Reframing feminism mod warning posts 1 and 50

mzungu · 20-06-2016 08:45PM

midlandsmissus wrote: »

Every other man I have seen is vehemently opposed to it. Why?

To be fair, a hell of a lot of women are opposed to it too. I guess it boils down to work ethic. We all work our asses off and we want to succeed when deserved and if we fail when we come up against a better candidate, then thats fine. But to put work in and then fail, not because you were not good enough, but because you happened to be the wrong sex, well that is what has people scratching their heads.

midlandsmissus · 20-06-2016 08:46PM

mzungu wrote: »

As citizens though. What power does the average man on the street have that the average woman on the street does not?

The big one is the same as it is worldwide. The amount of sexual harrasment and sexual abuse that women suffer is shocking. Look at any of the threads on TLL to see it.

An imbalance of power at the top filters down to all levels.

midlandsmissus · 20-06-2016 08:49PM

mzungu wrote: »

To be fair, a hell of a lot of women are opposed to it too. I guess it boils down to work ethic. We all work our asses off and we want to succeed when deserved and if we fail when we come up against a better candidate, then thats fine. But to put work in and then fail, not because you were not good enough, but because you happened to be the wrong sex, well that is what has people scratching their heads.

So why do you think they have had to implement gender quotas in roughly 128 countries worldwide?
Do you think there was any possibility of an abuse of power?
Any possibility of old systems refusing to change?

ancapailldorcha · 20-06-2016 08:50PM

midlandsmissus wrote: »

I'm amazed that some men are finding it hard to give way to even this inch of power.

Em... We're not a hive mind. We're all individuals and exert little to no control over what our MP does. I urged my local MP to vote against action in Syria earlier this year as did many in my area. He went and voted for it anyway. I gain no power whatsoever from a male-dominated Westminster.

midlandsmissus · 20-06-2016 08:50PM

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

Em... We're not a hive mind. We're all individuals and exert little to no control over what our MP does. I urged my local MP to vote against action in Syria earlier this year as did many in my area. He went and voted for it anyway. I gain no power whatsoever from a male-dominated Westminster.

As to why I said the lovely, 'some men'.

ancapailldorcha · 20-06-2016 08:52PM

midlandsmissus wrote: »

As to why I said the lovely, 'some men'.

You're desperately clinging to this outdated power narrative for some reason. Elites are out for themselves, not for white people or men or whomever. They act in their own self-interest with lavish incomes and privileges from lobbying, lavish incomes and status. Whether they're male or female, this constant will remain unchanged.

midlandsmissus · 20-06-2016 08:54PM

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

You're desperately clinging to this outdated power narrative for some reason. Elites are out for themselves, not for white people or men or whomever. They act in their own self-interest with lavish incomes and privileges from lobbying, lavish incomes and status. Whether they're male or female, this constant will remain unchanged.

I disagree. High levels of female politicians in Sweden have shown vast social improvements. Equal parental leave for all etc.

There are now more men than women on this thread. Are you all genuinely interested in feminism, or why are you here. As I would like to have a discussion about feminism rebranding with the women on here.

Grolschevik · 20-06-2016 08:55PM

midlandsmissus wrote:

S Any possibility of old systems refusing to change?

ancapailldorcha wrote:

Em... We're not a hive mind. We're all individuals and exert little to no control over what our MP does.... I gain no power whatsoever from a male-dominated Westminster.

It's really about structural and economic power at its root. That's a function of the particular failings of our current model of democracy. But that is drifting even further away from the point of the OP, so I'll desist!

sullivlo · 20-06-2016 08:55PM

MOD
Folks this is going around in circles.

Midlandmissus: many posters are asking questions which you are ignoring. It comes across as ****-stirring for the sake of it.

All other posters: quit the snide comments directed at midlandmissus. She has her opinion and she is entirely entitled to it.

Any further mod actions required will result in warnings, cards, bans and locked threads. Nobody wants that.

mzungu · 20-06-2016 08:58PM

Grolschevik wrote: »

Well, I was thinking more on the aggregate than the individual level, but many of the issues with regard to casual sexism that can be seen in the 'Why I need feminism' thread might be a starting point for an answer.

