Religion and Ethics Forum
General Category => General Discussion => Topic started by: Rhiannon on September 21, 2018, 11:38:27 AM
-
Any takers?
-
And if there are any takers. please state what you think feminism to be.
-
Any takers?
If you have certain advantages in life bestowed on you by the fact that you were born a man, and you like to exploit them, of course you are going to hate the people who are trying to level the playing field.
-
(Imported from Lady Macbeth thread)
Feminism is the belief that women should have the same rights and opportunities as men. It’s the belief that being a woman shouldn’t make you a second class citizen.
What is there to hate about that?
Nothing. That's what I believe & always have.
However I wonder if Humph has a different definition & it would be useful if he would say why he hates it.
-
Any takers?
Of course :)
-
And if there are any takers. please state what you think feminism to be.
A movement which wishes to divide the working class upon gender lines.
-
If you have certain advantages in life bestowed on you by the fact that you were born a man, and you like to exploit them, of course you are going to hate the people who are trying to level the playing field.
And what are the advantages of being born male, into poverty?
-
(Imported from Lady Macbeth thread)
Nothing. That's what I believe & always have.
However I wonder if Humph has a different definition & it would be useful if he would say why he hates it.
And who wrote that definition? Wiki? I edit Wiki sometimes.
-
The Oxford Dictionary.
However the Urban Dictionary is quite an eye opener.
You haven't said why you hate feminism or stated your definition of the word, Humph which is the purpose of this thread.
-
The Oxford Dictionary.
However the Urban Dictionary is quite an eye opener.
You haven't said why you hate feminism or stated your definition of the word, Humph which is the purpose of this thread.
Yes I have, please see reply number 5.
-
A movement which wishes to divide the working class upon gender lines.
You are going to have to unpack that for me a bit because I can't even begin to understand what you mean by it.
-
Neither do I. I've been searching. I am aware that there are different schools of thought/groups under the umbrella of 'Feminism', disagreeing with eachother.
To me it means:- "The theory of the political, economic, and social equality of the sexes" (Merriam-Webster), which is self explanatory. Humphrey what you have said is far more complicated.
-
You are going to have to unpack that for me a bit because I can't even begin to understand what you mean by it.
A movement which splits the working class (proletariat) on gender basis (i.e do you belong to the offspring bearing gender, or to the non offspring bearing gender?)
I would have thought that distinction was obvious, but then not all of us went to Orpington College in 1976.
-
A movement which wishes to divide the working class upon gender lines.
Ehhhhhhhhhhhh?
-
A movement which splits the working class (proletariat) on gender basis (i.e do you belong to the offspring bearing gender, or to the non offspring bearing gender?)
I would have thought that distinction was obvious, but then not all of us went to Orpington College in 1976.
Why is it just the proletariat that this supposed split is being forced upon?
Why do you think it splits the proletariat to have equal rights for men and women?
Orpington college doesn't seem relevant to me, but if it holds sway in your life good for you.
-
Why is it just the proletariat that this supposed split is being forced upon?
Why do you think it splits the proletariat to have equal rights for men and women?
Orpington college doesn't seem relevant to me, but if it holds sway in your life good for you.
It is not just the proletariat, I draw attention to the attempts to allow rich women to leapfrog their way onto FTSE top 100 boardrooms.
FTR Orpington College was the first place where I heard about Marx (Karl that is).
As far as I am concerned feminism is the strange and peculiar notion that working class women have more in common with wealthy women, than they do with working class men.
-
And who wrote that definition? Wiki? I edit Wiki sometimes.
I wrote it.
I think it's perfectly reasonable and I don't see anybody disputing it in any substantial way, except you and your definition does not make any sense.
-
It is not just the proletariat, I draw attention to the attempts to allow rich women to leapfrog their way onto FTSE top 100 boardrooms.
FTR Orpington College was the first place where I heard about Marx (Karl that is).
As far as I am concerned feminism is the strange and peculiar notion that working class women have more in common with wealthy women, than they do with working class men.
