Happy 100th International Women's Day.

Morag

Today is international women's day, it's been a 100 years from the first one in 1911.

http://www.internationalwomensday.com/about.asp

1911
Following the decision agreed at Copenhagen in 1911, International Women's Day (IWD) was honoured the first time in Austria, Denmark, Germany and Switzerland on 19 March. More than one million women and men attended IWD rallies campaigning for women's rights to work, vote, be trained, to hold public office and end discrimination. However less than a week later on 25 March, the tragic 'Triangle Fire' in New York City took the lives of more than 140 working women, most of them Italian and Jewish immigrants. This disastrous event drew significant attention to working conditions and labour legislation in the United States that became a focus of subsequent International Women's Day events. 1911 also saw women's 'Bread and Roses' campaign.

A lot has changed for women over the last 100 years, so much progress has happened re rights and equality and it's wonderful that so much of the day is now about celebrating achievements but it's also about raising awareness about where women have been left out of history and where there is still inequality.

Some of those are where equality has been legislated for but it doesn't happen in practice or that culturally we still have a gender bias in how we treat people and what we expect from them and how we judge them.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gkp4t5NYzVM

The stats on over 50% of women who have been murdered ere killed by their current or previous partner unfortunately applies also to Ireland.

http://www.trust.org/trustlaw/blogs/100-years-of-international-womens-day/feminism-shouldnt-be-an-f-word-annie-lennox

100 Years of International Women's Day - Feminism shouldn’t be an F-word - Annie Lennox

It shocks, disappoints and angers me that in a world where man has travelled to the moon and where we can connect to people anywhere on earth instantly online, men and women are still not equal.

The statistics are sobering. Across the globe, gender-based violence causes more deaths and disabilities among women of child-bearing age than cancer, malaria, traffic accidents and war combined. Even in the war-ravaged Democratic Republic of Congo, it’s safer to be a soldier than a woman. Women do two-thirds of the world’s work for a paltry 10 percent of the world’s income and own just 1 percent of the means of production.

As the centenary of International Women’s Day approaches, I urge you to stop and think.

Last year, I did just that. I participated in one of 119 bridge events for International Women’s Day involving 20,000 women across four continents. It was a moving and powerful show of strength. I saw many wonderful women there, standing up for equality, justice and peace. But I was struck by how many other amazing women weren’t there.

It seemed to me that some people must think we already have equality. Nothing could be further from the truth. Yes, huge gains have been made since 1911, but we still have a mountain to climb. We need to persevere with this for the sake of our daughters, our granddaughters, and the generations to come.

Motivated and inspired, I became convinced that collectively we could make a loud noise. I want this year’s centenary celebrations for International Women’s Day to be a turning point, a catalyst for tangible and positive change.

Despite the fact that half of the world’s population is female, women’s rights have become marginalized as a ‘minority issue’. Many young women feel that the label of ‘feminist’ is, at best, irrelevant to their lives and, at worst, a stigma to be avoided at all costs.

Sullied by stereotypes of hairy arm-pitted man haters, the concept of feminism and its principles of equality and anti-sexism need to be refreshed and reclaimed by a new generation. Feminism shouldn’t be an F-word. We should embrace it.

Change only happens when we see the need for it and set about making it happen.

So how are you going to celebrate today?

There are events happening all over the world, two of which are.

Suffragette City

08 March · 20:00 - 23:00 L
Location The Mercantile Bar 28 Dame st Dublin, Ireland
Created by:
Irish Fem-Net, Madeline Hawke
More info
We're casting off the shackles of election day blues and kicking out the jams suffragette style!

Join the Irish Feminist Network in celebrating 100 years of International Women’s Day with a bevvy of talented musicians!

Suffragette City is aimed at not only celebrating IWD but also the talent of indie female musicians from around Ireland. Men and women alike are welcome!

The gig will feature music from:

Marianne Lee
Lauren Guillery
and
Isobel Anderson

Included on the night will be a raffle where you could have the chance to win one of our delectable prizes. You gotta be in it to win it!

Doors open at 8pm.
Tickets €5

And if you prefer a giggle

The Humorous Feminist

Time
08 March · 19:30 - 22:30
Location The Sugar Club, 8 Lower Leeson st., Dublin 2

Created by: The National Women's Council of Ireland (NWCI)

More info
Join us for our International Women's Day with a host of hilarious female comedians such as The Nualas, Meave Higgins, Eleanor Tiernen, Sonya Kelly, Margo Carr, Lisa Joyce, Aileen Ivory, Sharon Mannion and Gaby Tzsechloch.

