If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Options
Take a look around and enjoy reading the discussions. If you'd like to join in, it's really easy to register and then you'll be able to post. If you'd like to learn what this place is all about, head here.
Comments
Can you explain why?
Surely at this point it becomes a humanist approach then, rather than one of feminism.
For me, feminism is primary concern with the equality issue when females do not carry the same rights as men. in that I would include things like the vote or equal pay for equal work.
When it comes to those aspects you mention then rights for all are in play. Why should courts still see mothers as the prime place for childrearing, why should abortion be seen soley as a right for the mother, why shouldn't anyone have the right to decent working conditions or to buy a home?
Unless we have mastered immaculate conception (and I cannot think of a single case in human history where we have) then surely we should also celebrate the father and his biology?
because the only person involved is the potential mother.
Celebrating one thing does not preclude from also celebrating another.
How wrong I was...
bitch
Thank you for proving a point, even though I agree to a certain extent. It isn't, after all, the father whose body will be directly affected.
However, his emotions clearly are not worth considering, but he is, I suppose, just the father.
The point being made was that we should celebrate womanhood for being able to give birth, to bring a child into the world. A very feminist approach, one could say.
I would argue that actually it's take both genders to bring a child into the world. Guess which gender is usually forgotten.
No, we don't consider the emotions of one person as more important than the rights over ones own body, do you think we should? Do you think abortion is a special case where we should or, there are other examples?
Feel free to change my mind...
Except that in this case it's not a new job. It's actually just the job I already do, which they are trying to deny me the right to get recognition for because I am going on leave. Which in turn means that when I come back, I actually won't be doing the same job in the same conditions, even though I am legally entitled to.
That's not even a matter of gender, in my eyes, it's a matter of law, and happily for me they're on the wrong side of it in this case. I didn't make this about whether I'm male or female, they did. I'm just not going to roll over and accept it.
I suppose you think that makes me a terrible bra-burning man-hater. Oh well
On the thread topic, and in case it isn't obvious from this, I would say I am a dictionary-definition feminist. I am all about equality, although by being equal, I don't mean identical. IMO, comparing men and women is like comparing apples and oranges. They don't have all the same bits, or all the same functions, but they are both equally valuable fruit :thumb:
Well, what do you want? Celebration of fathers? I'm all for it, the best way to start might be... with a bit of consciousness raising, in the form of a 'rant' if you like
I missed the part where is suggested, or insinuated, that emotions were more important than the rights of a woman's body.
Abortion was, however, the only thing that you picked out of my response questioning whether the issues you raised were feminist issues of one where rights should be available for all.
Ah, so this is a thread for feminist issues only? Kinda sexist approach, non
Er, no :no:
From a capitalist perspective gender, race and class are all intertwined. The basic argument is that capitalists have systematically created racism and sexism in the workplace so that races and genders see more in common with themselves than their fellow working (wo)man :wave: and therefore limitating their bargaining rights in the workplace. I think this applies more to race than gender but it equally is true for both imo.
My point is tha abortion isn't, and should never be seen as, solely a "women's issue". It's a parent's issue.
I'm never going to argue that the father should have a right of veto but, unlike many, neither will I argue that it is something which only affects the mother. It doesn't.
but it would be too problematic to give the father rights over an abortion because by doing so you'd be invading the mother's human rights.
i think a similar type of after care should be available to fathers e.g. counselling and support but the abortion itself i think, should always remain the mother's decision.
I even remember suggestions that Parliament shouldn't be making laws in this instance because it's so male dominated
From here, as an example.
Indeed, this is what I would have responded.
First, MoK, I don't think recognising the awesomeness of my care team - and they were all amazing, midwives, doctors, care assistants - means there is less room to recognise the awesomeness of my achievement too. It's not a zero-sum game. We all did a great job.
And as Big Gay rightly points out, when I say I think I did amazingly, part of what I mean by that is, isn't my body amazing? Isn't the human body incredible? I'm not necessarily claiming I had any major will or volition over the whole thing, and perhaps biology does 'take over' - but still, that in itself is incredible, and I don't see 'me' as somehow separate from my body. I am my body, and my body did an incredible job.
(That said, I still had to work hard mentally too. 27 hours in labour is quite a tough psychological, as well as physical feat!)
But MoK, your comment
is, quite frankly, ridiculous. I carried the babies for nine months. During that time I suffered morning sickness, all manner of aches, pains and other general fatigue, and then serious discomfort towards the end when the baby was overdue. Then I went through a marathon of a labour. Then I breastfed for six months.
The part my partner's biology played in all that was ejaculating inside me at the start of all that. While I agree that it kicked off a rather wonderful and magical process, I don't think it was too much of a challenge for him! I don't think there is any great symbolic injustice being done if we marvel at the immense feat being carried out by women's bodies every day, while not extending the same reverence to men's role in it all! It may indeed take two genders to bring a baby into the world, but one of those fulfils his role rather quickly and pleasurably at the start of the process.
That's not to say that men have no interests to be considered with respect to the unborn child of course, because these two issues, while related, are separate. The question of how much wonder and awe we should feel towards women's bodies is a separate one from the question of rights over them.
While you might be right that abortion is not only a women's issue, it's obviously primarily a women's issue. It involves a woman's right to decide what happens to her own body - how is that not a woman's issue? Of course it affects fathers too - but given that the right of the woman in question is her right to bodily integrity, then it's hard to see how any interest of the father's could ever trump that. So while he might have an interest worth considering, and a right to express that, it's hard to see how it could ever be decisive, and in that case, while he does have an interest, he has no rights.
Not a good start, is it? More generally, I view feminism in the same way as most other things - with at least one cynical eye. Because women seem very selective about what bits of feminism they actually want to see. In other words, they only want equality when it's convenient for them. I, as a man, have no objection to women being equal with men, but it does annoy me when I see this. For example, women currently get to retire 5 years earlier than men. That isn't equality, in my eyes. If anything, it should be men that get to retire first on the grounds that women live for longer. But you never hear anyone point that out, do you?
Sigmund Freud, when he famously queried "What do women want?" was really onto something...
No, you didn't just read that.
I can't be arsed to engage with your tedious and off-topic bashing of a member of the government just for the hell of it, because it's all so predictable.
I am all in favour of equalising the retirement age, and would indeed point this out in a discussion of gender equality. Apart from anything, I have no desire to retire at such a ridiculously early age as 65, let alone 60. Bearing in mind I'm in very good health and will probably live another 30 years after that, I would like to keep working as long as I possibly can. Anyway, the law is being changed to bring men and women's retirement ages into line, most feminists would have no problem with that at all, and as I'm With Stupid says, the discrepancy at the moment is probably down to old fashioned ideas about women's frailty and weakness.
So what else have you got?