friendofdorothy
Solidarity against neoliberalism!
Glad to see feminism threads revived. I would say there is no single unified view of what femisism is, but I know when I am oppressed, distrimated against, dismissed or insulted.
Feminism - where are the threads?
- Thread starter JudithB
- Start date
Feminism started to lose coherence and validity (for me) not long after the Greenham Common years. By the time I did a degree at Sussex in the 90s, I admit to finding academic feminist writing especially unedifying, obtuse and suspiciously complex. The female fucking gaze and bizarre, irrelevant psycho-analytical rambling. Thankfully, I fled to film studies, economics, some shite called 'Shamanic Consciousness' and mostly history and still got my first.
Probably says more about me (and a somewhat chippy wc belligerence) but 2nd wave feminism seemed apolitical, ahistorical but far worse, elitist. With nothing whatsoever to address the lived experience of just about all the women I know...and most heinously of all, it seemed that to even mention stuff like childcare, parenting, working hours and opportunities and even our actual bodies (unless as commodities of course), was largely dismissed. As FoD succinctly states - there are many shades of feminism but oppression is a overarching, prickling, stinging, ever-present background hum (rising to a shriek).
In fairness, amongst the many demands of the first wave feminists was not just a call for equal opportunity but also a recognition of the value of nurture...not as some abstract compassion, but having material value and economic consequence. Parenthood, and caring in general should not be unpaid labour, but should be valourised and rewarded...and equally shared by men. Yes, it seems ridiculously hopeful and even a bit hippyish, that 'women's work', if given value and respect, would be far more likely to be shared equitably, leading to a net gain for society. I know, it's almost laughable in its naivety... and distressing to see how rapidly the interests of capital managed to subvert feminism by holding up some meritocratic fantasy of success though labour exploitation. And how quickly was the rug pulled from our feet so that the working parent became not just a lifestyle 'choice' (having it all) but a grinding necessity.
I think its a real shame that most people's exposure to psychoanalysis is through french academic psychoanalysis. There are politically committed psychoanalytic clinicians and academics in the UK who don't write in that way at all. I think psychoanalysis might have a lot to say about the idealisation of women (mothers,nurses) and their denigration (mothers again, teachers) etc.
chilango
Hypothetical Wanker
True, but then again, I wouldn't have been exposed to psychoanalysis at all if Zizek wasn't so obsessed with Lacan and if Lacan didn't write in that French Academic style (that appeals to me, perhaps - sadly - for precisely the reasons it's so open to valid criticism).
...having said that, I guess that my exposure will remain largely at, and in, that abstracted bersion
8ball
AV REFUGEES WELCOME
This was recommended to me many years back as a way of understanding why non-autistic people say the things they do, and what it is they actually want when they are saying things that on the surface are very confusing. I found it massively helpful in updating my understanding of social interactions but yeah, you need to be very mindful of the time and culture in which it was written.
I’m really torn about this idea that caring for our families should be paid. I think it’s the case that women are better suited (as a generalisation) to caring. More patient, gentle, kind. Which isn’t to say kids don’t need fathers too (although they clearly survive and thrive without), but fathers usually play a different role in child-rearing.
That’s not to say there aren’t exceptions and that they shouldn’t be celebrated too- men who want to be the primary carer, or women who want to go back to work full time as soon as possible. But the idea that majority of women want to equally share wage-earning and child-rearing/homemaking does not meet my experience. I wanted to stay home when my kids were little. That wasn’t the patriarchy, it was instinct. (I had to take shitty night time jobs ftr). Of all the dual parent families I know it’s maybe 9:1 female:male primary caregiver. I think we have to accept now that this is female as well as male choice.
I do want a situation where women’s roles do hold value. I’m not sure money is the answer, although I’ve a lot of time for Wages for Housework idea. And certainly believe kinship caring should be recompensed and care work generally should be paid double straight away.