Doors open at 7.30
5 euro unwaged 10 euro unwaged
All proceeds go to raising money for a rape crisis centre in Leitrim

How ever you day goes to day have a good one.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rhfiiGGy7Ls

Morag

P.S. before someone derails the thread, Novembmer 19 is International's men's day.

Womens day AND pancakes all in one :cool::cool:

Can't make any events, but hope people enjoy

Morag

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/series/top-100-women

Morag

http://www.gaelick.com/2011/03/international-womens-day-events/14777/

Actually I suppose I should stick this up also -
http://tenzinpalmo.com/tenzin_palmo/biography.htm
One woman I have a lot of respect for after watching a documentary about her 12 year retreat and this struggle against sexism.

A lot of women around where her nunnery was set up, were not allowed culturally to go into monastic life whereas the men were always encouraged. She fought a lot against sexism in the religion & region and founded the nunnery.

Tenzin Palmo's vision was to found a Nunnery to give young nuns of the Drukpa Kagyu lineage the opportunity to realise their intellectual and spiritual potential after so many centuries of neglect and to reinstate at the Nunnery the 'Togdenma' (yogini) tradition.

Scarinae

I thought this article in the Evening Standard (free London newspaper) yesterday made a very good point... I'm sick of people seeing feminism as some sort of battle between the sexes, and I fully believe that men can be feminists too (though they're unlikely to call themselves one)

Don't fight female equality, guys - it benefits you too

"What's the point of International Women's Day?" a (male) friend asked me last week. "That the other 364 still belong to you," was my reply. I was being facetious. But when the global statistics on womanhood stand at 1% of the land, 67% of the adult illiterate and 100% of the period pain, a 24-hour oestrogen fest is fairly easy to justify.

Tomorrow, IWD celebrates her centenary. But far from slipping into her dotage with a letter from the Queen, she's making a hullabaloo. There'll be music, marches and comedy: a celebration of the enormous progress that has been made towards equality between the sexes, but also a reminder that there is much left to do.

It is easy to overlook the latter part in the West. Particularly given the regular declarations that feminism has "gone too far". Tally up the long list of sins placed at the feet of women's libbers - from begetting commitment-phobic sons to causing child obesity - and it seems there is a default setting: whatever the problem, blame the bra-burners. And while females represent the majority of the UK's poor and are expected to suffer more severely from public sector cuts, only last week we were told again that the nation has suffered a "mancession" and that the future for testosterone-bearers looks "depressing" as more women become the main earner.

Now, a book in the US, Manning Up, has charged feminism with a new crime: infantilising men.

Author Kay Hymowitz, who seems intent on offending both sexes, claims that greater equality in education and the career sphere has spawned a generation of Seth Rogens - men in their twenties and thirties who have a scatological sense of humour and think that a perfect evening is chowing down on pizza while playing on their PlayStation or watching porn. They are portrayed as behavioural Dorian Grays - staying child-like, unable, or unwilling, to mature. In the man-boy's attic, there must be a photo where he moves from drinking with his mates to mowing the lawn.

Many men are understandably livid at this portrayal, rightly accusing Hymowitz of sexism. She has also absolved men of all personal autonomy, of any ability to control their own lives. For her argument rests on the idea that men only put away childish things in the past because they had women and babies to provide for - now that their potential partners are self-sufficient, there's no need to grow up.

But another frustrating part of her argument is that it perpetuates the myth that gender equality harms men - that if women are the winners, men must be the losers. This view fuels the anti-feminist backlash.

True equality benefits both sexes. It reduces the damaging pressure on men to be the big moolah-maker, a pressure that means a sense of personal worth can be too closely tied to career success and which can make thwarted ambition so painful.

Instead, being a good father and partner can be valued above raking in the money. And rather than making men bitterly reject women, as Hymowitz believes, female independence should make a relationship more appealing, as a meeting of equals. As the American writer Bell Hooks stated simply: "feminism is for everybody."

tishiewishie

Happy International Women's Day ladies!!

Stheno

I think I celebrated by enjoying my work. I now work with 3 guys, used work with fourteen and one woman, and today I went off for a haircut.

They all commented (well the two in the office did )

Not in a bad way, or in a snide way, or in a sexist way, more in the way I did when they cut their hair last week

So really a gender free comment, there was loads of fun about it.

