nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Feminists

darkman2

This won't be controversial at all but do Feminists believe Women = Men or Women > Men?

Discuss!

Find more posts tagged with

feminism

Quick Links

Comments

[Deleted User]

Exactly!

WesternNight

Ickle Magoo wrote: »

Relax, Mr D, I think blue is pointing out you could just as easily label them rude as feminist as it's their rudeness/ignorance driving the ferocity of their feminism towards another person, rather than the other way around.

Indeed. Let's not confuse being a feminist with being a bitch!

Micky Dolenz

I know plenty of bitches but I have yet to have a conversation with an active feminist talking about feminism, rude or otherwise. Maybe I have and I just wasn't listening.:P

Blowfish

Micky Dolenz wrote: »

I know plenty of bitches but I have yet to have a conversation with an active feminist talking about feminism, rude or otherwise. Maybe I have and I just wasn't listening.:P

From the few 'active' feminists that I've known, they tend to deliberately not want to push it too much for fear of being labelled the preachy/bra burning type. They also tend not to want it to be seen as their 'defining quality'. Rather than wanting to be known as a feminist, they want to be known as women who happen to support feminism (if that makes any sense).

Ickle Magoo

WesternNight wrote: »

Indeed. Let's not confuse being a feminist with being a bitch!

Well, obviously while both titles may apply to one person - the objection is that to some, in declaring any kind of affinity to one one results in an automatic assumption of the other. Frankly, it's depressingly unusual not to have to wade through a swamp of ignorant paranoia before any kind of discussion surrounding feminists or feminism can be had.

Micky, what does "active feminist talking about feminism" mean? Can you give me a definition of each please?

Micky Dolenz

Ickle Magoo wrote: »

Micky, what does "active feminist talking about feminism" mean? Can you give me a definition of each please?

I have never meet a women who openly told me she was an active member of a organisation that defended the rights of women. In my opinion, a woman or man may have feminist beliefs but unless they are active in trying to change things, either individually or as part of a group, then they are not active feminists.

[Deleted User]

Micky Dolenz wrote: »

I have never meet a women who openly told me she was an active member of a organisation that defended the rights of women. In my opinion, a woman or man may have feminist beliefs but unless they are active in trying to change things, either individually or as part of a group, then they are not active feminists.

You don't have to go on big demonstrations to change things; changing can and often ought to be a subtle slow moving process. Certainly I would call myself a feminist

Micky Dolenz

bluewolf wrote: »

You don't have to go on big demonstrations to change things; changing can and often ought to be a subtle slow moving process. Certainly I would call myself a feminist

I did say doing things individually counts. How do you contribute to the feminist movement?

Ickle Magoo

Micky Dolenz wrote: »

I have never meet a women who openly told me she was an active member of a organisation that defended the rights of women. In my opinion, a woman or man may have feminist beliefs but unless they are active in trying to change things, either individually or as part of a group, then they are not active feminists.

That doesn't make sense. One would have to do so little in order to be actively feministic - inferring one would have to attend mass demonstrations or specific organisations is like suggesting one can't be actively political unless a member of a political party or announcing attendance at protest marches.

Micky Dolenz

Ickle Magoo wrote: »

That doesn't make sense. One would have to do so little in order to be actively feministic - inferring one would have to attend mass demonstrations or specific organisations is like suggesting one can't be actively political unless a member of a political party or announcing attendance at protest marches.

But being actively political is meaningful because if the only thing you do is vote, well that is doing something.

In my opinion, if you say you are a feminist and do nothing to contribute to the cause, it is like saying you are a supporter of a sports team but in no way support them I.E never go to their ground to watch them play, never buy jerseys, etc. But you will celebrate in their victories without any contribution. It just seems hollow.

Can I say I am a feminist because I believe in equal opportunities and pay?.

WesternNight

Micky Dolenz wrote: »

Can I say I am a feminist because I believe in equal opportunities and pay?.

When it comes up in conversation, or are otherwise in an position to say so, and you state that you believe that, then yes. If you object verbally/in writing/text when someone makes prejudicial comments about women then yes. If you treat the women in your life as equals, then yes.

