Feminism wrong about men?

[Outrider]

1. Forced marriages is a cultural thing, it does not apply across the board.

So it's irrelevant, then?

2. In a working career which I regret to say has lasted almost forty years, I have never worked anywhere where women were paid less than men simply because they were women. Never.

And therefore it doesn't happen? Whilst you might have been in this situation, personally I've never worked anywhere where people discussed openly what they were paid, but I've only been going for just shy of twenty years. The statistics, though, in pretty much every combination people care to measure, consistently show that like-for-like, qualification equalised, men are paid less than women at every level except minimum wage, and the higher the earning bracket the higher the proportional difference.

3. I cannot get too upset about a handful of rich women who want to leapfrog a slightly larger handful of rich men onto a FTSE 100 board. I care rather more about receptionists, security guards, cleaners, administrators, etc, and whether they have enough money to live on.

It's symptomatic - if there are fewer board members there are fewer figures of inspiration for women and more tendency for men to be promoted as natural replacements for the men who are leaving. The disproportionate balance continues down through the upper echelons of the top companies.

4. Almost 100 % of those people who give birth are women. Some things you just have to get on with. If one partner has responsibility for the child, it means the other one has to do more work outside the home.

Why does it? Why does the biological fact that women give birth mean that ongoing child- and home-care fall primarily on them?

5. I don't care about politicians any more than I care about FTSE 100 boards. I don't think many others do either. One could equally argue that Lay Magistrates have the greater impact on more peoples lives than the senior judiciary, and a majority of the former are women. That ain't doing too much for those women who appear before them charged with theft because they had to steal to feed their families.

Perhaps - only perhaps, but it's a reasonable proposal - MPs would have a more balanced and representative approach if they were a more balanced and representative group? Again, though, its about the message it sends as much as the practical, direct effects.

6. I sometimes read the Daily Wail, it's a guilty pleasure of mine. But I don't blame the offspring bearing gender for writing "Kylie Krudder shows daring side boob" stuff, if it sells, so be it.

Do you not? You don't think that the consistent sexualisation of women and reduction of women to ratings of attractiveness and clothing choices in all walks of life is indicative of a male editorship and writing detail for whom those are the relevant considerations of women?

7 So "boys" films involving violence & explosions don't have that many female characters. Most of the characters in such films get killed, you could argue that it is discrimination to imply that the death of a male character means less than the death of a female character.

The fact that characters are less often women, the people we are supposed to engage, the 'heroes' in every sense are more often men than women doesn't strike you as somehow wrong-headed?

8. I think that is what is usually termed "A First World problem".

It's a first world application of an unfortunately universal problem.

9. If women don't want to join the police in huge numbers, that is their choice.

And our problem. And their problem.

10. So not everybody wants to do science? Not all women want to work in HR either, but nobody grumbles about the lack of men in such posts. A 3:2 ratio for doctors does not strike me as being unduly lopsided. As for nurses, have you ever met a male dental hygienist?

And, again, you make my point. Why is that girls leave school better qualified to be doctors, but are discouraged from doing so: and when they do they are less likely to take surgical paths and more likely to become general practitioners? What is it that discourages girls from these paths? It doesn't strike you as strange that for every 2 women who go into medicine 3 men do, despite them being less qualified on average? In research science it's even worse, and engineering and computing still worse again: these places that are shaping the technologies of tomorrow are desperately short of the input and life experience of half of the population, because as a society we discourage girls from entering those professions.

The most absurd thing about current feminism is that it calls for abortion on demand as a woman's right to do what she wants with her body, yet it calls for prostitution to be outlawed.

In some instances, and when they call for it to be outlawed it's typically because the social and economic realities mean that the vast majority of women in prostitution are there because they feel they have few other options. Personally - as with the drug trade - I'm in favour of decriminalising it to allow women who are in the position the autonomy, official recognition and protection that should just be a given in a modern society.

 Given the impositions place on women because of bearing children, whilst I have reservations about the current term limits on abortions, I'm fully in favour of the free access to it.

O.

[Sriram]

Social equality is one thing and insisting that equal number of women and men should work in all areas including doctors, engineers, business, military, police and so on is quite another thing.  I don't see why they should be forced to do so (through social coercion).

Women should be given equal opportunities and... that's it. What they choose to do is their affair. Its possible that in most cases they might choose occupations that are  in line with their biology, psychology, family roles, cultural requirements and personal preferences. Why is that a problem?