And also in the 'Stanford' thread.

And earning power has been discussed extensively in this thread.

And then there are the links I posted earlier on the political science research on the issue of quotas themselves.

But each individual is different, and I'm actually not sure what the 'average man or woman on the street' might look like, depending on age, class, ethnicity etc.

On average, childless women earn 17% more than men as it stands. So, the pay gap is there alright

.

As regards 'power', I did not mean in a way mentioned in those threads. I meant 'power' to dictate policy, well that is what I thought Midlandmissus meant when she mentioned 'power'.

So I guess, for all us mere mortals not in Leinster House...or the EU (I went there :pac:) ... what actual power to dictate policy do we have?

My answer = None. No matter who is in change, none of us actually have the power to do anything meaningful to change policy. So, the idea of Irish men not wanting to give up power is not true, simply because we don't have it to begin with. No matter who sits in government that would not change, so there would be no ulterior motive.

ancapailldorcha · 20-06-2016 08:58PM

midlandsmissus wrote: »

I disagree. High levels of female politicians in Sweden have shown vast social improvements. Equal parental leave for all etc.

The Nordic countries have always been socially progressive but they're economically hindered by overreach from their governments IMO. The IMF ranks Sweden 23rd for GDP (Source). I'll take the UK ranked at 5th thanks. It has maternity leave and female politicians as well.

Edit: Sullivlo, if my posting is detracting the thread, I'll desist. I just saw your post.

midlandsmissus · 20-06-2016 09:01PM

sullivlo wrote: »

MOD
Folks this is going around in circles.

Midlandmissus: many posters are asking questions which you are ignoring. It comes across as ****-stirring for the sake of it.

All other posters: quit the snide comments directed at midlandmissus. She has her opinion and she is entirely entitled to it.

Any further mod actions required will result in warnings, cards, bans and locked threads. Nobody wants that.

Sullivlo I think that is a completely invalid point.

Show me the many posters who are asking me questions that I haven't answered please. And I can show you posters that I have asked questions who haven't answered me. I didn't get upset.

Do you think it's possible to keep up with everyone on this thread?

Grolschevik · 20-06-2016 09:02PM

mzungu wrote:

So I guess, for all us mere mortals not in Leinster House...or the EU (I went there ) ... what actual power to dictate policy do we have?

mzungu wrote:

My answer = None. No matter who is in change, none of us actually have the power to do anything meaningful to change policy. So, the idea of Irish men not wanting to give up power is not true, simply because we don't have it to begin with. No matter who sits in government that would not change, so there would be no ulterior motive.

I'm with you there: on that interpretation of power, I agree.

midlandsmissus · 20-06-2016 09:04PM

So we're getting back to on topic of talking about rebranding feminism now yes?

The Pheasant2 · 20-06-2016 09:04PM

midlandsmissus wrote: »

I'm amazed that some men are finding it hard to give way to even this inch of power.

No wonder we had to get s quota in!

Because it isn't necessary - for the general election my top 3 selections were women. Makes absolutely no difference to me what the gender of the candidate is, so long as they can do a quality job.

I would however actively refrain from voting for someone who got in on the back of a quota (regardless were they man or woman)

sullivlo · 20-06-2016 09:05PM

midlandsmissus wrote: »

Sullivlo I think that is a completely invalid point.

Show me the many posters who are asking me questions that I haven't answered please. And I can show you posters that I have asked questions who haven't answered me. I didn't get upset.

Do you think it's possible to keep up with everyone on this thread?

MOD
Please don't question a mods action on thread. If you have an issue I am happy to discuss via PM.

But while I'm here, I'm on my phone so can't go far back, but this post was directed at you:

Jack Killian wrote: »

Who suggested anything to the contrary ?

Who's to say that Swedish politicians - including men - haven't more cop-on in general ?

Can someone answer these because I think my questions are being ignored?

As were several others. This is not your first on thread warning - please increase the standard of your posting.

midlandsmissus · 20-06-2016 09:07PM

sullivlo wrote: »

MOD
Please don't question a mods action on thread. If you have an issue I am happy to discuss via PM.