But what as women do we really want? Job flexibility, that would be most women i knows number one ask. The ability to wfh at times if possible, the ability to leave early (sick child, school play etc) or even just to work within school hours, excellent quality childcare for when necessary or wanted, holiday clubs for kids, youth centres to get our kids off the streets, better disciplined and delivered education for our kids, informal and formal care networks we can call on for help when we can’t get to elderly parents or relatives, more proper security for anyone raising kids alone where the man won’t support them (secure council housing with sufficient space), decent benefits (if necessary) for any woman with young children so she doesn’t need to work until they are 6 instead of paying fucking nurseries (madness). Those are my list from the top of my head. What are yours anyone?
Athos
Well-Known Member
What do you mean by this? To what extent is 'instinct' informed by a sense of self that's been shaped by culture?
What I mean is that even in the event that I didn’t have to work because my husband earnt enough money (he really didn’t at that stage), and even if he was prepared to be the primary carer (laughable to even consider, most men don’t mind you), I STILL would have wanted to be at home with my children to mother them when they were little.
And my assertion is that the majority of women feel the same. They might want a small part time job, but given the choice most want to spend the most time with their little ones, bond with their babys, form secure attachments, and just be there especially in those early years.
(I’d still want to finish work to be home by 3:30 for my teens if I could).
chilango
Hypothetical Wanker
Don't most/many/some men feel this too?
Certainly both of course.
Not going by the choices they make, not most, no.
Why "certainly"? What's natural about 21st century life?
Fozzie Bear
Well-Known Member
I would have much preferred to have stayed at home with the daughter when she was a nipper.
I think some men are socialised into thinking that looking after their own kids is somehow beneath them.
Unfortunately my own experience was that it was very difficult for my partner to get back into work after having a kid and it was very easy for me to stay in a 9-5. So it wasn't really a choice, as we were both knackered and fell into the traditional roles, much as we tried to resist them.
I think some men are socialised into thinking that looking after their own kids is somehow beneath them.
Unfortunately my own experience was that it was very difficult for my partner to get back into work after having a kid and it was very easy for me to stay in a 9-5. So it wasn't really a choice, as we were both knackered and fell into the traditional roles, much as we tried to resist them.
Last edited:
Athos
Well-Known Member
Many men want to stay at home with kids; many women don't.
But, in your case, to what extent do you think that desire was a biological thing, and how much of it was a product of culture?
Perhaps more importantly, why does it matter, politically speaking? Shouldn't we be aiming for a situation in which the important (and difficult) work of caring for children (and the elderly) is valued, and the burden/opportunity of any activity isn't based on sex?
weltweit
Well-Known Member
I think in one of your posts you said you had trouble with the idea of paying for childcare, I couldn't find it just then. I do too, it is a part of family which is mostly private.
Yet, child rearing is also essential to the continuance of society, if women didn't conceive carry give birth to children, society would quickly fall apart. That women largely rear children is less critical because men could do some of that, but women do do most of the rearing.
It is probably the only area of work "which is essential for the continuance of society" and that only women can do, that is not paid at all. I doubt people would appreciate the interference of ofsted in their child rearing, but were it paid by government you could be sure that would be involved.
Thora
Differently Ethical
I disagree - in my experience most women don’t want to be at home full time with small children.
Most women want interesting/rewarding jobs, not “little jobs”.
Most parents would prefer to have a balance of work and time with their children.
Choices about who works and who stays at home are (in my experience of friends, family, people at school etc) driven by finances.
)Really? So why don’t more young women choose to go back to work full time after kids, cos I think women and men earn about the same up until they have kids. If it was finance driven you’d expect about 50% of parents at primary school gates or toddler groups to be Dads and last time I checked (which in all seriousness was a while back now) it was female dominated.