In many ways they do.
https://www.glasgowlive.co.uk/news/glasgow-news/more-5000-glasgow-city-council-15171402
-
And what are the advantages of being born male, into poverty?
As compared to being a female born into poverty? They are many and varied. You have all the advantages that any male has in that you are less likely to have to give a blow job to get a job, you will be paid more if you get a job, you are less likely to be raped, you are less likely to be treated as an object, you are less likely to have to do a full time job and all the housework and look after the kids.
Those are just the ones I could think up off the top of my head in a few seconds. Do you want people to carry on? I'm sure Rhiannon and LR and Robbie, who, unlike me, have to deal with sex discrimination on a daily basis, can come up with a whole heap of extra advantages.
-
I wrote it.
I think it's perfectly reasonable and I don't see anybody disputing it in any substantial way, except you and your definition does not make any sense.
You want to split the working class political movement based upon gender, and you think that is reasonable?
-
You want to split the working class political movement based upon gender, and you think that is reasonable?
What on earth has that got to do with feminism? Feminists are from all strata's of society.
-
In many ways they do.
https://www.glasgowlive.co.uk/news/glasgow-news/more-5000-glasgow-city-council-15171402
My apologies, what is the relevance of the link to working class women identifying with wealthy women?
I do not think for one moment that the female security guards at work identify with their HR boss more than they identify with their male colleagues standing next to them.
-
My apologies, what is the relevance of the link to working class women identifying with wealthy women?
I do not think for one moment that the female security guards at work identify with their HR boss more than they identify with their male colleagues standing next to them.
Because they are paid less because they are women.
-
HWB, what do you think is women's role in society, and how should they conduct themselves?
-
As compared to being a female born into poverty? They are many and varied. You have all the advantages that any male has in that you are less likely to have to give a blow job to get a job, you will be paid more if you get a job, you are less likely to be raped, you are less likely to be treated as an object, you are less likely to have to do a full time job and all the housework and look after the kids.
Those are just the ones I could think up off the top of my head in a few seconds. Do you want people to carry on? I'm sure Rhiannon and LR and Robbie, who, unlike me, have to deal with sex discrimination on a daily basis, can come up with a whole heap of extra advantages.
Oh dear. What has giving oral sex got to do with the discussion? The only female colleagues of mine who were paid less then me in my forty year working career were my workplace subordinates, and I have had many female bosses who were paid more than me. As for being treated like an object, I have mentioned my violent and spiteful ex in other discussions, it ain't just a female thing.
I do not accept that every female has to put up with sex discrimination every day of her life, any more than I accept that every ethnic minority person faces racial discrimination every day of their life. Quite frankly for you to claim the former, puts you on the same level as the ludicrous Bahar Mustafa and her "kill all white men!" request.
-
Because they are paid less because they are women.
Are they paid less because they are women, or because they hold lower paid jobs? At mywork the female cleaners are paid more than are the male cleaners, because the former tend to be the supervisors.
-
Are they paid less because they are women, or because they hold lower paid jobs? At mywork the female cleaners are paid more than are the male cleaners, because the former tend to be the supervisors.
Because they are women. As the story makes clear.
-
HWB, what do you think is women's role in society, and how should they conduct themselves?
LR I dislike feminism because it divides the least well off in society on the grounds of gender. If you want me to start quoting from the Bible you are going to be disappointed.
-
Because they are women. As the story makes clear.
Well no it did not. Surely to pay somebody less purely on the basis of gender is illegal? If so then legal action, rather than strike action, should be taken.
-
Well no it did not. Surely to pay somebody less purely on the basis of gender is illegal? If so then legal action, rather than strike action, should be taken.
That was done too. The Labour council spent money trying to justify their paying women less.
https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/glasgow-city-council-drops-legal-11868501
-
That was done too. The Labour council spent money trying to justify their paying women less.
https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/glasgow-city-council-drops-legal-11868501
Thanks for the second link. But this strikes me as being a trade union issue, not a feminist issue as such, and trying to make it a women's issue IMHO breaks the solidarity. FTR I worked for a Scottish company based in Glasgow, and I had to take them to court so as to enforce my contractual annual leave rights. (The Sheriff, and the court staff, were very helpful without being biased).