[Sassy]

I saw this article and thought how much I agree with it.

Quote

Today's feminism teaches women to see themselves as victims and men as perverts, bullies and misogynists, says Natasha Devon


At the end of the session, one of the Society's senior members said: "It's great that you don't think there's any misogyny in your world, but I think if you talked to these men for long enough you'd find there were some pretty sinister ideas about women buried somewhere beneath the surface."
In that moment, I suddenly realised why so many aspects of the modern feminist movement in Britain irritate me so much. Don't misunderstand, I'd consider myself a feminist and I'm all for structural changes which ensure equal treatment of the sexes - the types that are working to ensure we have an equal number of female MPs and laws to prevent female genital mutilation, for example. But cultural "feminist" changes, the types that insist lads mags, Page 3 and wolf-whistling are automatically offensive and should therefore be scrapped from the public consciousness, I have always struggled to comprehend. For, at their crux is the notion that men are either genetically or socially conditioned to be evil. This explains why relatively harmless acts - an admiring glance, a whistle, a propensity for lads mags - are imbued with such weighty significance, often lazily labelled as "rapey".

Today's feminism teaches British women to see themselves as victims and victims cannot exist without a villain, in this instance – men. In order for this thesis to have any kind of logic, feminists have made sweeping, inaccurate judgments about an entire demographic, based on nothing more than their gender. Ironically, the exact practice they claim to be fighting.
Gender equality requires co-operation on all sides. As a humanist, I'd like to see today's feminists give men a bit more credit - they might just be surprised.



http://www.telegraph.co.uk/men/thinking-man/10831043/Modern-feminism-has-got-it-wrong-about-men.html




I've taken bits from it ( so you may want to read the whole thing for context) , but basically I think she is right.

What do you think?

Morning Rose,

I do not agree with all she has said.
Women who have been raped refuse to see themselves as victims and I find it offensive for this woman to speak out and say such things.

But cultural "feminist" changes, the types that insist lads mags, Page 3 and wolf-whistling are automatically offensive and should therefore be scrapped from the public consciousness, I have always struggled to comprehend. For, at their crux is the notion that men are either genetically or socially conditioned to be evil. This explains why relatively harmless acts - an admiring glance, a whistle, a propensity for lads mags - are imbued with such weighty significance, often lazily labelled as "rapey".

I believe that cultural 'feminist' do not make the above to be offensive rather they believe lad's mags single women out at sexual objects rather than human beings.
There in lies the problems. We have people here who in their own country rape a woman or a child and get away with it. What message does it send out to them having page 3 girls and lads mags?
It is rather about the individuals perception than. What affect does these mags have on the young lads in society. Given mans history of pillage and rape do you think it is good for men to grow up
with the thought it is okay for women to bear all to satisfy the male lust? Because the truth is, that if men did respect women they would not buy the magazines would they?

It is all about the messages they send how. The other day on tv they were discussing about sex dolls of children being made for perverts. It is dangerous to ignore the fact sexual predators and
perverts exist despite what we believe about lad mags.
Whilst wolf whistling does no harm not everyone woman wants to be wolf whistled at, nor do they want their bottom pinching.

Today's feminism teaches British women to see themselves as victims and victims cannot exist without a villain, in this instance – men.

I think it is utter rubbish.... Feminism is about all that is good about being a woman and progression which makes women treated the same without making it about the battle of the sexes.
Sometimes they confuse manners and treating women properly with feminism.

Every woman has the right to live her life without being seen simply as a sex object, baby making machine and only fit for being a home maker. I think some men would probably be offended
at the rubbish this woman is spouting.

A woman want to be treated equal to men in the work place, politics etc. But we need to remember that women are the gentler sex and should be treated with the respect.
That women are more likely to be raped. Be the partner beaten or killed by jealous husband and treated as a sex object.

If anything women do not see all men as rapist or themselves as victims.

In order for this thesis to have any kind of logic, feminists have made sweeping, inaccurate judgments about an entire demographic, based on nothing more than their gender. Ironically, the exact practice they claim to be fighting.
Gender equality requires co-operation on all sides. As a humanist, I'd like to see today's feminists give men a bit more credit - they might just be surprised.