ElizabethofYork
Old Crone
This is the crux of it as far as I'm concerned. The jobs which women traditionally do, such as childcare, nursing, support roles, elderly care, have always been undervalued. Looking after the most vulnerable people in society should be highly respected and properly compensated.
weltweit
Well-Known Member
I collected my son from primary school. There were only two other men, the rest were women.
I worked from home then, but my wife earnt more than me in a full time position.
Clair De Lune
Apocalypse cocktails
As a single mam on benefits I wanted to work or study...but childcare is expensive! As someone who was unqualified and unskilled I simply couldn't have earned enough to cover my childcare. Its ok I guess if you have nice granny and grandad down the road who are willing to babysit for free...but lots of us don't have that luxury. So no little jobs for me and no time to myself or out of the house. Now don't get me wrong, those years were precious but they were also incredibly hard, lonely and soul destroying. I went from being a social, partying, creative fun person to an unpaid cleaner, sleep deprived, socially starved, mentally unchallenged and depressed person by the end of it. I had no life outside of being a mam. I had to wait till my youngest was in full time education before I could dig myself out of that catch22 by going to college to attempt to gain qualifications that would make me employable.
Thora
Differently Ethical
Childcare is really expensive. The mother has been off on maternity leave so becomes default childcarer.
Say a couple both earn £18-£20k. Full time childcare costs £12k+, there are commuting costs, it doesn’t make sense for mum to go back full time and only make a few hundred a month.
Some couples might decide mum goes back full time and dad drops to part time or works around childcare, but there’s a social expectation about what set up is “natural”.
Our school gates I would say is about 50% mums, 50% dads/nans. There are some sahm and a few sahd but lots of families split it so for eg mum drops off and goes to work later, dad works early and picks up. I’d say most of the sahm are single.
I personally don’t know of any women who have expressed an intense natural desire to be sahm, most can’t afford to anyway. I’m sure some exist but not enough to convince me it’s an instinct.
chilango
Hypothetical Wanker
Yes. Childcare is crazy expensive, I was lucky enough to be well qualified, skilled and experienced yet the cost of childcare when I went back to work f/t (when my daughter hit about 2 years and needed the xtra socialisation and stimulation) still ate up my entire wage.
I've posted on here before about my experiences as a sahd, so I won't repeat myself, but it's no coincidence that stuff like Wages for Housework suddenly made sense to me.
I'm still the primary care giver and do almost all of the domestic labour. My career never really recovered from taking two years out, and I'm happier doing this than the rat race.
That said. the ongoing internal and external pressures on my sense of identity/self taking these roles can't be underestimated.
I'll try and shut up again now. sorry!
I've posted on here before about my experiences as a sahd, so I won't repeat myself, but it's no coincidence that stuff like Wages for Housework suddenly made sense to me.
I'm still the primary care giver and do almost all of the domestic labour. My career never really recovered from taking two years out, and I'm happier doing this than the rat race.
That said. the ongoing internal and external pressures on my sense of identity/self taking these roles can't be underestimated.
I'll try and shut up again now. sorry!
Last edited:
ElizabethofYork
Old Crone
It 'should be' but it isn't. Why are they undervalued? What's the history of that? Why do they continue to be undervalued? Those would be my questions.
Winot
I wholeheartedley agree with your viewpoint
Because there’s massive societal expectation that the role of women is to look after children and the role of men is to be a provider.
I think part of the difficulty in understanding this is the way issues seem to be posed as if its external vs internal, social vs natural/ instinctual. When you say there's a massive social pressure and the subjective experience is one of choice, it's hard to conceive of how that external becomes internal to the point that it feels natural. How things appear or feel natural is what ideology is all about ( I think) but its hard to talk to describe that process without it sounding like something is imposed, mechanically, without any agency or resistance or negotiation.
I think this is partly where kabbes paper comes in, because he's interested in how identity is socially formed. And the dreaded psychoanalysis.
I think this is partly where kabbes paper comes in, because he's interested in how identity is socially formed. And the dreaded psychoanalysis.
Similar threads
