Feminist board

Rigby, with respect you are not a poster I would wish to hold a discussion with because you are bossy and it must be your way or no way, you insult posters too, sorry but just being honest and giving an explanation as to why I am not interested , it would be multiple lectures , not being unkind, just honest , I am sure there are those who disagree with me, I can respect that

MB I'm not sure where you got the idea of demarcation or being a card carrying feminist from. I'm sorry if I've given that impression but I don't know how. I tried to explain that it would be for discussing feminist issues for people who are interested . I'd guess that the Arts and Crafts board is for people interested in er er Arts and Crafts. And you couldn't be more wrong to think that feminists agree - where did you get that idea from? One of the interesting aspects of this is the wide range of different feminist perspectives - my dd and I are both feminists and we disagree on practically every feminist issue we discuss. One of the things that has become quite clear on this thread has been how much misinformation and misunderstanding there is on the topic and IMO it would be really interesting to explore the issues more. I'm sorry you've said no as opposed to abstsining however as you say as well you aren't bothered. Oh well there you go.

Yes I can understand why you wonder some are against it because you think it needed. And I can understand why some do not think it needed

In the same way that posts on some threads meander into other areas, I suppose we would be no worse off having a "Feminist" thread, in the same way we have News and Politics. BUT I would not welcome any sort of demarcation or necessity to be a card carrying feminist to contribute. If everyone is agreed on a topic or on a thread, where is the discussion. I have very mixed feelings about being classified in any way. "What is the feminist view" may be a million miles from "Now what is the ladies' take on this issue" but amounts to the same thing in the end.
Just as we are not all necessarily grannies or indeed grandparents of either gender, we are not all women, and we are not all of the same political persuasion.
We are, however, all people and the variety of views should be what makes GN stimulating.
So, on balance, No from me, but if you want one that wouldn't bother me at all, in the same way that I can choose whether or not to look at other topics, I remain free to choose to opt into a Feminist topic or thread or not.

But -ab can you appreciate that I do wonder why people are against it as opposed to not being for it? I don't understand why one more board matters - there are plenty on the list hardly used that could be said to be 'cluttering up' GN

Yes ab you are right HQ made the error did just that but it wasn't that I was referring to.

Could it be we were asked for a yes or no and have given a yes or no , we were not asked why we give a yes or no.

TriciaF I think I've perhaps misused the word - I note that HQ used the word 'topic'. What I meant ( sorry if I got it wrong) was a 'heading' like News and Politics or Relationships and then if there was a particular issue that you wanted to discuss that addressed feminist issues, you would start a new thread there like & Should women have to wear high heels at work' or ' is it right to use derogatory words like witches coven when describing a group of women'. I d o appreciate that these threads could be started anyway - under News and Politics or Chat - I'd just thought that if Feminism had its own whatever its called it would signal what the focus was. That's all. I love the feminist boards on MN but I would really like to debate some of these issues with more people in my age group and who have experienced the huge changes in women's lives and experiences from the say 50s onwards. Until recently, I was very comfortably ensconced as a liberal feminist but I have to say that recent debates on transgender issues have really shaken my certainties and I wanted to explore a bit more what being a feminist means and what issues face women today compared with the past. I wanted I suppose Jaysnna's thoughtful rational discussion but some people are sounding quite cross and dismissive of the whole idea But no one would have to join in who doesn't want to so I'm not sure why they care so much that it doesn't happen

I vote yes for a Feminist board, simply because it would make it easier to find threads on the subject.

I didn't realise that by gays you meant men and women. But anyway, I still don't agree . This isn't simply about prejudice -- for example, only women can be pregnant. There are many issues in the work place that may affect a pregnant women which are not about prejudice but about the fact that the specific issues haven't been thought about . These issues will not affect a disabled man or a gay man but would need addressing. Feminism is about so much more than prejudice - so much much more. For point 2. I don't agree it's facetious - there is a debate on equality of outcome versus equality of input and before equality is discussed I really don't see that it's facetious to ensure we have a common understanding of what we mean by the concept.

Rigby - I should have asked before - what do you mean by 'a feminist board'?
I thought, a new thread about feminism. But maybe not?

Sorry HQ just reread your post - I see you are working on a majority. Quantity not quality . When is close of play?

Rigby46 1. I agree the mainstream media do focus on the extreme end of any movement - but that doesn't alter the fact that the more intemperate claiming sexism at any opportunity does damage the whole movement

2. Your sample is, if I may say so, facetious. Equality of course would mean all the boys being able to watch the football match, any other interpretation would be disingenuous

3. Of course different groups face different prejudices, but on the whole if someone is inclined to be prejudiced it doesn't matter which group or sub-group a person belongs to.

4. I didn't say I think gay MEN experience more prejudice than women. What I meant was any gay person (male or female) or ANYONE who differs from what some consider the "norm" will experience more prejudice than a woman who "conforms" to what is considered "normal" (whatever that is)

What is 'natural fairness' Elegran. That's a serious question and I have no idea of the answer

Sorry trad=tran -was in a rush as lunch was ready.

-Cherry in the interests of equality there would not have to be a 'masculinist' board - that's so absolutely not what equality means. But if there were a feminist board and the legions of men on GN wanted a board which focuses on male issues, then they could ask for one couldn't they? What would be much more interesting would be for all the men on GN to join in on discussions on feminism and give their perspective - some of them would be feminists anyway.

Like I said before, a yes from me if it can be a place for thoughtful, rational discussion.

*phoenix' sorry you feel that way

-sunseeker there's a lot in your post to unpack but I'll have a go

1.sadly I think in the MSM there is very little sensible discussion of feminism and what it means. The right wing press will seine on a small atypical example and pretend that that is what feminism is all about

2. Equality for all - well first of all what does equality mean, what does it look like? Do you know the cartoon which shows three boys of differing heights behind a wall in front of which a football game is being played? The tallest boy can see properly over the wall, the medley height boy can see half over and the smallest can not see over the wall at all. The next picture show what happens when they are all given an equal sized box to stand on - the smallest one still cannot see over the wall. In the third picture, they are all given different sized boxes so their heights are evened up and they all can see over the wall equally

3. My guess would be that most people would say they are in favour of equality for all but the issues facing the different groups who face inequality are, overall, generally different both between and within groups. That's why the Government has a separate minister for disabilities and separates out women as minister for women and inequalities.

4. I don't think we can just take a group eg gay men and say they face much more prejudice than women. The within groups inequalities are very wide - different groups of women will face less or more prejudice than other groups of women and that can be exacerbated for example by being a black woman or a gay woman or a disabled woman. Also the rights of one group can conflict with the rights of another eg trad women and women

No for me

Well obviously it's a yes from me - will the decision be based on a simple majority regardless of numbers?. For example, if 30 people said yes and 31 said no would you think that was enough interest for the topic even though thos in favour were less? ( not that I expect numbers like that but just wondered)

No from me too.

Rather patronising tone in your post to me, Rigby I'd take umbrage if I could only get the lid off the bottle!

A NO from me

It is a NO from me, too. There are enough different topic headings at the moment. A feminist viewpoint can be applied to any subject (and without even mentioning the words "feminist" or "women's rights", just "I think . . " or "In law . . ." or "It would be unfair if . . .". Feminist has become a label to argue about in itself, without any reference to legality or natural fairness.)

It's a no from me too

It's a "no" from me.