-
You want to split the working class political movement based upon gender, and you think that is reasonable?
The class angle as far as I can see is a delusion of your own concoction.
-
The class angle as far as I can see is a delusion of your own concoction.
Er...no. Ever heard of the Socialist Workers Party?
-
Thanks for the second link. But this strikes me as being a trade union issue, not a feminist issue as such, and trying to make it a women's issue IMHO breaks the solidarity. FTR I worked for a Scottish company based in Glasgow, and I had to take them to court so as to enforce my contractual annual leave rights. (The Sheriff, and the court staff, were very helpful without being biased).
They were paid less because they were women.
-
Then it is a classic trades union issue. It has nothing to do with wealthy women leapfrogging wealthy men into boardrooms, or deliberately appointing only females as dental hygienists/ admin assistants/ secretaries/receptionists. How many men are ever given those jobs?
And please do not claim that all men are on FTSE top 100 boards, cos most of us ain't.
-
Then it is a classic trades union issue. It has nothing to do with wealthy women leapfrogging wealthy men into boardrooms, or deliberately appointing only females as dental hygienists/ admin assistants/ secretaries/receptionists. How many men are ever given those jobs?
And please do not claim that all men are on FTSE top 100 boards, cos most of us ain't.
What are you on about?
-
HBW seems to be very confused! :o
-
A movement which splits the working class (proletariat) on gender basis (i.e do you belong to the offspring bearing gender, or to the non offspring bearing gender?)
I would have thought that distinction was obvious, but then not all of us went to Orpington College in 1976.
I thought they taught A levels at Orpers in those* days, to mixed classes?
(Marxist roots of feminism was taught in A level Sociology, maybe still is. There's plenty about feminism and Marxism on the internet.
The class angle as far as I can see is a delusion of your own concoction.
I've been trying to get my head around that too. One obvious uniting factor for women of every 'class' is that all have faced discrimination on the grounds of their sex but so what? Strikes me you may be a bit hung up about class, sorry if I have misjudged you.
HWB:- "...deliberately appointing only females as dental hygienists/ admin assistants/ secretaries/receptionists"
News to me (as an ex HR manager) there was any deliberation about it. Not many men applied for those jobs except admin assistant. Secretaries are now executive assistants or some other title and whilst there may be more women than men, there are men who do such jobs, appointed because of suitability and not sex. There are male receptionists and male veterinary nurses just as there are women who drive delivery vans and buses.
*or 'them' if you prefer.
-
What are you on about?
It is something for the trades union to deal with. What do you think that trades unions do?
-
I can't think of any job, which employs people of one gender.
-
It is something for the trades union to deal with. What do you think that trades unions do?
And the thing that are dealing with is women being paid less for being women.
-
I've been trying to get my head around that too. One obvious uniting factor for women of every 'class' is that all have faced discrimination on the grounds of their sex
Easy way out. "They discriminated against me because I am female/black/disabled". Who discriminated against Elena Ceaucescu?
News to me (as an ex HR manager) there was any deliberation about it. Not many men applied for those jobs except admin assistant. Secretaries are now executive assistants or some other title and whilst there may be more women than men, there are men who do such jobs, appointed because of suitability and not sex. There are male receptionists and male veterinary nurses just as there are women who drive delivery vans and buses.
*or 'them' if you prefer.
Then take a walk to Falconwood Employment Agency in London Road, Bromley. Ask them how many males are given temporary white collar jobs.
-
I can't think of any job, which employs people of one gender.
There are some jobs, in nursing, social work, which are exempt from the 1975 statute. I am not grumbling about them.
-
There are some jobs, in nursing, social work, which are exempt from the 1975 statute. I am not grumbling about them.
Such as?
-
H:- Easy way out. "They discriminated against me because I am female/black/disabled".