Ickle Magoo

Micky Dolenz wrote: »

But being actively political is meaningful because if the only thing you do is vote, well that is doing something.

In my opinion, if you say you are a feminist and do nothing to contribute to the cause, it is like saying you are a supporter of a sports team but in no way support them I.E never go to their ground to watch them play, never buy jerseys, etc. But you will celebrate in their victories without any contribution. It just seems hollow.

But I'm also actively political by teaching my kids about politics or discussing politics with those around me, I think you're slipping into the "feminist cause for the sista's" fallacy.

If my daughter wants to wear trousers or my son wear pink, my husband wants to do the majority of the child care while I work full time and along the way my voting, friends, arguments and charitable donations are chosen specifically because they go some way to pushing for a fairer and more equal society/world then that would make me a very active feminist.

Micky Dolenz wrote: »

Can I say I am a feminist because I believe in equal opportunities and pay?.

That would be a feministic stance - whether you are a feminist depends on whether that wish for equality extends to other things...

Micky Dolenz

Ickle Magoo wrote: »

But I'm also actively political by teaching my kids about politics or discussing politics with those around me, I think you're slipping into the "feminist cause for the sista's" fallacy.

If my daughter wants to wear trousers or my son wear pink, my husband wants to do the majority of the child care while I work full time and along the way my voting, friends, arguments and charitable donations are chosen specifically because they go some way to pushing for a fairer and more equal society/world then that would make me a very active feminist.

I'm not falling into the a sista thing. Letting your daughter wear trousers is hardly supporting feminism. It might have been a 100 years ago.

The donations could be seen as supporting a feminist cause. As a matter of interest which organisations do you support?

I support a few myself but none are gender based.

Ickle Magoo

Micky Dolenz wrote: »

I'm not falling into the a sista thing. Letting your daughter wear trousers is hardly supporting feminism. It might have been a 100 years ago.

Or even twenty years ago when a mother started an eventually successful campaign at a school demanding to know why her daughters should have to freeze in skirts in the middle of a long Scottish winter when the boys could wear trousers...

Micky Dolenz wrote: »

The donations could be seen as supporting a feminist cause. As a matter of interest which organisations do you support?

I support a few myself but none are gender based.

Well, that depends who is shaking the bucket, I actively avoid giving money to some organisations with a history of patriarchy, who support anti-equality stances or legislation and dig deep for others which share my political leanings - that can be seen as feminism...the local woman's shelter would be a favourite to donate to toys and clothes to, for example. My work could also be seen as feministic - though I'm not going to go into detail about that here. :cool:

Micky Dolenz

Ickle Magoo wrote: »

Or even twenty years ago when a mother started an eventually successful campaign at a school demanding to know why her daughters should have to freeze in skirts in the middle of a long Scottish winter when the boys could wear trousers...

Well, that depends who is shaking the bucket, I actively avoid giving money to some organisations with a history of patriarchy, who support anti-equality stances or legislation and dig deep for others which share my political leanings - that can be seen as feminism...the local woman's shelter would be a favourite to donate to toys and clothes to, for example. My work could also be seen as feministic - though I'm not going to go into detail about that here. :cool:

Ok, so we know your mother was a feminist

But giving loose change and second hand stuff you are getting rid of is hardly feminist, it's just you clearing out the house :P

Unless you are willing to disclose your job, it should be stricken from the record and not considered :pac:

Ickle Magoo

I have a feeling that A) you aren't taking this discussion very seriously and

whatever reply you get you are just going to keep moving the goal posts until your own arbitrary definition of feminist can be fulfilled. Feminism is a title some women chose to give themselves, along with many others eg mother, sister, wife, colleague, etc, etc - whether it's applicable to them is not for you to decide.

I don't want to go into specifics regarding my work because I don't think it's appropriate or necessary, you can either take my word for it or not - but if feminism involves helping women over-come social barriers and helping them to become more politically and socially aware, then I must be a feminist.