I've encountered sexism three times in my working career, none were nice, all were dealt with, but I'd not have had that fun bit of banter about hairdos that I had today 100 years ago in a mixed gender environment imo

Nor would I be mentoring guys or accepted as having an equal opinion as them.

Sounds small but it's a big achievement

Thanks to the ladies of the past, and the ladies of the futures like girl geeks ireland who encourage this

The Sweeper

I find it bizarre that the statistic on women being murdered by current and former partners is touted as a mark of inequality.

If 50% of murdered women were murdered by current or former partners, and those current and former partners were not prosecuted for these murders, and were instead held up as virtuous examples for committing them, that would be a mark of inequality.

Stheno

The Sweeper wrote: »

I find it bizarre that the statistic on women being murdered by current and former partners is touted as a mark of inequality.

If 50% of murdered women were murdered by current or former partners, and those current and former partners were not prosecuted for these murders, and were instead held up as virtuous examples for committing them, that would be a mark of inequality.

The perspective I would take on it, is that 50% of murdered men are not murdered by former or current partners (and no I don't have the stats to hand as to what percentage of murdered men are murdered by former or current partners) so that implys an inequality, why is it that half of the women who are murdered are victims of a partner whilst this is not the case for men?

LightningBolt

Stheno wrote: »

The perspective I would take on it, is that 50% of murdered men are not murdered by former or current partners (and no I don't have the stats to hand as to what percentage of murdered men are murdered by former or current partners) so that implys an inequality, why is it that half of the women who are murdered are victims of a partner whilst this is not the case for men?

Because those men who are murdered are more likely to:

1. be involved in crime gangs resulting in a gangland style killing
2. be involved in a (drunken) row that leads to stabbings/shootings etc

I know how much of an issue stats is in this forum when these types of topics pop up but I just thought I'd point that out.

Stheno

LightningBolt wrote: »

Because those men who are murdered are more likely to:

1. be involved in crime gangs resulting in a gangland style killing
2. be involved in a (drunken) row that leads to stabbings/shootings etc

I know how much of an issue stats is in this forum when these types of topics pop up but I just thought I'd point that out.

Which pretty much backs up the original assertion that women are more likely to be murdered by a former/current partner, this is not the case for men, so it's an example of gender inequality? I.e. that women are statistically more likely to be murdered due to being in a relationship with a partner than men are?

Morag

It's not a 100 years from when men could legally beat thier wives and there was no way for her to have charges pressed.

It means that while the law may have changed there are still people in pockets of society who think it is acceptable for a man to beat his partner. In the majority of cases where a woman is murdered by her partner or ex there has been an abusive relationship there already and when the woman tries to leave she is killed, so it's about control and ownership.

Domestic abuse is a fact of life for many people, it effects the whole family and often many generations of the same family. It's important to count the victims.

"We have been asked by many people to accept that women are making progress, because one sees our presence in these places where we weren't before. And those of us who are berated for being radicals have been saying:

'That is not the way we measure progress. We count the number of rapes. We count the women who are being battered. We keep track of the children who are being raped by their fathers. We count the dead. And when those numbers start to change in a way that is meaningful, we will then talk to you about whether or not we can measure progress.'"

--Andrea Dworkin, MASS MURDER IN MONTRÉAL -- The Sexual Politics of Killing Women in Life and Death.

The Sweeper

I think it's more complicated than that.

A man and a woman doing the same job and getting paid different wages is inequality. There is no reason other than societal attitude and discrimination for that woman to be paid differently in the same job especially if her output and contribution is absolutely identical to a man's.

A man using his superior strength, aggression and physiological advantages to beat or control his partner to the point where he may murder her, is millions of years of evolution hardwired into the psyche of humankind.

What stops women earning the same as men? Societal attitudes that are pushed by male-oriented society.

What stops women murdering their husbands in the same numbers as men murder their partners? Nothing except the evolutionary tendancy for the woman to be the smaller, physically weaker, less violent partner.

Could women therefore murder men to the same degree that men murder women if they wanted to?

Yes they could.

What's stopping them (other than morality and the law?)

Nothing.

Can women be guaranteed the same wage for the same output in the work place?

No they can't.

What's stopping them?

Societal attitudes, presumptions of social norms, and male-orientated business structures that disciminate against women.


