can we discuss feminism please

It's also really difficult for those of us who werent on the thread to follow what is happening here!

Galaxy

It's also really difficult for those of us who werent on the thread to follow what is happening here!

Fair comment.

Although I am obviously slipping and missed a good row

Galaxy I think you have the gist of the argument. Raise any other issues than the standard women are victims into the discussion and you will be shut down with "women are murdered" "you are blaming women". Along with we know about it, we just don't want to discuss it. We prefer to focus on the issue of trans people who have been with us for years but who we have just found out about.
It's 50 years since the Kinks sang Lola and almost 50 since Bowie's Rebel Rebel. Which I was listening to today- 5 years since he died!
In his words "You've got your mother in a whirl, cos she's not sure if you're a boy or a girl."
It seems that some are still in a whirl, maybe it's just the young who accept things more.

Not that keen on Bowie to be honest. Discussing male violence is not shutting anyone down.

Without bringing the other thread into it again, may I just say that the above passive aggressive interpretation is absolutely not the same as mine

Actually I thought it was pretty plainly agressive. I suppose though that is something I'm not allowed to be because I'm a woman.

Another patronising and ridiculous suggestion that posters have ‘only just’ found out about trans people. Yes this is a group of women who sang along with The Kinks - in my case along with discussions with my parents about trans.

You seem to see yourself as being victimised because you’re the only poster with the knowledge trisher. It’s becoming impossible to discuss feminism without This happening. I’d like to see more posters contributing to feminism discussions but that’s not likely

I can’t find any of the discussion I was involved with yesterday. As I am new to Gransnet can someone advise please? I hope it has not been removed.

If you mean on this thread, it’s still there.

It seems it is ok for the Westminster parliament hall to have roaring folk, mainly men, who don’t listen to each other televised to the world, whilst mature women engaging in civil discourse is censored!

That censorship is a feminist matter.

Debate is healthy, it challenges our opinions, sharpens our arguments and has the potential to find common ground if there is good will all round.

Doodledog - I can’t see it!

MBH it's all there. There are lots of pages to the thread, sorry if I am saying somethungmobvious but I dont know what you mean. It hasnt been censored.

I really must check my posts for punctuation before I post.

Ahh, found it, with great difficulty ?. One result was that the page had been moved with pic of a cow!!!!
Anyway...replying to a question about using loos on the continent - my experience of using unisex loos there, is that it is one cubicle just of the main cafe/bar. I have found some difficulty using them when wearing loose trousers. I don’t sit on the seat of non domestic loos so that means hovering, then to keep the bottom of my trousers of the floor (floor usually covered in urine from missed bowl urinating) heisting up the legs, holding on to them, whilst trying to pull my pants down and forward....sure you all get the picture, so all round inconvenient in unisex convinces (sorry, couldn’t resist that ?). Our loos are usually tucked away, some down/up stairs, unless they are for easy access use. They are often behind two closed doors with a line of cubicles with walls that have gaps bottom and top. ‘Up skirting’ became a common occurrence so a law, campaigned for by women, had to be created. A unisex loo provides opportunities for toxic masculinity to work its self into behaviour /action and videoing is only one concern.
For men who identify as women, to gain a gender recognition certificate (GRC) they must evidence living as a woman and using Ladies loos, changing rooms etc is seen as evidence.
So, considering unisex loos for women, children is a risk and for those men who are transitioning also puts them at risk whilst not providing evidence. The solution in long term is to address toxic masculinity so anyone and everyone is not at risk and in short term keep Ladies loos for women/children use and create loos for men who identify as women, this can be considered as sufficient evidence for the GRC. Same for changing rooms etc. Right now, the unpalatable choice, because it is not a win-win is that we have a duty to reduce the risk to children and follow the Equalities Act 2010 that has as a protected characteristic ‘Sex’. So, all who are not providing loos for the use of women and children only are breaking the law. There is some research into the impact of this and I will try to find it and post if I can work out how to do that.

Reading through some of the posts on this thread I see I have some common ground with others e.g. the patriarchal property and for non profit issues, as well as a recognition of the need to put women and children’s rights at the centre, where ever we live on this earth, and allow this to inform our views.

Just for information, Ilovecheese a breeding female cat IS called a queen!

I was thinking about Simone De Beauvoir's assertion that women are complicit in maintaining their position as "other" and allowing men to remain as powerful. I know this won't sit well with some on GN but I do wonder if we do unconsciously buy into this. I'm thinking of the many posts about how male partners or husbands can't be trusted to do household tasks because they don't do them properly. In any other situation you would insist the person did the task more often until they improved, but some women don't do that. I recognise that when I had small children I was intensely protective of that role and had difficulty passing responsibility to their father. I think for women today it must be incredibly difficult accepting equal roles in childcare . But if we don't make men responsible for the everyday tasks and childcare how can we move away from being seen as only homemakers and become equals.
This was written by a women called Lisbeth Simm in 1913.
To rid ourselves of ancient superstitions regarding woman’s proper sphere: to equip ourselves for the work of to-day, public as well as private; to join hands in good faith and comradeship with all those willing to work with us. Surely this is not difficult? Surely working women will not refuse? Then it may soon become a matter of urgent practical politics to relieve the working woman of much that is now considered the necessary work of each separate home, so that the energy and thought this set free may be used for the development of an altogether higher standard of human life; and women’s labour in the home be recognised as other than a desirable but unpaid for appendage to the labour of the working man. In our visions we sometimes imagine a time when poverty and misery will be banished from our midst - the time is not yet, but it is brought nearer whenever a woman realizes that poverty in a land of plenty is an unnecessary evil. First then, as working women, we must combine; second, educate and agitate; third, administrate; and so by easy stages gradually take our proper place as comrades and equals with men in the great family life of the nation.
She was a workng class woman now largely forgotten. She also wrote that women didn't attend political meetings because men didn't do their share of the housework.
How far have we moved on since then?