Morag

Feminism is a movement and a philosophy and I don't agree with the yardstick you are trying to use. If you subscribe to the philosophy then imo your a feminist.
For me feminism is not just about equality of rights and opportunity it is about empowering and encouraging women to avail of them, part of that is starting discussions and making people think and spending time myself reading and informing myself so that I can try and help and inform and empower others.

Micky Dolenz

Ickle Magoo wrote: »

I have a feeling that A) you aren't taking this discussion very seriously and whatever reply you get you are just going to keep moving the goal posts until your own arbitrary definition of feminist can be fulfilled. Feminism is a title some women chose to give themselves, along with many others eg mother, sister, wife, colleague, etc, etc - whether it's applicable to them is not for you to decide.

I don't want to go into specifics regarding my work because I don't think it's appropriate or necessary, you can either take my word for it or not - but if feminism involves helping women over-come social barriers and helping them to become more politically and socially aware, then I must be a feminist.

I am taking it seriously.

The bold part is exactly what a feminist is, in my world. Wrongly or rightly, I don't know. But I am open to having my opinion change.

Ambersky

Ah now! after 173 posts on the topic of What Is A Feminist,
Mickey comes in with

Is the raging bra burning feminist just a myth?
I do however support all and any movement dedicated to getting rid of bras, silly contraptions.

That sounds very like, but Im sure you wouldnt actually say...
Go on girls, explain yerselves there for my entertainment.
Im not bothered reading through tracts of previous posts just give it to me there in a nutshell.
Here Ill throw you a little insulting stereotype about Raging bra burning feminists for you to deny and distance yerselves from first that should get you going.
Couldnt be ar**d Googling bra burning feminist, to find out what it means.
Im going to sexualise you ie getting rid of bras and then Im going to tell you Im taking this issue seriously.
Go on give us a smile, you look much nicer when you smile.

panda100

Ickle Magoo wrote: »

So they may well have been feminists, just not the ultra-hardcore variety? I've never met one of those stereotypical hardcore, ram it down the throat type feminists either. I have a hunch they are a titchy-tiny minority blown up to mythical proportions and used to bash the very notion or title of feminist/m...

I would know a lot of people active in the Feminist open Forum, Lashback, RAG, Cork Feminsta and other feminist organisations in Ireland. I have yet to meet anyone involved in these groups who would fit the stereotype put out there about feminists.

Talking of feminsim, where has Thaedayl gone??She used to be great on these types of threads but she seems to have deserted us

Just to add on to Ambersky post: Feminists never burned bra's because they didn't like wearing them. They were just used as a symbol, along with other items associated with women such as tweezers and mops, to be burnt at a protest against Miss America.

Maple

Ambersky, to be fair Micky Dolenz does go to qualify his original post.

Maple

Ambersky

Giving the benefit of the doubt that this is a genuine open question and Im also reminded thats thats how this thread started with no one sure if it was serious or not.
I would suggest to Micky that he read through the thread he may learn a lot.
Maybe I will re post this definition as it may be helpful

Feminism is a collection of movements aimed at defining, establishing, and defending equal political, economic, and social rights and equal opportunities for women.[1][2][3] Its concepts overlap with those of women's rights. Much of feminism deals specifically with the problems women face in overcoming social barriers, but some feminists argue that gender equality implies a necessary liberation of both men and women from traditional cultural roles, and look at the problems men face as well. Feminists—that is, persons practicing feminism—may be persons of either sex.

So Micky a feminist can be a man or a woman.
You dont have to be part of an organisation to be a feminist you just have to be for equal political economic and social right for women.
Social barriers are worked on politically within organisations and individually.
Individually many women and men are looking for gender equality in their relationships, in discussions, etc, they dont have to be part of an organisation .
Gender equality is about issues like equal pay and also about issues like equal housework and childcare.
Women and men can be active feminists by challenging sex stereotypes, the sexualisation of women and girls in advertising and especially of young girls in the clothing industry, they can educate their children to be for equality, they can create equality within their family by looking at who has responsibility for and who does housework and childcare. etc etc there are loads of ways to be a feminist.