I guess I feel that inequality is the sort of stuff that can be changed legislatively, where policies, procedures and laws can be passed to prevent the sort of arbitrary discrimination that marks the gender divide. What we do about the very nature of humanity though - I'm both unsure how the hell you fix that and not convinced it comes under the same umbrella term 'inequality', if that makes any sense.

flowerchild

Do you really like feminists? I mean women, whether or not they wear make-up, who have attitude about what is said or done?

Morag

The Sweeper wrote: »

I think it's more complicated than that.

A man and a woman doing the same job and getting paid different wages is inequality. There is no reason other than societal attitude and discrimination for that woman to be paid differently in the same job especially if her output and contribution is absolutely identical to a man's.

Yes but by having laws against it, and increasing awareness we empower women to stand up and fight for their rights, we may have the right but we often still have to fight for them.

Like the female employees of walmart are having to do, which could lead to the biggest class action suit america has seen.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-12601177

So will the laws are there we still have to be vigilant and empower women to avail of their rights.

The Sweeper wrote: »

A man using his superior strength, aggression and physiological advantages to beat or control his partner to the point where he may murder her, is millions of years of evolution hardwired into the psyche of humankind.

That's no excuse and frankly can be considered insulting to men.
Plenty of men world wide don't do it.

The Sweeper wrote: »

What stops women earning the same as men? Societal attitudes that are pushed by male-oriented society.

Yup and many are not even aware that is it that way, and creating awareness is the start of people questioning why.

The Sweeper wrote: »

What stops women murdering their husbands in the same numbers as men murder their partners? Nothing except the evolutionary tendancy for the woman to be the smaller, physically weaker, less violent partner.

Bull Shít, there are female domestic abusers out there and women who have killed their partners or hired someone to do it. Poison is often the choice so it's not that women are smaller or weaker, it's to do with socail conditioning.
'Nice girls' don't do that.


Yes, we have seen cases come before the courts where women have snapped and kill thier partners, in some cases beating them while they were asleep when they had been drinking or had drugs taken or in some cases setting them on fire. Women can be just a cruel and vicious and the notion that they are some how not inclined means the victims of those who break those taboos find it harder to speak out and get help and support.

The Sweeper wrote: »

Can women be guaranteed the same wage for the same output in the work place?

No they can't.

What's stopping them?

Societal attitudes, presumptions of social norms, and male-orientated business structures that disciminate against women.

The first step is being aware of it, then looking for it to change and encouraging and empowering change.

The Sweeper wrote: »

I guess I feel that inequality is the sort of stuff that can be changed legislatively, where policies, procedures and laws can be passed to prevent the sort of arbitrary discrimination that marks the gender divide. What we do about the very nature of humanity though - I'm both unsure how the hell you fix that and not convinced it comes under the same umbrella term 'inequality', if that makes any sense.

You start about trying to fix it by talking about it, by educating yourself and other's, your family, your friends. Equality is not just about the law, it's about how we treat ourselves and others. Change can take generations but it happens.

cdaly_

flowerchild wrote: »

Do you really like feminists? I mean women, whether or not they wear make-up, who have attitude about what is said or done?

What do you mean by this? I'm a feminist, I hope I'm bringing my sons up to be feminists. I don't have attitude in relation to feminism but I will call people on sexist behaviour...

pickarooney

The 50% statistic really means nothing out of context, e.g. the percentage of total murder victims who are men/women (It's about 80:20 in the U.S for instance). I imagine the most radical way to lower that figure would be for more women to join criminal gangs, but that would hardly benefit women or society in general, would it?

Regarding inequality in pay, I'm still not sure how it makes financial sense for employers to pay men more than they're worth but even from the most self-centred point of view there's no doubting that a woman being paid less than she's worth has a direct, negative impact on me, and I reckon that goes for the vast majority of men so it's absolutely in our best interests as sons, brothers, boyfriends, husbands and fathers to do what we can to rectify this.

So what can we do?

PrincessLola

Fishie wrote: »

I thought this article in the Evening Standard (free London newspaper) yesterday made a very good point... I'm sick of people seeing feminism as some sort of battle between the sexes, and I fully believe that men can be feminists too (though they're unlikely to call themselves one)

Great article thanks:)
I read some of the comments and got disheartened tho..
Men still feel really threatened by feminism, as tho equality somehow harms them:(

WesternNight

flowerchild wrote: »

Do you really like feminists? I mean women, whether or not they wear make-up, who have attitude about what is said or done?

