in person? Going by this there must be very few female partners in Irish Law firms with children, which I find hard to believe tbh.

I have one, a woman who is the same age as me, with a full driving licence and similar driving experience will always pay less for insurance than I would, simply because she is a woman, this impacts me directly.

PK2008

Those stats need to be elaborated on, they could be easily skewed to places where wider political and/or cultural problems effect womens rights rather than being representative of a global inequality.

Can we get Irish stats?

neuro-praxis

MagicMarker wrote: »

1. In my family my brother does the cooking. If the women in your family share your idea of feminism then why don't they insist the men do their part? There's no one forcing them to do anything.

2. Is this what your sister in-law was told in person? Going by this there must be very few female partners in Irish Law firms with children, which I find hard to believe tbh.

I have one, a woman who is the same age as me, with a full driving licence and similar driving experience will always pay less for insurance than I would, simply because she is a woman, this impacts me directly.

I'm glad to hear it's not like this in every family.

On point 2, it's the reality. If you take 6 months off to have a baby, let's say, 2-4 times in your career, you can pretty much kiss goodbye to becoming partner.

Women pay less insurance because statistically at least they cause less accidents and are less of a liability.

MagicMarker

neuro-praxis wrote: »

I'm glad to hear it's not like this in every family.

On point 2, it's the reality. If you take 6 months off to have a baby, let's say, 2-4 times in your career, you can pretty much kiss goodbye to becoming partner.

Us men can hardly help that now can we? If I decided to take 6 months off to go travelling 2-4 times in my career I wouldn't make partner either, it's not my fault I can't give birth. Some times you just have to prioritize.

neuro-praxis wrote: »

Women pay less insurance because statistically at least they cause less accidents and are less of a liability.

Oh please, say that in the motors forum and you'll be ripped apart, it's complete nonsense.

Morgans

I dont see why spending time with your children is seen as such a chore.

I do wonder if any studies have been done on how many men would prefer to take time off from their career and spend more time with their children during their formative years.

Even if that option was open to them...

Wibbs

OK folks. Good debate, but lets keep thing civil and polite. Any sign of baiting other posters or sideways personal attacks and there will be bannings. Men or women. I'm an equal opportunity banner. Thanks.

Boston

neuro-praxis wrote: »

Women pay less insurance because statistically at least they cause less accidents and are less of a liability.

Women find it more difficult to move past middle management positions due to employers taking into account that statistically they're more likely to fall pregnancy and have to take a prolonged leave. They're also statistically likely not to return to work immediately after taking paid maternity leave.

Nevyn

Funny that it is only the 3rd wave extremeist seperatist radical feminists that seem to be the ones that everyone loves to site and say down with that sort of thing.

There is a lot more to feminism then that small part of a huge movement, it's like listening to only to country and western music and declaring it and all other music shíte.

eoferrall

neuro-praxis wrote: »

I'm glad to hear it's not like this in every family.

On point 2, it's the reality. If you take 6 months off to have a baby, let's say, 2-4 times in your career, you can pretty much kiss goodbye to becoming partner.

Women pay less insurance because statistically at least they cause less accidents and are less of a liability.

but of course - 2-4 times is 2 years experience when working...this will automatically put a man ahead if all other points are equal between two candidates. But how do you propose that is avoided? it is just ignored - how is that fair on the man who has worked gaining that experience?

Nevyn

The_Minister wrote: »

Egalitarians care about both sexes, feminists only care about injustices to women (and some extremes want to increase and maintain injustices against men).

Sorry that that is complete and utter bollix and I have never in all my time as a feminist and a person who believes in equal right and as women's rights officer and while involved with WRAC have EVER heard any woman and never any feminist of either gender utter such clap trap.

Back up your statement please.

bronte

eoferrall wrote: »

but of course - 2-4 times is 2 years experience when working...this will automatically put a man ahead if all other points are equal between two candidates. But how do you propose that is avoided? it is just ignored - how is that fair on the man who has worked gaining that experience?

Only way to avoid it at the moment is not have kids.

Nevyn

eoferrall wrote: »

but of course - 2-4 times is 2 years experience when working...this will automatically put a man ahead if all other points are equal between two candidates. But how do you propose that is avoided? it is just ignored - how is that fair on the man who has worked gaining that experience?

So level the playing field and bring in actual state mandated paternity leave cos we have none in this country.

asdasd

I think the OP's statistics are occasionally misleading i.e.

*Women work two-thirds of the world's working hours, produce half of the world's food, and yet earn only 10% of the world's income and own less than 1% of the world's property.

I am fairly dubious about the food bit. In any case the "world's working hours" probably includes unpaid work like cooking food at home ( actually it definitely does because in more patriarchial societies it must do - since women dont work outside so much). Thats fine but it explains why the pay is so low, does it not? In other news when I do work for people I live with, or myself, like cooking, cleaning, and fixing up stuff - all of which I do - I also dont get paid.. I get paid for outside stuff.

*Women hold only 12% of parliamentary seats worldwide. In the least developed countries it can be as low as 8.5%.

True, and in other news, women can vote for women if they choose to.

*Women hold only 1% of executive positions in the world's biggest international corporations.

That sounds lower than I would have guessed. As to why - besides discrimination - lack of the will-to-power found in some men. Less agressive men also are not in executive positions. ( I dont have alink but the testosterone levels of American Female executives is a good deal higher than the female norm). And child-birth.

*There are 876 million illiterate people in the world - two thirds of them are women. Two thirds of school-age children in the developing world without access to education are girls.

Probalby true, possibly religious, even more possibly islam. However not much of an impact in Ireland.

*Approximately 80 per cent of people displaced by conflict or human rights violations are women and children. Displacement, internally or across borders, is disruptive and dangerous. It deprives women of the security of their community and exposes them to hunger, disease, violence and sexual assault.

I was trying to work out why the men would stay at home, if the wives and childeren were displaced by conflict. Then I realised the men were probably dead.

sharky86

MagicMarker wrote: »

Parental rights, pretty big piece of the pie if you ask me.

+1 here anyway. try been a father who doesnt quiet see eye to eye with the mother anymore:eek: I'm all for EQUAL rights