Many women are tired of derogitory stereotypes allocated to feminism.
Many women are tired of the belittling of the issue or treating it like its just a laugh. Lauging with is ok, laughing at is not.

Maple

Yep, and I believe that if you read this post of his here http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=72120295&postcount=199

you might find that he is in agreement with you.

Now can we all please chill out.

Thanks

Maple

Micky Dolenz

I'll admit I didn't read the thread entirely.

I may have been light hearted in my opening post but I do take the subject matter seriously, of that I can assure you.

I found your last post very interesting and have a few questions.
All my questions are genuine and should be seen as such.

How can someone challenge sex stereotypes in every day life?

Is there really a big difference in wages?
In my industry I don't see it. Saying that I work in a male dominationed environment. A few years ago the company I work for expanded and we needed a full time office administrator, the job was advertised and wages were stated, regardless of gender. On a side note, a woman got the job as she was the best person for the job.
we openly advertise our trade jobs too but no women to date have applied as far as I am aware.

Also within the home, about chorus, child minding etc. This may not be anti feminist or sexist. a lot of it is cultural and the most practical way of doing things. Please let me explain. I grew up with six older women, I would rarely if ever have cooked or cleaned, I did however tend the horses we had. Mainly because it was heavy work and I had an interest, my sisters never did.

As I grew older, like a lot of men, we couldn't cook or clean cos we never did it. But of course we can learn and did so.

In modern partnerships, people share jobs around their home. I know a lot of men out of work at home with kids and being house husbands so on that front things are most certainly changing and tables of the past are being turned.

I am all up for human rights and women's rights, but don't we live in a country where most people are free to pursue any avenue they see fit?

Stheno

Micky Dolenz wrote: »

How can someone challenge sex stereotypes in every day life?

Lots of different ways, tbh, working in a profession dominated by the other gender and succeeding would be one, not subscribing to gender based assumptions another? I work in a male dominated environment, (was once the only woman in a team of 40) and regularly offer to talk to my old school and their pupils about the area I work in and how it worked.

On the flip side, when I was managing teams of men, and they had childcare issues, e.g. I tried to support them as much as possible.

Is there really a big difference in wages?
In my industry I don't see it.

I've not seen it/experienced it in mine, I work in IT. It tends to be very much the role is advertised as x salary usually a band, and you negotiate.

There is much debate about statistics on this, with arguments saying that different professions/occupations are not taken into account, nor is the fact that more women work part time than men, right on up to an argument that women are not as upfront and willing to negotiate to secure the best package.

There was an interesting article a few years ago about how the average salary of a female CEO of a charity/not for profit was paid significantly less than the average male CEO of the same industry sector which looked at this issue quite closely and examined the cause. I can *try* and dig it out for you if you are interested.

Then there is also the pregnancy/maternity leave that impacts women in terms of experience. Your average woman who has 2-3 children is going to have missed approx. 2.5 - 3 years of professional experience compared to a male colleague with the same skills and so cannot command the same salary. I experienced an attitude when I was interviewed once, and the interviewer took note of the fact that I lived far away, I was married (at the time) and started his interview by stating, "You're married, you live in x, more than 50 miles from y, you obviously have children, how do you balance your work and family commitments?" My response was simply that I didn't have children, and I'd worked in y whilst living in x for 8 years. I got offered the job, explained reasonably to their HR manager why I wasn't taking it (His attitude) and moved on.

Also within the home, about chorus, child minding etc. This may not be anti feminist or sexist. a lot of it is cultural and the most practical way of doing things. Please let me explain. I grew up with six older women, I would rarely if ever have cooked or cleaned, I did however tend the horse we had. Mainly because it was heavy work and I had an interest, my sisters never did.

My dad did all the cooking in my house

and passed it on to us all

We all had to do chores, thankfully I've a big family

As I grew older, like a lot of men, we couldn't cook or clean cos we never did it. But of course we can learn and did so.

In modern partnerships, people share jobs around their home. I know a lot of men out of work at home with kids and being house husbands so on that front things are most certainly changing and tables of the past are being turned.