That has frequently happened and still happens. We who haven't experienced such discrimination are fortunate but doesn't mean we aren't aware of discrimination.
H:- Who discriminated against Elena Ceaucescu?
No idea but in the end she was indiscriminately shot.
H:- Then take a walk to Falconwood Employment Agency in London Road, Bromley. Ask them how many males are given temporary white collar jobs.
Are you trying to say they favour women over men regardless of qualifications and experience? Or is it just that more women than men are interested in those jobs.
You could ask them if it is so important to you, come back and tell us what they say. Or do some undercover work and go digging.
Ifyou find evidence that Falconwood discriminate against male candidates, write it up and send to the Bromley Times. Name and shame.
-
HWB:- There are some jobs, in nursing, social work, which are exempt from the 1975 statute. I am not grumbling about them.
Such as?
Bumping this so that Roses is answered.
-
Bumping this so that Roses is answered.
Are you and LR seriously claiming that you do not know that some jobs are exempt from the Sex Discrimination Act 1975?
LR does not know Karl Marx from Groucho Marx, but you claim to have worked in HR, and you do not know that some forms of nursing, and some social work within certain communities, are exempt from that statute? Do you think that women from the Horn of Africa, escaping an abusive marriage, and not wishing their daughters to suffer the butchery of FGM, are forced to talk to men?
-
Humph, please don't jump to conclusions, I wanted you to answer Little Roses or, more specifically, as I had posted at some length immediately after her, I didn't want her post to be overlooked.
-
Are you and LR seriously claiming that you do not know that some jobs are exempt from the Sex Discrimination Act 1975?
LR does not know Karl Marx from Groucho Marx, but you claim to have worked in HR, and you do not know that some forms of nursing, and some social work within certain communities, are exempt from that statute? Do you think that women from the Horn of Africa, escaping an abusive marriage, and not wishing their daughters to suffer the butchery of FGM, are forced to talk to men?
You are really behaving in a very silly way, by making daft comments. What the heck Marxism has to do with this topic goodness only knows. Men and women can request having someone of the same gender to attend to their care, or with whom to discuss personal problems. That is not the as saying people of either gender are barred from those areas.
-
The Act was repealed a few years ago, Humph may remember when, I don't but the Equality Act embraces Sex Discrimination, Race Relations and other things.
(Some of the exemptions are religion based which won't please everyone, I ain't gonna open that can of worms.)
Still don't really get H's anti-feminist stance particularly the class issue but I haven't anything else to add to this discussion. Over to others.
-
I'm sympathetic to moderate feminism, but I can see Humph's point. It has occurred to me before now that feminism cuts across the usual left-wing groupings. As Humph says, a working class woman has more in common with aworking-class man than with a posh, rich woman, who is exploiting her economically to some extent.
-
You want to split the working class political movement based upon gender,
My definition does not say that. My definition, in fact says the opposite.
and you think that is reasonable?
I think your definition is definitely unreasonable.
-
Oh dear. What has giving oral sex got to do with the discussion?
You don't pay attention to the news then.
The only female colleagues of mine who were paid less then me in my forty year working career were my workplace subordinates, and I have had many female bosses who were paid more than me.
Well I congratulate your employer for not being discriminatory towards women.
As for being treated like an object, I have mentioned my violent and spiteful ex in other discussions, it ain't just a female thing.
Unlucky you. Nearly twice as many women suffer from domestic abuse as men.
I do not accept that every female has to put up with sex discrimination every day of her life, any more than I accept that every ethnic minority person faces racial discrimination every day of their life.
Just because you can find a few examples that do not fit the general trend doesn't mean the trend does not exist.
Quite frankly for you to claim the former, puts you on the same level as the ludicrous Bahar Mustafa and her "kill all white men!" request.
Quite frankly you are talking out of your arse.
-
I'm sympathetic to moderate feminism, but I can see Humph's point. It has occurred to me before now that feminism cuts across the usual left-wing groupings. As Humph says, a working class woman has more in common with aworking-class man than with a posh, rich woman, who is exploiting her economically to some extent.