She justs wants to make a name for herself and it is working... Truth is no woman sees herself as a victim. They are survivors in a male dominated world.
Knowing what other women go through elsewhere we can certainly say that British Women do not see themselves as victims. We have right of say and voice our opinions.

Using lad mags and rape is not about feminism the true meaning of equality in the work place and politics etc.

Women in the past were made out to be victims. Rape still happens.. Lad mags still portray women as sexual objects. But true feminism is about equality.
We will never be able to pee up a wall and men will never be able to have babies. Physical factors which are true and make us different in our male and female roles.
But we can all do the same jobs. However, having said that... I would never have wanted to go down a coal mine. I would not have liked been in the Titanic when men had to let the women
and children go first. You see as humans we all have the ability to be afraid and all equal in our emotions and love.  So maybe had the Titanic had Muslim men and women on it, the women would have been left behind and the young girls whilst the men and boys put in the life boats...
Civilization is different the world over and feminism isn't even a thought let alone a reality.

This referred to British Women. WHY? Because women are victims in other countries. Here they can speak out for themselves. But that does not make our personal opinions the right ones.
But we should not confuse being defined as a sexual object as being part of feminism. Or making us victims.

[Bubbles]

You have raised some interesting and relevant points Sassy  and given me something to think on.

Thanks

 
🌹

[Outrider]

Social equality is one thing and insisting that equal number of women and men should work in all areas including doctors, engineers, business, military, police and so on is quite another thing.  I don't see why they should be forced to do so (through social coercion).

Nobody's suggesting that, the figures and the commentary suggest that rather social pressures and norms are restricting women who want to partake of these opportunities, and colouring their upbringing to encourage them not to want to partake of these opportunities.

Women should be given equal opportunities and... that's it.

Yep.

What they choose to do is their affair.

Yes, but the way they are raised and the culture and society in which they are raised colour those choices.

Its possible that in most cases they might choose occupations that are  in line with their biology, psychology, family roles, cultural requirements and personal preferences. Why is that a problem?

That isn't a problem, necessarily, but the evidence suggests that they don't 'in most cases' want to be limited to those occupations that you think are in line with their biology or 'psychology' (as though there were significant differences there). Why should they be limited by a preconceived notion of 'family roles', it's for them and their family to decide what their family roles will be?

Their self-reported experience of modern life suggests that this isn't happening yet, that they are wanting opportunities that are being denied them, and that cultural clues are discouraging them from trying.

O.

[jeremyp]

I think it is more a refusal to be victims to expectations and culture, as per my last point. The idea that women should see men as 'villains' is one I find baffling.

As a man, obviously I agree with that, but I can see why some feminists have that opinion.

[Sriram]

Nobody's suggesting that, the figures and the commentary suggest that rather social pressures and norms are restricting women who want to partake of these opportunities, and colouring their upbringing to encourage them not to want to partake of these opportunities.

Yep.

Yes, but the way they are raised and the culture and society in which they are raised colour those choices.

That isn't a problem, necessarily, but the evidence suggests that they don't 'in most cases' want to be limited to those occupations that you think are in line with their biology or 'psychology' (as though there were significant differences there). Why should they be limited by a preconceived notion of 'family roles', it's for them and their family to decide what their family roles will be?

Their self-reported experience of modern life suggests that this isn't happening yet, that they are wanting opportunities that are being denied them, and that cultural clues are discouraging them from trying.

O.

Some obvious problems I can see...

1. Men and women are identical and are interchangeable.

2. The psychology and natural inclinations of women are not biological (genetic & epigenetic) but only cultural.

3. Working outside is of primary importance not just to earn a living but as a social necessity. Families being secondary or incidental.

4. Work outside is a symbol of equality.

5. Upbringing of girls should be such that they should not be aware of  any special gender related capabilities or limitations. People should raise all children in a gender neutral way.

6. Culture and tradition are of no significance at all and should be eradicated.

[Outrider]

1. Men and women are identical and are interchangeable.

And, presumably, made of straw.

2. The psychology and natural inclinations of women are not biological (genetic & epigenetic) but only cultural.

No, but the cultural elements are there and can be improved.

3. Working outside is of primary importance not just to earn a living but as a social necessity. Families being secondary or incidental.

No, having the freedom to choose whether to be a home-maker or a bread-winner is important, rather than having a cultural or social expectation make the decision for you.

4. Work outside is a symbol of equality.

No, having the same opportunity to do so is the equality.

