Corax
Luke 5:16
It's plausible that the overall numbers are more equal. I'm pretty sure that more women are on the extreme end of domestic violence though.
million women rise march and rally - today (5th march), central london
- Thread starter tufty79
- Start date
It's plausible that the overall numbers are more equal. I'm pretty sure that more women are on the extreme end of domestic violence though.
trashpony
Hag
Two women a week are murdered by their partners. I don't know how many men suffer from DV but certainly there aren't two a week dying from it. And the stats put it at 75/25 although there is the issue of reporting (having said that, apart from one woman, I don't know any woman who's been raped who's reported it).
The march is to decry violence against women. It's not just domestic as I said earlier, it's about rape and assault being used as a war tactic and to try and raise awareness among young men that gang rapes really don't make them more masculine. If we educate the women, we educate the men.
The march is to decry violence against women. It's not just domestic as I said earlier, it's about rape and assault being used as a war tactic and to try and raise awareness among young men that gang rapes really don't make them more masculine. If we educate the women, we educate the men.
stethoscope
Well-Known Member
Hmm. That makes it even less clear IMO. If men are welcome, then a more inclusive title would be a positive thing. If it's a women only event for the reasons Froggie's commented on, then men shouldn't be attending surely?
A lot of marches do have men's sections - and men's engagement is growing reasonably well within both pro-feminist and these types of movements. You usually have a women's-only march, and then a mixed genders one too - when it comes to the women's-only part of the march, it's about men respecting the space. And all the men I've spoken to on such marches in the past have understood and supported that philosophy.
But, y'see, Corax, even by saying 'a more inclusive title', you're then effectively disempowering women and changing the dynamics of the march. And FFS, it's their space that they've created, and to a backdrop of a historically sexist/misogynistic society. It just comes across sometimes (not you Corax) like a load of bloody men being cry babies because some political organising doesn't include them. Well, women have had to put up with that from men for centuries.
Corax
Luke 5:16
That puts a very different spin on it. Thanks trashpony.
Googling the Million Woman March. Brings up that it started as a response to the American Million Man March organised by Louis Farrakhan's Nation of Islam in the USA.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Million_Man_March
Black women felt their voice was not being heard, in particular over domestic violence.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Million_Man_March
Black women felt their voice was not being heard, in particular over domestic violence.
quimcunx
imprimeo, lamino, distribuo
Guineveretoo
Mostly bewildered
A Million Women Rise is fairly recent phenomenon, I guess building on the feminist movement in the West, but it is really about empowering, and giving a voice to, women in the developing world who are suffering from violence at the hands of men, and who are only just finding ways to express themselves, and to let the rest of the world know it is happening.
It is supposed to be raising awareness of the issues worldwide, and less about women in Britain or, come to that, about men in Britain, some of whom appear to feel too threatened by the notion of women across the world standing up for their right to live peacefully and without threat.
This is not a 70s "Women's Group" or or a 90s "Reclaim The Night" march. It's not a trade union thing, or a political party thing. It's a bunch of individual women and community groups who are trying to raise the issue and allow women across the world to express their views and to get the issue of violence against women into people's psyche and into the press, in the hope that it will be talked about it, and realise that is not about political correctness or hating men, or saying that all men are evil. But evil is being done across the world, to women and to children, and the Million Women Rise is an attempt to do something about it. If it doesn't fit with your beliefs, then stay away from it. The social in the evening says "all welcome" to show that men are welcome, too. It's about raising voices, that's all.
It's not well publicised in this country, but maybe that is because it is not really about this country, or maybe it is because the, male dominated print media, don't feel comfortable publicise something which they see as emasculating them in some way?
It is supposed to be raising awareness of the issues worldwide, and less about women in Britain or, come to that, about men in Britain, some of whom appear to feel too threatened by the notion of women across the world standing up for their right to live peacefully and without threat.
This is not a 70s "Women's Group" or or a 90s "Reclaim The Night" march. It's not a trade union thing, or a political party thing. It's a bunch of individual women and community groups who are trying to raise the issue and allow women across the world to express their views and to get the issue of violence against women into people's psyche and into the press, in the hope that it will be talked about it, and realise that is not about political correctness or hating men, or saying that all men are evil. But evil is being done across the world, to women and to children, and the Million Women Rise is an attempt to do something about it. If it doesn't fit with your beliefs, then stay away from it. The social in the evening says "all welcome" to show that men are welcome, too. It's about raising voices, that's all.
It's not well publicised in this country, but maybe that is because it is not really about this country, or maybe it is because the, male dominated print media, don't feel comfortable publicise something which they see as emasculating them in some way?