But while I'm here, I'm on my phone so can't go far back, but this post was directed at you:

As were several others. This is not your first on thread warning - please increase the standard of your posting.

And I have also asked questions of others that were ignored. Are you going to say the same to them? Or why just me? I will bring to pm certainly.

midlandsmissus · 20-06-2016 09:12PM

The Pheasant2 wrote: »

Because it isn't necessary - for the general election my top 3 selections were women. Makes absolutely no difference to me what the gender of the candidate is, so long as they can do a quality job.

I would however actively refrain from voting for someone who got in on the back of a quota (regardless were they man or woman)

Gender quotas have been introduced in over 100 countries worldwide, why do you think that is?

Jack Killian · 20-06-2016 09:12PM

midlandsmissus wrote: »

And I have also asked questions of others that were ignored. Are you going to say the same to them? Or why just me? I will bring to pm certainly.

Well even before the above you asked me a question and I replied; haven't seen a reply from you since.

Jack Killian wrote:

midlandsmissus wrote:

Jack you said you were happy with an overwhelming majority of men in government yes? And always has been? Do you see any discrimination in this?

If you say I am discriminating, I can also say you are discriminating . So the facts are not in your favour.

News to me! Where did I say this ?

That said, I'm not going to labour the point or drag us into a spat; just highlighting the facts.

midlandsmissus · 20-06-2016 09:15PM

Jack Killian wrote: »

Well even before the above you asked me a question and I replied; haven't seen a reply from you since.

That said, I'm not going to labour the point or drag us into a spat; just highlighting the facts.

Jack it is not possible to reply to everyone. I would say that I was in the minority viewpoint for the last 2 pages, and sometimes I am answering comments from 5-6 people. And also I have asked people questions and they didnt reply.

But yes let's get back on the topic at large.

midlandsmissus · 20-06-2016 09:17PM

Gender quotas are in place worldwide and are here to stay.

Jack Killian · 20-06-2016 09:17PM

midlandsmissus wrote: »

Jack it is not possible to reply to everyone. I would say that I was in the minority viewpoint for the last 2 pages, and sometimes I am answering comments from 5-6 people.

But yes let's get back on the topic at large.

So you're not going to answer ? Fair enough.

Count me out of your "discussion" so; discussions involve multiple views, questions and answers.

Faith · 20-06-2016 09:20PM

I've been reluctant to contribute to this thread because I posed the questions, but it's interesting to see how the discussion continues to evolve. It seems a lot of people are saying the same thing, and that's nice to see

It looks like there's broadly two camps:

1. Men and women are equal and should be treated as such in all regards
2. Women need more help in some areas, and the priority is to support all women, globally, to achieve equal rights.

/edit: It's been pointed out that the above is a little flawed, and I agree. I'm trying to avoid being accusatory in any way, but it ended up being clumsy.

Jack Killian · 20-06-2016 09:26PM

Faith wrote: »

I've been reluctant to contribute to this thread because I posed the questions, but it's interesting to see how the discussion continues to evolve. It seems a lot of people are saying the same thing, and that's nice to see

It looks like there's broadly two camps:

1. Men and women are equal and should be treated as such in all regards
2. Women need more help in some areas, and the priority is to support all women, globally, to achieve equal rights.

I wouldn't see those as two distinct camps; as I posted earlier the method is up for discussion but "help" should not be discriminatory.

Let's try a simple analogy.

Helping an old lady across the road = good
Helping an old lady across the road to ensure that she gets a taxi before an old man = not so good

sullivlo · 20-06-2016 09:28PM

Faith wrote: »

I've been reluctant to contribute to this thread because I posed the questions, but it's interesting to see how the discussion continues to evolve. It seems a lot of people are saying the same thing, and that's nice to see

It looks like there's broadly two camps:

1. Men and women are equal and should be treated as such in all regards
2. Women need more help in some areas, and the priority is to support all women, globally, to achieve equal rights.

I would consider myself to be firmly in both camps :pac:

I don't think that we can compare every country equally. It's like comparing apples with oranges. Obviously women in the western world have better opportunities than those in developing countries, thus I think that they require support to achieve equal rights.