5. Upbringing of girls should be such that they should not be aware of  any special gender related capabilities or limitations. People should raise all children in a gender neutral way.

If only anyone had said that. Children should be raised aware of the differences of biology, but those should not be exaggerated by cultural bias.

6. Culture and tradition are of no significance at all and should be eradicated.

Culture and tradition are great reasons to celebrate the things we do well, and great reasons to remember the things we used to do wrongly. They're shit reasons to keep doing things badly.

O.

[King Oberon]

Trust me on this. There's a huge amount of competition among women to be thin, young and fashionable, and most of the time blokes are completely oblivious to it.

It may appear that way but  most young males do spend their lives trying to match what ever ideal is in their heads to fit in with their mates and attract the opposite sex.

I'll grant that most advertising is aimed towards women but peer pressure (and individual pressure) applies to all.

When I was a kid I was a punk .. it took me hours to perfect the couldn't care less what I was wearing look!!   

[Rhiannon]

As a man, obviously I agree with that, but I can see why some feminists have that opinion.

I can too, but it's not only unhelpful, it's untrue.

[Sriram]

Outrider,

What is cultural bias and how do we decide it?  Who decides what the good and bad aspects of culture are? And which culture (period, region) should be the base to decide this on?

[Outrider]

What is cultural bias and how do we decide it?

In this context, it's the idea that there are predetermined gender roles in society beyond the biological limitations.

Who decides what the good and bad aspects of culture are?

The people within that culture, in particular the ones that can show that they are being disadvantaged by those aspects.

And which culture (period, region) should be the base to decide this on?

The ideal one that gives everyone as much of what they want as we can managed whilst putting the fewest restrictions on them we can get away with.

O.

[Hope]

The problem is that male sex behavior is usually linked to some level of aggression and dominance due to the testosterone levels. Therefore, a certain level of dominance and control over the female is a part of the sexual drive.

Once we try to separate the two and expect the male to shed his dominance, his sex drive and thereby his fertility also could  get affected.  This could be one of the reasons for decreasing fertility in counties with relatively more feminism.....and more fertility in countries with relatively more male dominance. 

Just a thought.

An interesting set of ideas, Sri.  And totally untrue in my opinion.  If infertility is caused by anything, it would appear to me to have to do with the chemicals that are used in a lot of processed foods.  If one thinks about it, processed foods and 'feminist' thinking (whatever that might be) do seem to have an element of corrollation.

[floo]

An interesting set of ideas, Sri.  And totally untrue in my opinion.  If infertility is caused by anything, it would appear to me to have to do with the chemicals that are used in a lot of processed foods.  If one thinks about it, processed foods and 'feminist' thinking (whatever that might be) do seem to have an element of corrollation.

What on earth has feminism to do with infertility? I agree that it is likely to have much more to do with the chemicals we imbibe!

[Udayana]

In this context, it's the idea that there are predetermined gender roles in society beyond the biological limitations.

The people within that culture, in particular the ones that can show that they are being disadvantaged by those aspects.

The ideal one that gives everyone as much of what they want as we can managed whilst putting the fewest restrictions on them we can get away with.

O.

You don't think your "ideal" itself just reflects a cultural bias?

[Hope]

The ideal one that gives everyone as much of what they want as we can managed whilst putting the fewest restrictions on them we can get away with.

And is that your ideal, or the ultimate ideal, O?  Remember that, whatever we like to believe, women almost always do more family-related work than men.  This ranges from giving birth to children (something that men currently are unable to do) to homemaking.

[Outrider]

You don't think your "ideal" itself just reflects a cultural bias?

Any cultural choice is going to be a 'cultural bias' - this has the benefit being the least intrusive, a culture of individual choice.

O.

[Hope]

Any cultural choice is going to be a 'cultural bias' - this has the benefit being the least intrusive, a culture of individual choice.

Which, in sociological terms, isn't always the best type of culture, if society is seeking to be a cohesive entity. 

[Outrider]

And is that your ideal, or the ultimate ideal, O?

I'd say both, of course, but then everyone thinks that their ideal is THE ideal.

Remember that, whatever we like to believe, women almost always do more family-related work than men.  This ranges from giving birth to children (something that men currently are unable to do) to homemaking.