Just a small point - feminism isn't about the wearing or not wearing of make-up. Nor is it about having attitude :

Definition of FEMINISM

1
: the theory of the political, economic, and social equality of the sexes

2
: organized activity on behalf of women's rights and interests

Way too many people confuse feminism with man-hating-bitter-radicalism which is something entirely different and, in my opinion, very out of keeping with feminism in its true sense.

The Sweeper

Sharrow wrote: »

Bull Shít, there are female domestic abusers out there and women who have killed their partners or hired someone to do it. Poison is often the choice so it's not that women are smaller or weaker, it's to do with socail conditioning.
'Nice girls' don't do that.


Yes, we have seen cases come before the courts where women have snapped and kill thier partners, in some cases beating them while they were asleep when they had been drinking or had drugs taken or in some cases setting them on fire. Women can be just a cruel and vicious and the notion that they are some how not inclined means the victims of those who break those taboos find it harder to speak out and get help and support.

So you're saying that you believe that women as a gender have the same drive to violence and agression as men do, as a gender, but we're just trained out of it?

donfers

WesternNight wrote: »

Just a small point - feminism isn't about the wearing or not wearing of make-up. Nor is it about having attitude :




Way too many people confuse feminism with man-hating-bitter-radicalism which is something entirely different and, in my opinion, very out of keeping with feminism in its true sense.

well then i'd suggest you speak out against the man hating bitter radicals who call themselves feminists, yes i'm sure many will protest that they do that but not enough do it often enough and thus that perception remains firmly embedded in the thought-processes of those who would otherwise be sympathetic to many of feminism's stated goals...do nothing and say nothing about the man hating bitter radicals and it may be perceived as tacit acceptance of their ways (and even if their end goal is worthy the means of achieving that need to be re-evaluated)

those who shout loudest are unfortunately heard the most and they do the feminist cause a great disservice and they need to be made aware of that

Dudess

donfers wrote: »

well then i'd suggest you speak out against the man hating bitter radicals who call themselves feminists, yes i'm sure many will protest that they do that but not enough do it often enough and thus that perception remains firmly embedded in the thought-processes of those who would otherwise be sympathetic to many of feminism's stated goals...do nothing and say nothing about the man hating bitter radicals and it may be perceived as tacit acceptance of their ways (and even if their end goal is worthy the means of achieving that need to be re-evaluated)

those who shout loudest are unfortunately heard the most and they do the feminist cause a great disservice and they need to be made aware of that

Or maybe people should just do as WesternNight suggested and not gleefully maintain feminists = man-hating radicals? It's not like encounters with the man-hating radicals are a very common daily occurrence anyway.
Of all the stupid things that keep cropping up on Boards, "the feminists" in reference to irrationally angry women is one of the stupidest...

donfers

Dudess wrote: »

Or maybe people should just do as WesternNight suggested and not gleefully maintain feminists = man-hating radicals? It's not like encounters with the man-hating radicals are a very common daily occurrence anyway.
Of all the stupid things that keep cropping up on Boards, "the feminists" in reference to irrationally angry women is one of the stupidest...

nobody gleefully maintained feminists = man-hating radicals

nobody cropped up with the stupid thing that "the feminists" is in reference to irrationally angry women

but if you feel like having a rant with yourself then go ahead

Silverfish

donfers, you are on thin ice in this forum.

Any further thread derailment / third-party insults from you and you will have your access removed.

WesternNight

donfers wrote: »

well then i'd suggest you speak out against the man hating bitter radicals who call themselves feminists,

Is that not exactly what I did?

Also, men can be feminists too, it's not only up to women to campaign on their own behalf. It doesn't need to be a "them vs us" thing.

Morgase

WesternNight wrote: »

Also, men can be feminists too, it's not only up to women to campaign on their own behalf. It doesn't need to be a "them vs us" thing.

Men can definitely be feminists or egalitarians or whatever one wants to call it. I know plenty of men who have a feminist attitude (and I mean that in a very positive way, as in they look for full equality at home, at work and in society in general). It's a great thing to see and shows how far attitudes have changed in the past few decades.

Dudess

Even though "feminism = man-haters" annoys me and there are varying strains of feminism, I don't really subscribe to feminism, as it does - intentionally or not - create a divide. Sometimes that divide comes purely from those who hold the "feminism = man-haters" view (and that's not just held by some men, it's by some women also) but in and of itself, an "ism" focuses more on one group than any other. Women put up with crap because of their gender, men also put up with different crap because of their gender - all of that crap should be wiped out, whether it's suffered by women OR men. And the abuses women experience in other cultures are more of a human rights issue than a women's rights one, in my opinion...