I'm glad someone can see Humph's pov which he is entitled to and it can't be much fun when everyone appears to be against you. How you have explained it is far easier too.
Don't agree with you though. For a start a 'posh' rich woman who exploited another person economically would not be a feminist. Yes a 'working class' woman would have lots in common with a man from similar background, not much doubt about that but no reason to suppose she has nothing of note in common with women who are better off. It's actually rather demeaning to assume she wouldn't.
Some attitudes displayed here are, frankly, anachronistic. I'm not so naive as to be unaware of class distinction, it exists and I abhor it but people in our society are far more economically and socially mobile than in the days of the hunger marchers. The Equal Opportunities Act and, later, the Equality Act have been instrumental in helping to make society fairer. Still a way to go, we learn from history but no need to be stuck in it.
How often does anyone really dwell on 'class'? People are people. Being resentful and defensive towards those better off or believing one should stick to their own 'class' is sheer snobbery. It's also hurtful & bewildering to be on the receiving end.
-
I don't understand what all this "having things in common" stuff has to do with feminism. Back in the early 90's I worked with a woman who is still a friend. We did more or less the same job and she was at least as good at is as I was. Unquestionably, she had more in common with me than with women in poverty or extremely rich women, but that doesn't alter the fact that (and I only found this out a couple of years ago) she was being paid far less than me.
Feminism says that a woman doing the same job at the same standard as a man should be being rewarded the same amount. That doesn't seem like dividing the genders to me.
-
I don't understand what all this "having things in common" stuff has to do with feminism. Back in the early 90's I worked with a woman who is still a friend. We did more or less the same job and she was at least as good at is as I was. Unquestionably, she had more in common with me than with women in poverty or extremely rich women, but that doesn't alter the fact that (and I only found this out a couple of years ago) she was being paid far less than me.
Feminism says that a woman doing the same job at the same standard as a man should be being rewarded the same amount. That doesn't seem like dividing the genders to me.
In the same way anti-racism says that any persons doing the same job at the same standard should be rewarded the same amount; anti-classism says that any persons doing the same job at the same standard should be rewarded the same amount, similarly for religion and ethnicity - so clearly a focus on feminism could divide or even thwart efforts in the other areas.
But the whole thing is academic as: there is no good way of deciding who is doing a given job at the same standard at the same pay - especially as pay and perks are not publicly disclosed. Also, the whole idea is subverted by the gender equality paradox - as women gain equality in status and pay, they tend to move to, traditionally, women's careers and stereotypical outlooks eg. apply less for STEM subjects.
-
In the same way anti-racism says that any persons doing the same job at the same standard should be rewarded the same amount; anti-classism says that any persons doing the same job at the same standard should be rewarded the same amount, similarly for religion and ethnicity - so clearly a focus on feminism could divide or even thwart efforts in the other areas.
How?
Two people doing the same job to the same standard should be rewarded equally no matter what their race, gender or class is.
But the whole thing is academic as: there is no good way of deciding who is doing a given job at the same standard at the same pay - especially as pay and perks are not publicly disclosed. Also, the whole idea is subverted by the gender equality paradox - as women gain equality in status and pay, they tend to move to, traditionally, women's careers and stereotypical outlooks eg. apply less for STEM subjects.
Why are there stereotypical female and male jobs? Don’t you think it’s all part of the same problem?
-
How?
Two people doing the same job to the same standard should be rewarded equally no matter what their race, gender or class is.
Of-course, that is a fair objective to have. The schemes to bring this about though require that people of disadvantaged race, gender or class actually get into those jobs first - so the schemes can end up in competition, or bypassed completely by a company appointing a black disabled woman to the board and making no other changes.
Why are there stereotypical female and male jobs? Don’t you think it’s all part of the same problem?
Well there are, because women, often for cultural or historical reasons, may not have the same interests as men. This does not mean that both should not be rewarded with equal pay and power:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p05y9hpq
There are quite a few other articles on the 'paradox' too.