That's sort of the point. Why do they? Childbirth is a biological factor, that can't be accommodated, but why are women overwhelmingly forced to choose between childcare and career? Why aren't children considered, in any real way, an impediment to a man's career? Why is the presumption made that in a relationship a woman will be the primary carer?

I know that, historically, this has been the case, but it doesn't necessarily need to be so. The ideal is when individual couples make that choice for themselves, or share the responsibility as they choose, and we have a culture that's accepting of that practice.

Man and women who wish to stay home and be child-rearers - presuming they have the financial freedom - can choose to do so, and men and women who would rather go out to work can do so equally. Personal choice rather than cultural expectation, it limits no-one.

O.

[Outrider]

Which, in sociological terms, isn't always the best type of culture, if society is seeking to be a cohesive entity.

How do you know? Where have we tried a culture without strong gender biases? The closest I can think of is Northern Europe, and they seem quite happy and cohesive.

O.

[Sriram]

I know that, historically, this has been the case, but it doesn't necessarily need to be so. The ideal is when individual couples make that choice for themselves, or share the responsibility as they choose, and we have a culture that's accepting of that practice.

Man and women who wish to stay home and be child-rearers - presuming they have the financial freedom - can choose to do so, and men and women who would rather go out to work can do so equally. Personal choice rather than cultural expectation, it limits no-one.

O.

This is not new. Traditionally in most countries the poorer sections of the society have always managed only like that. Women iin the lower classes have always (for thousands of years) worked in the fields , as maids, laundry women, vegetable vendors and so on.... and both  men and women have shared the household tasks. 

Its not about personal choice....its about adjustments and working together for a common goal such as family welfare.

The moment we emphasize personal choice instead of adjustments and joint responsibility....we sow the seeds of discord automatically.

[Outrider]

This is not new. Traditionally in most countries the poorer sections of the society have always managed only like that. Women iin the lower classes have always (for thousands of years) worked in the fields , as maids, laundry women, vegetable vendors and so on.... and both  men and women have shared the household tasks.

And men were sent to learn trades, and the responsibility for elevating a family was down to the man, regardless of the talent or capacity of the women.

Its not about personal choice....its about adjustments and working together for a common goal such as family welfare.

And, in a given family, if the woman is smarter or better equipped to earn, currently the systemic, cultural biases work against her achieving as a breadwinner what a similarly capable man would.

In families that choose not to have children, what's a woman supposed to be doing then?

It is for individual families to decide what is best for them, not for a social template to be forced upon them.

The moment we emphasize personal choice instead of adjustments and joint responsibility....we sow the seeds of discord automatically.

And yet the societies that are the most free and most equal are amongst the most stable, wealthiest and happiest. Where is the discord inherent in people choosing their own path?

O.

[King Oberon]

Here Sriram,

Hmm India, gender equality... nah I don't think so.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gender_inequality_in_India

[Samuel]

why are women overwhelmingly forced to choose between childcare and career?

Not disagreeing, but I would add that this is a fairly middle class problem. First of all the idea of a career it refers to is not one that a lot of women would experience in their life time, or men for that matter. Secondly, a lot of women simply don't have that choice. They have to return to work because they need the income.

Like I said, I'm not trying to undermine the point, as its important and real, its just important to remember that feminism can easily become dominated by a middle class perspective unless we are careful. On a similar note I recall a woman's hour special about feminism that discussed this and also the fact that women of ethnic minorities often perceive 'feminism' to be for 'white people only'. Worrying.

[Outrider]

Not disagreeing, but I would add that this is a fairly middle class problem. First of all the idea of a career it refers to is not one that a lot of women would experience in their life time, or men for that matter. Secondly, a lot of women simply don't have that choice. They have to return to work because they need the income.

And that's part of the same cultural pressures, too - woman are 70% of minimum wage workers, more likely to be in part-time employment despite the fact that at every level of educational achievement women outperform men.

Like I said, I'm not trying to undermine the point, as its important and real, its just important to remember that feminism can easily become dominated by a middle class perspective unless we are careful. On a similar note I recall a woman's hour special about feminism that discussed this and also the fact that women of ethnic minorities often perceive 'feminism' to be for 'white people only'. Worrying.

There is a cultural perception of race that is problematic, and the economic inequalities in our society are not only problematic but growing - it's easiest to focus on the impact in the 'middle' areas, because they in some ways are the most obvious and the easiest to find figures for, but the pressures extend (in different ways) right across the board.

O.