There are a lot of studies done that show that women do significantly more work around the house than their male partners regardless of professional status, I think a few have been posted in this thread, have a read back and if you can't find them I'll again try and post one for you.

I am all up for human rights and women's rights, but don't we live in a country where most people are free to pursue any avenue they see fit?

Lack of equal parenting rights impact both men and women in this country, men in terms of access to their children if they do not have a stable relationship with the mother, women in terms of access to working equality due to men not being allowed take paternity leave. Our constitution still enshrines the right of the woman to be in the home etc.

Schools don't always offer the same curriculum choice for students, especially if they are single gender. I've had clients when I worked as a consultant in previous roles ask my male senior if I was his PA, there is a lot of attitudinal based ways of thinking that need to be challenged still imo

Does that shed any light for you?

WesternNight

Micky Dolenz wrote: »

I am all up for human rights and women's rights, but don't we live in a country where most people are free to pursue any avenue they see fit?

Free to pursue, generally yes. Free from discriminatory attitudes that can oftentimes halt those pursuits? I'm afraid not.

Morag

Micky Dolenz wrote: »

In my industry I don't see it. Saying that I work in a male dominationed environment. A few years ago the company I work for expanded and we needed a full time office administrator, the job was advertised and wages were stated, regardless of gender. On a side note, a woman got the job as she was the best person for the job.
we openly advertise our trade jobs too but no women to date have applied as far as I am aware.

Micky Dolenz wrote: »

I am all up for human rights and women's rights, but don't we live in a country where most people are free to pursue any avenue they see fit?

How do you reconcile those two parts of your post?
Why do you think that there are no women who seem interested in the area that you work in?
Is is lack of qualified women?
What if any possible barriers can you think of which may stop or put of a young woman choosing your field of work?

Micky Dolenz

WesternNight wrote: »

Free to pursue, generally yes. Free from discriminatory attitudes that can oftentimes halt those pursuits? I'm afraid not.

Can you give me examples please?

Sharrow wrote: »

How do you reconcile those two parts of your post?
Why do you think that there are no women who seem interested in the area that you work in?
Is is lack of qualified women?
What if any possible barriers can you think of which may stop or put of a young woman choosing your field of work?

I shall answer your first question in the course of answering the ones that follow.

Because the work is heavy, hard,cold and dirty. There are very few women on the cold front of what I do.But a lot around it, engineers, surveyors, admin, etc

The possible barriers would be the work is hard, low paid for the first four years and pretty thankless.

Stheno

Micky Dolenz wrote: »

Can you give me examples please?

You can take my one about people assuming I was my principle consultants PA, when told I was the senior consultant in the practice, the response in that case was their jaw dropping, that sort of attitude could really get you down if you let it.

A really good example is that of recruitment agents/HR attitudes, where an assumption is made that if you are of childbearing age, then you have children, which immediately precludes you from roles. I've had that question couched to me so many times over the years in terms of my availability out of hours, my availability for travel, that it rolls off my back at this stage. Strangely and this is just ime, it's usually the female HR/Recruitment agents who straight out will ask if you have family commitments, though as per my previous post, not exclusively. The wrong answer will preclude you from consideration, yet one has to wonder if those questions are there to preclude those with family commitments.

I shall answer your first question in the course of answering the ones that follow.

Because the work is heavy, hard,cold and dirty. There are very few women on the cold front of what I do.But a lot around it, engineers, surveyors, admin, etc

The possible barriers would be the work is hard, low paid for the first four years and pretty thankless.

You've just described being a cleaner too

Morag

and being a nurse isn't heavy lifting, hard or dirty and is low paid for the first few years and is pretty thankless.

I know of female sparks, aircon fitters, and pumbers, there are very few and thin on the ground due to a range of reasons, but primarily the gendered perception of the job and then the work culture around it.

As for a job being physically tough, it is hard but there are women out there who are as strong and in some cases stronger then some of the men they know, but if they are doing such work and then having to go home and do a couple of hours house work and try and wrangle kids from homework to bed time then they aren't on such an equal footing.

Men who did hard jobs which were labour intensive would have, in the past, been spared having to do that when they got home.