But I also think that all people are equal and should be treated as such.

The Pheasant2 · 20-06-2016 09:29PM

midlandsmissus wrote: »

Gender quotas are in place worldwide and are here to stay.

Oh okay, you've decided. That's that everybody, back to your hovels.

Faith · 20-06-2016 09:35PM

Jack Killian wrote: »

Helping an old lady across the road = good
Helping an old lady across the road to ensure that she gets a taxi before an old man = not so good

Is it okay if we just line them up and watch them race?

I think my description in my last post was a little flawed, on reflection. I may edit it to make a note of that

IvyTheTerrible · 20-06-2016 09:36PM

The Pheasant2 wrote: »

Oh okay, you've decided. That's that everybody, back to your hovels.

MOD Keep it civil, please.

One eyed Jack · 20-06-2016 09:36PM

midlandsmissus wrote: »

Back to feminism, we have been talking about quotas along time, does anyone have any more ideas about rebranding it, moving forward with it?

Well, since you ask - there was a post earlier this morning in which the poster made a comment about the amount of phallic sounding usernames in the thread, and it reminded me of a line from an article I read a few weeks back. It was an article on everydayfeminism.com discussing 5 Reasons We Need to Stop Making Jokes About Men Who Have Been Raped By Women.

The very first line started off with instantly bringing the focus back to women, in the most bizarre terms possible:

Let’s start here: Not all men have penises, and not all people with penises are men (because not all people are cisgender!).

But even that has to try harder to compete with the concept of the "cotton ceiling":

The blogosphere is fired up over the cotton ceiling today, a term porn actress Drew DeVaux and other queer trans women are using to challenge cis lesbians’ tendency to support trans causes generally but draw the line at sleeping with trans women or including trans lesbians in their sexual communities. Some cis lesbians have responded in outrage to the term (trigger warning on link for heavy transphobia), claiming that it implies sex with cis women without their consent, perpetuates rape culture, and reveals trans women’s patriarchal motives to break into their bedrooms as they presumably have broken into their bathrooms.

This spectre of rape that cis lesbian “radfems” habitually raise, centered around the supposed inherent threat of the phallus, minimizes the appalling rates of physical and sexual violence committed against trans women, particularly trans women of color and sex workers. It also twists the picture of systemic violence to make it look like trans women are a huge, systemic threat to cis lesbians when in fact trans women as a group face incredible systemic barriers in almost every aspect of life.

Certainly there are individual cases of interpersonal violence that one could bring up involving a perpetrator of any description. But, although I may not be 100% comfortable with the mental image of panty-ripping, I find it ludicrous to suggest that trans women, in pointing out their exclusion from lesbian sexual communities and the relationship between common lack of cis lesbian desire for trans women and the structural problem of cissexism/transmisogyny, are threatening rape of cis lesbians or perpetuating rape culture.

At one point in my life, I identified as female and as a lesbian. I was early to feminism and I had been through some difficult heterosexual experiences. I’m ashamed to admit that I sympathized in some ways with the radfem position. I want to be clear in my argument here–I’m not ashamed of the fact that at that time, I wasn’t interested in PIV sex or in touching a penis. That’s a legitimate sexual preference. My shame comes from the way I looked at trans women at that time without examining my prejudices or educating myself, and the fact that I assumed a preference for cis women was a natural preference that I didn’t need to mention aside from identifying as “lesbian.”

Source: The Cotton Ceiling Is Real and It’s Time for All Queer and Trans People to Fight Back, Queer Feminism

See the direction that's going? In an effort to be more "inclusive", some feminists are now suggesting to women who identify as feminist that in order to be an inclusive feminist, you have to accept what you are absolutely opposed to as a feminist! It's because of feminism being rebranded like that, and feminism moving in that direction, that I think more and more women are abandoning the idea of feminism.

.

midlandsmissus · 20-06-2016 09:36PM

The Pheasant2 wrote: »

Oh okay, you've decided. That's that everybody, back to your hovels.

I think it has been decided by the Governments of over one hundred countries.

Reframing feminism ** mod warning posts 1 and 50 **

Comments

Reframing feminism mod warning posts 1 and 50