WesternNight

Dudess wrote: »

Even though "feminism = man-haters" annoys me and there are varying strains of feminism, I don't really subscribe to feminism, as it does - intentionally or not - create a divide. Sometimes that divide comes purely from those who hold the "feminism = man-haters" view (and that's not just held by some men, it's by some women also) but in and of itself, an "ism" focuses more on one group than any other. Women put up with crap because of their gender, men also put up with different crap because of their gender - all of that crap should be wiped out, whether it's suffered by women OR men. And the abuses women experience in other cultures are more of a human rights issue than a women's rights one, in my opinion...

Indeed. I would agree that discrimination of both men and women shouldn't exist. Assumptions of ability shouldn't ever be made purely on the basis of gender. Exploitation shouldn't ever happen on the basis of gender (or at all). People should be made aware of the fact that men and women are far more similar than they are different, and even in areas where they are different it need not be a bad/superior/inferior thing.

I would also agree that sometimes it is more of a human rights issue, but if particular abuses are perpetrated exclusively against women then it's on the basis of gender so while it would also be a human rights issue, it would be very much a women's rights issue as well. Whatever you call it it's bad and shouldn't be happening.


You'd be amazed by the amount of very subtle incidences of, dare I say it, sexism that's everywhere, all around us. Not even just the obvious stuff. I remember in a lecture once the lecturer was talking about academia and how much under-the-radar sexism there is...even down to the language that's used in textbooks and stuff.

Silverfish

Okay folks, donfer's post has been dealt with, let's move on.

pow wow

A friend is teaching in East Africa and Women's Day is a HUGE deal out there. She lives in a pretty small town but all the women get dressed up and take part in a parade that the Mayor observes from a viewing platform (not entirely unlike what you'd see at a St. Patrick's Day parade!) followed by a street party that everyone participates in. It's a big day out and is combined with health awareness initiatives for malaria, HIV etc. She's emailed a few pics for me to share to demonstrate!







I hope everyone had a great day.

goose2005

Stheno wrote: »

Which pretty much backs up the original assertion that women are more likely to be murdered by a former/current partner, this is not the case for men, so it's an example of gender inequality? I.e. that women are statistically more likely to be murdered due to being in a relationship with a partner than men are?

No, because (say) that four times as many murders of men take place as murders of women; and 12.5% of murdered men are killed by partners, then the figures would come out equal. Moreover, I don't see what that has to do with equality - how do you legislate against hatred or revenge?

WindSock

I look forward to a time when this designated day is abolished.

WindSock

donfers wrote: »

well then i'd suggest you speak out against the man hating bitter radicals who call themselves feminists, yes i'm sure many will protest that they do that but not enough do it often enough and thus that perception remains firmly embedded in the thought-processes of those who would otherwise be sympathetic to many of feminism's stated goals...do nothing and say nothing about the man hating bitter radicals and it may be perceived as tacit acceptance of their ways (and even if their end goal is worthy the means of achieving that need to be re-evaluated)

those who shout loudest are unfortunately heard the most and they do the feminist cause a great disservice and they need to be made aware of that

Yeah I guess the same type of people think all Muslims are terrorists. Thankfully there are enough right thinking people around that know those people are asses and the Muslim community don't have to constantly defend themselves to everyone.

WindSock

WindSock wrote: »

I look forward to a time when this designated day is abolished.

To clarify what I mean by this, this day always reminds me of this interview of Morgan Freeman.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GeixtYS-P3s

And what I mean is it would be great that we don't have to have just a day for the achievements to be recognised as they and the human struggles worldwide will be regarded on any other day.

Count Duckula

I'm a little late to the party here, but am I the only person that dislikes the word "feminism"? Perhaps it's because I'm a man - actually, it almost certainly is - but the word itself rankles with me a bit. A bit pathetic on my part, I know, but I can't help but think to myself that it's a movement designed for the benefit of women and only women, purely because of the name.

I'm a big believer in equality of the sexes, and I don't think that anyone should ever be judged on their abilities or prospects based on their gender (or their orientation, age, creed or race, but those are separate issues), and so my heckles raise a little bit when the word itself seems to reinforce those gender groupings by its very appearance. I know it means equality of the sexes, and that's something I very much believe in, but at its core what it seems to be saying (through it's roots in the word feminin - the same place feminine and female come from) is that women need to fight to be considered equal as men, and men need to consider women their equals.

