Feminism - where are the threads?

[ManchesterBeth]

You're out of order.

So? what you gonna do about it?

 

[ManchesterBeth]

kmt.

 

[Poot]

So? what you gonna do about it?

I'm going to suggest that you step away for a while. I read your article, it was interesting, but this is probably not the best thread for it.

 

[ManchesterBeth]

pretty tame, in all honesty. was hoping for some more full blooded insults.

The thing is, respect for the elders is a cornerstone of the nuclear family and its on in full force on this thread, so, haha.

 

[cupid_stunt]

Ok what planet is this?

He can't reply, he's been banned from the thread, and hopefully another one will be soon.

Unwatching thread.

Would had been good idea if you had actually done so, perhaps you can step away now?

 

[BristolEcho]

Can't find the posts now, but someone mentioned foster carers. Totally agree with that. My Mum was a foster carer for over 30 years and had to fight for her pension as they didn't want to her pay her properly claiming it wasn't work. Luckily there is organising going on now to try and fight this stuff. My Mum never asked for a penny of what she was entitled too beyond the minimum and they still tried to rip her off at the end.

In regards to care and social work. It's something that has been getting on my nerves for a while. We need to challenge the idea that it is "unskilled" work that anyone can do competently. It's a long road, but again I am seeing signs of resistence which can only be a good thing.

 

[JudithB]

That article has fuck all to do with intersectionalism. rather than froth at the mouth talking about people with no penises, have some fucking empathy for people in the food industry (predominantly women by the way) who work to getting your poxy English food to you at a just in time rate with very little to no English language skills, something you would know if you weren't a shit stirrer. not just another country in Africa, right on your doorstep in West London.

I am unsure if you are rude to other people in the same way. I am going to make an assumption you are probably not as rude to people with penises.

Thank you for taking the time to elucidate some of the points of the article you posted.

FYI I do not live in West London

 

[scifisam]

why separate them off from one another? The nature of women's oppression, and of racism, both come from the introduction of 'modern' capitalism and the changes required to end feudal support systems. It cannot be sensibly discussed 'outside of' capitalism - just as you can't sensibly talk about ending capitalism without also talking about ending it's patriarchal and racist bedrocks. They are all intimately connected. Federici is spot on on this.

They are connected, but in order to have meaningful discussions you have to separate them. That doesn't mean pretending the connections don't exist, because we should always be aware of them and they're often very important. But when we just go nebulous it's all capitalism all things are interconnected etc etc it goes over the head of most people and is very, very helpful to those in charge because we just argue amongst ourselves about what we should even be arguing about.

It's OK to talk about women being underpaid. It doesn't mean that the people talking about that are unaware that other people are also underpaid. It means we've selected one specific topic to discuss. The way you deal with problems is not to launch yourself headlong against them all like a berserker, you have to break them down and deal with them one by one.

And for discussion on a messageboard that applies even more. Some people want to discuss one topic in a bit of spare time and some other people come along and say no, that's too general! Discuss ALL topics! Now! On this thread!

So should all the Star Trek: Discovery threads then be obliged to be general scifi or TV discussions? Even to the extent that ST is sidelined? No. Then why should talking about being a woman be subsumed by other topics in a thread that was about women?

 

[ManchesterBeth]

nvm.

 

[Pickman's model]

I am unsure if you are rude to other people in the same way. I am going to make an assumption you are probably not as rude to people with penises.

Thank you for taking the time to elucidate some of the points of the article you posted.

FYI I do not live in West London

To be fair he's rude to everyone without regard for their sex

 

[ManchesterBeth]

To be fair he's rude to everyone without regard for their sex

Now that's some pedantry i can get behind!

 

[Pickman's model]

Now that's some pedantry i can get behind!

Perhaps you could get 30 feet behind it or at least 30 feet from a computer or mobile

 

[ManchesterBeth]

Perhaps you could get 30 feet behind it or at least 30 feet from a computer or mobile

Pretty easy with a wireless keyboard that.

 

[JudithB]

My experience, which is not unique, is that middle management is almost entirely made of white middle class men, and whilst there is a single very well paid woman director, women are almost never promoted. We just aren't considered. But because of the one female director who earns fucktons, the stats don't look too bad. Or as my manager says 'there's no sexism here. Look at the gender pay gap statistics!' This was shortly after I'd requested something from a male colleague and been told to 'say pretty please!' So yeah, no sexism apparently, I must be hysterical or something to even consider it.

This is a condition oft repeated in organisations. Sex segregation. Men and women perform different jobs and women's jobs are undervalued because they are performed by women.

This is galling insomuch as historically women were paid less as they were expected to prioritise domestic duties allowing the men to be the main bread winners. Nowadays it is a useful tool of capitalism to keep wages down and a great deal of care work inside the home relatively free. Wherein most households need both wages to remain out of poverty and there are a fuckton of women who are not married/cohabiting and do not have dependents.

Of course sexual division of labour inside the home is still unchallenged and the patriarchal system of work, organised on the assumption that the protype worker is male, creates a situation removed from reality by an unconcious internalised fantasy of the working man supporting his wife and children on a family wage.

 

[friedaweed]

That article has fuck all to do with intersectionalism. rather than froth at the mouth talking about people with no penises, have some fucking empathy for people in the food industry (predominantly women by the way) who work to getting your poxy English food to you at a just in time rate with very little to no English language skills, something you would know if you weren't a shit stirrer. not just another country in Africa, right on your doorstep in West London.

Why do you go from 0 to 90 like this all the time? You're like an angry shouty child who want his voice to be louder than everyone else's. Why don't you converse with people with a bit more kindness in your words like the way you would like someone to talk to you?