Paperbackwriter I was quoting Sweek1, but don't know how to do the quote thing.

See above for link to programme about crimes with cameras etc

Oops! Try again

l.facebook.com/l.php?u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.bbc.co.uk%2Fprogrammes%2Fp0872g59%3Ffbclid%3DIwAR2SZ53YOYFBx7i1RKtjhgOa8IxHOOI_j1RIK0lCzQUD_RnaPXGYYyrnImE&h=AT0j_WUmdCFHdP9nY_GPHpRbtQx5rYkRTRfs-Hu8xOrlDB7IUFR9yNJODgjyERydUObSgZCI78C0_OMQllFsPg5aQnQm1ZD-lRNrd3fsLu5FPWITMX2Z1YJfjQubYKIHC3tUpXbIimPRLq502-VAVT8&__tn__=H-R&c%5B0%5D=AT0kmCb-WaQb8duDSSzrHT_RDf9qEQaDBs56jIo0uiRlxVTAJFE7b0ZrTF5mhm-AFcngxLymt-WcBUc8aeIdLXN47OGxP61EasFz824oSt03pMBmlKVE-atHzQzWdqxRfpLfDbqIdtvIQlieK2sZBc3RKGPqjDPymQF5l6bKiMi14jl-m1-WjQbamhUroZh1LFlmgbDM39zEHXnu5baupuSlinXoxAv0vcz583FYy8ZgO43FO-YBoDqB0tAMiWhJB7QXp8rED6U7QSu1_OgrPZh5NTzRczNkJu_67pfximeb

MBHP1 if your suggestion is implemented and we have seperate loos for transpeople how do you think this rule will be implemented. Will we have to show some sort of id in order to enter a toilet? Laws which are unenforceable are useless.

Trisher - if you believe there are predatory men who have disguised themselves in order to gain access to children and women e.g. priests, teachers, doctors, uni lecturers, tv presenters, do you believe they will not disguise themselves as women to gain access to women and children spaces? If you do, how do you propose we continue to protect women and children in what is recognised traditionally as their spaces?
Are you in agreement with the Equalities Act 2010 that protects women in law by having rights to privacy, dignity and personal safety? If you are, how do you suggest we continue to protect those rights in spaces where they are particularly vulnerable to predatory men like toilets, changing rooms?
I presume you agree with child protection laws and the stats and research that informs us that it is men who they most need protection from so how do you propose that we continue to protect children from predatory men if we accept that toilets, changing rooms etc are to be also used along with men? Women and children would not use a toilet specifically for men who present as women, would they?
I presume you know that in all Health and Safety policies and procedures, prevention is paramount because it is recognised, based on evidence, to be the most effective way for protection.

trisher

I was thinking about Simone De Beauvoir's assertion that women are complicit in maintaining their position as "other" and allowing men to remain as powerful. I know this won't sit well with some on GN but I do wonder if we do unconsciously buy into this. I'm thinking of the many posts about how male partners or husbands can't be trusted to do household tasks because they don't do them properly. In any other situation you would insist the person did the task more often until they improved, but some women don't do that. I recognise that when I had small children I was intensely protective of that role and had difficulty passing responsibility to their father. I think for women today it must be incredibly difficult accepting equal roles in childcare . But if we don't make men responsible for the everyday tasks and childcare how can we move away from being seen as only homemakers and become equals.
This was written by a women called Lisbeth Simm in 1913.
To rid ourselves of ancient superstitions regarding woman’s proper sphere: to equip ourselves for the work of to-day, public as well as private; to join hands in good faith and comradeship with all those willing to work with us. Surely this is not difficult? Surely working women will not refuse? Then it may soon become a matter of urgent practical politics to relieve the working woman of much that is now considered the necessary work of each separate home, so that the energy and thought this set free may be used for the development of an altogether higher standard of human life; and women’s labour in the home be recognised as other than a desirable but unpaid for appendage to the labour of the working man. In our visions we sometimes imagine a time when poverty and misery will be banished from our midst - the time is not yet, but it is brought nearer whenever a woman realizes that poverty in a land of plenty is an unnecessary evil. First then, as working women, we must combine; second, educate and agitate; third, administrate; and so by easy stages gradually take our proper place as comrades and equals with men in the great family life of the nation.
She was a workng class woman now largely forgotten. She also wrote that women didn't attend political meetings because men didn't do their share of the housework.
How far have we moved on since then?

Are you familiar with the campaign from her time, ‘Round about £1 a week’ and the book of the same title?
Trisher - The campaign was for the government to allocate to all women a weekly amount in recognition of the ‘unpaid’ work that they contributed to society by working in the home.
I think it worked it’s self into the ‘Family Allowance’ benefit, paid to all mothers regardless of circumstances and paid in the mothers name, now ‘Child Benefit’ no longer to all mothers nor paid in her name only!

P.s. financial independence is a fore runner but not exclusive, to a woman being involved in things out with the home.