I had this rant in another thread, but as long as you're drawing these lines and groups, then I think true equality is out of reach. So many men will object to being told that they need to accept women as an equal but separate group, because through implication it suggests that they're taking part in the oppression of women. This may be true through societal attitudes in general, but no one likes to be accused of something.

I guess what I'm trying to say is that, in my opinion, the best way to achieve quality of the sexes would be to blur the lines between those sexes. It should no longer be about all women having equal rights to all men as two distinct but level groups, but instead about every human being having equal rights to every other human being.

And, yes, I'm well aware that it's silly to get worked up over the appearance of a word (not even the meaning of the word - that I agree with - but the word itself!), but I think through its very existence it will start to hold back any equal rights movement.

panda100

Count Duckula wrote: »

I'm a little late to the party here, but am I the only person that dislikes the word "feminism"? Perhaps it's because I'm a man - actually, it almost certainly is - but the word itself rankles with me a bit. A bit pathetic on my part, I know, but I can't help but think to myself that it's a movement designed for the benefit of women and only women, purely because of the name.

I'm a big believer in equality of the sexes, and I don't think that anyone should ever be judged on their abilities or prospects based on their gender (or their orientation, age, creed or race, but those are separate issues), and so my heckles raise a little bit when the word itself seems to reinforce those gender groupings by its very appearance. I know it means equality of the sexes, and that's something I very much believe in, but at its core what it seems to be saying (through it's roots in the word feminin - the same place feminine and female come from) is that women need to fight to be considered equal as men, and men need to consider women their equals.

I had this rant in another thread, but as long as you're drawing these lines and groups, then I think true equality is out of reach. So many men will object to being told that they need to accept women as an equal but separate group, because through implication it suggests that they're taking part in the oppression of women. This may be true through societal attitudes in general, but no one likes to be accused of something.

I guess what I'm trying to say is that, in my opinion, the best way to achieve quality of the sexes would be to blur the lines between those sexes. It should no longer be about all women having equal rights to all men as two distinct but level groups, but instead about every human being having equal rights to every other human being.

And, yes, I'm well aware that it's silly to get worked up over the appearance of a word (not even the meaning of the word - that I agree with - but the word itself!), but I think through its very existence it will start to hold back any equal rights movement.

I completely agree that every human being should have equal rights to every other human being. We should be striving for quality of life for all human beings rather than equality.
Why would any women want to be equal to a man in Irish society...mass unemployment and emigration, high depression rates, enormous pressure to conform to a specific type of masculinity...the list is endless. I agree that there needs to be a blurring of the line between genders, instead of being treated as two distinct groups. However, that is very difficult to do in a society that strives on the division of the genders. Tbh ,I see this division getting worse and worse in Irish society.Men and women are treated so differently from a really young age and really brought up to conform to gender norms.

I do think it is a bit silly to get worked up over the appearance of the word 'feminism', but its completely understandable why you are. It's a word that has been completely vilified in modern society because its a movement that has been so successful in creating equality, civil rights and tolerance, in a world that tries so hard to resist all these things. Feminism is about creating an equal society for both men and women. I'm involved in feminist groups and I have been active in campaigns on men's issues. The reason that women's issues so often come to the fore internationally is the ongoing struggle for gender equality, where basic rights such as voting rights are still to be won.

Morag

Feminism is the translation of féminisme, which is a term coined by french utopian socialist and philosopher Charles Fourier.

Notre société aspire à un nouveau féminisme.
Our society is aspiring towards a new feminism.

That women would no longer be held to a mode of behaviour which was considered feminine and if they deviated from it they were lessening themsleves or aping men.

Count Duckula

That's kind of my point though - if the movement is now less about addressing wrongs against women and more about equal rights for both genders (though I'm not saying they're equal; I'm well aware they're not), why are we still using the word 'feminism', which has its roots in the women's rights movement? Men's rights are inherently excluded by the word itself. I think that's half the problem - a lot of men object to the word because it makes them feel threatened, almost ganged up on. It's a powerful movement by a group they are not and cannot be part of, for the benefit of that group.

Morag

Feminism is not just about equality, it's also about empowerment and encouragement of women to avail of those rights were they have them.