You're a bright lad but no-one engages with you because you rant like rude kid from the Vis.

 

[kabbes]

Why do you go from 0 to 90 like this all the time? You're like an angry shouty child who want his voice to be louder than everyone else's. Why don't you converse with people with a bit more kindness in your words like the way you would like someone to talk to you?

You're a bright lad but no-one engages with you because you rant like rude kid from the Vis.

Practical intelligence

 

[JudithB]

I’m really really glad you said this. Because part of what I’d like to see happen is women properly supported in staying home with their babies and small kids. That having to put them in childcare despite baby crying at drop off, and Mum crying round the corner as soon as she’s ten steps away, is shite.

I am a mother who breastfed each time and also used the attachment method by mistake. Whatever works for a mother.

The demonisation of the mother must be curtailed and reexamined so that we are not again having to fit into a prototype designed for men. Women who stay at home should not be vilified for doing nothing all day. Childcare is hard work. Those who want to return to work often do so out of necessity. Both wages are needed to ensure the family stays out of poverty. Again these women should not be demonised.

Some women will want to return to work because after a year of winding up bobbins and peekaboo, some adult company is much desired. Again this is not wrong.

Women should be able to make choices and it is society in allowing men to be the breadwinner even before women have started a family - see Poot's post - that leads to women being the primary care worker. Early childcare and parent is often than not the sole responsibility of the mother from 9 til 5 and through the night.

What do we need to change to allow all mothers the choice to either stay at home or return to a "working life" that allows for parental considerations?

 

[Shechemite]

Practical intelligence

Interesting link

 

[scifisam]

This is a condition oft repeated in organisations. Sex segregation. Men and women perform different jobs and women's jobs are undervalued because they are performed by women.

This is galling insomuch as historically women were paid less as they were expected to prioritise domestic duties allowing the men to be the main bread winners. Nowadays it is a useful tool of capitalism to keep wages down and a great deal of care work inside the home relatively free. Wherein most households need both wages to remain out of poverty and there are a fuckton of women who are not married/cohabiting and do not have dependents.

Of course sexual division of labour inside the home is still unchallenged and the patriarchal system of work, organised on the assumption that the protype worker is male, creates a situation removed from reality by an unconcious internalised fantasy of the working man supporting his wife and children on a family wage.

Yes, parents are still expected to act as if there were two of them, even though there's often only one, and still expected to act as if the woman is the main caregiver.

I wouldn't say it's unchallenged though. It is challenged. But it has been for ages and it doesn't seem to have moved on that much in the past thirty years. We were challenging it then and we still have to challenge it now.

 

[JudithB]

Yes, parents are still expected to act as if there were two of them, even though there's often only one, and still expected to act as if the woman is the main caregiver.

I wouldn't say it's unchallenged though. It is challenged. But it has been for ages and it doesn't seem to have moved on that much in the past thirty years. We were challenging it then and we still have to challenge it now. View attachment 168698

It's like mummy flu. The same as man-flu but nobody gives a shit

I love that picture

 

[friedaweed]

Practical intelligence

Interesting. Ta.

 

[JudithB]

P.S. Can someone please come and remove all the Easter Eggs from my house?

 

[JudithB]

Interesting. Ta.

I concur
I was judging EQ levels which do not seem to be covered by Sternberg's theory

 

[ManchesterBeth]

Practical intelligence

Cheers, some useful references there, I shall have to read them in depth when I can brace it.

 

[Baronage-Phase]

Can't find the posts now, but someone mentioned foster carers. Totally agree with that. My Mum was a foster carer for over 30 years and had to fight for her pension as they didn't want to her pay her properly claiming it wasn't work. Luckily there is organising going on now to try and fight this stuff. My Mum never asked for a penny of what she was entitled too beyond the minimum and they still tried to rip her off at the end.

In regards to care and social work. It's something that has been getting on my nerves for a while. We need to challenge the idea that it is "unskilled" work that anyone can do competently. It's a long road, but again I am seeing signs of resistence which can only be a good thing.

Never knew that fosters carers got a pension. Dont know why I didn't know that...

 

[BristolEcho]

Never knew that fosters carers got a pension. Dont know why I didn't know that...

I can't remember the exact details, but it was due to her not making any national insurance contributions IIRC. I think it was to do with the amount of state pension she would get.

 

[kabbes]

I concur
I was judging EQ levels which do not seem to be covered by Sternberg's theory

The problem with EQ is that it assumes there is a context-free objective standard against which an individual can be judged. As the link notes, practical intelligence is domain-specific and learner-specific. The other problem with EQ is that (although it is not necessarily intended as such) it implies something inherent rather than learned. In Sternberg’s approach, the whole thing is conceptualised as developed abilities, not innate or otherwise fixed qualities. I think it’s a far more powerful way of thinking about the wider nature of human intelligence.

To bring this back to the subject at hand, the relevance to feminism is that if Sternberg is right, it’s this embedded sociocultural learning about how to interact with your environment that is a key impediment to all types of equality. Once you learn that your way to fit into the world is to show this characteristic and that behaviour, you don’t even have the conceptualisation you need to challenge it. This creates an overwhelming need for modelled alternatives to fight these self-conceptualisations that the embedded knowledge brings.

 

[JudithB]

Thanks

Can you expand on modelled alternatives are they societal or individual?

 

[editor]

Pretty easy with a wireless keyboard that.

I'm giving you a week off from this thread.

 

[kabbes]

Thanks

Can you expand on modelled alternatives are they societal or individual?

Could be anything. But think “I can’t be what I can’t see” except on the scale of the full spectrum of behaviour, not just job aspiration.

It applies to both men and women and about men and women too, of course.