Guineveretoo
Mostly bewildered
I don't think the two things are connected.
I believe the Million Woman March was a one off event, which happened some years before the Million Women Rise was started, and it was only in the States.
emma goldman
Member
photos here http://www.demotix.com/news/612590/million-women-march-london
and here http://www.demotiximages.com/news/611905/million-women-rise-march-through-london-mark-100th-iwd
i didnt go to the march but went to the benefit afterwards which was great. apparently this years march had been the biggest so far.
and here http://www.demotiximages.com/news/611905/million-women-rise-march-through-london-mark-100th-iwd
i didnt go to the march but went to the benefit afterwards which was great. apparently this years march had been the biggest so far.
London_Calling
Pleasant and unpatronising
Same bollocks for 40 years. After a while you begin to realise it's not unintentional.
girasol
Addicted to handstands!
Why don't they organise a march then?
oh, I see Thora made the point already. But just look at the statistics, from all over the WORLD! If this minority is significant they need to organise themselves and make themselves heard, just like women do. Why don't males victim of abuse approach the march organisers, for example?
girasol
Addicted to handstands!
And just from reading the intro page on the Million Women March website, also this:
Happy International Women's day!
Corax
Luke 5:16
Not only did Thora ask it, but I then answered in response....
Are you reading the thread?
girasol
Addicted to handstands!
Not only did Thora ask it, but I then answered in response....
Are you reading the thread?
sorry, I was skim reading it, saw Thora's post, then got distracted with work, I apologise...
and I think stephj sums it up nicely
trashpony
Hag
89% of DV victims are women
Corax
Luke 5:16
Whilst I appreciate some of the rest of your post, I'm afraid I've never been a fan of the 'people like us had to suffer, so now people like you have to pay' line. I don't think it's the way forward.
"Bloody men being cry babies" makes me a little bit
in this context as well...
Thora
Differently Ethical
Whilst I appreciate some of the rest of your post, I'm afraid I've never been a fan of the 'people like us had to suffer, so now people like you have to pay' line. I don't think it's the way forward.
"Bloody men being cry babies" makes me a little bit
Not about making people like you pay, just not doing the hard work for you.
stethoscope
Well-Known Member
Whilst I appreciate some of the rest of your post, I'm afraid I've never been a fan of the 'people like us had to suffer, so now people like you have to pay' line. I don't think it's the way forward.
"Bloody men being cry babies" makes me a little bit
Well, I appreciate I could have perhaps chosen some better wording, but tbh Corax, you tend to become rather defensive over the years both in rl and online when discussing these sorts of issues - because men do exercise their privilege all the time over women in them.
Women have had to organise themselves to fight for such causes, so often with derision and opposition from men historically. And having done so, we're then told by men (of course I always refer to 'men' in a wider societal/cultural context, not as individuals) that we should be including them!
stethoscope
Well-Known Member
And, it really helps when men actually acknowledge their privileges and fucking listen to our experiences/voices - that way at least unified ways forward are made much more possible.
But, IME, whether it we women's groups or an Anarcha-Feminist group I was part of some years back, all of our attempts to make them inclusive and invite men along, always seemed to end up with the men drowning out women's voices. So, a lot of us tended to retreat back into women's only spaces again. Hence why whilst urban is certainly a better space than many political ones online, it's still not perfect.
But, IME, whether it we women's groups or an Anarcha-Feminist group I was part of some years back, all of our attempts to make them inclusive and invite men along, always seemed to end up with the men drowning out women's voices. So, a lot of us tended to retreat back into women's only spaces again. Hence why whilst urban is certainly a better space than many political ones online, it's still not perfect.
stethoscope
Well-Known Member
We haven't met irl - and I'm not talking about you.
When I said 'you tend to become defensive' above, I mean i.e. those of us women/feminists. We get defensive because we get tired of having to point out men's privilege in these discussions time and time again.
When I said 'you tend to become defensive' above, I mean i.e. those of us women/feminists. We get defensive because we get tired of having to point out men's privilege in these discussions time and time again.
Corax
Luke 5:16
I think that's exactly what I've been doing on this thread - and believe me it has taken my understanding forward a step - which is why the choice of words seemed out of place in the context of the conversation we've been having.
Corax
Luke 5:16
It's good to hear that men were welcome this year. I would have liked to go but the wording on the poster I saw (before this thread started) seemed to make it clear it was for women only.
I've been attracted to feminism since I was a student and consider myself to be a feminist. But nobody I meet seems interested in the subject, and I can't remember the last time I encountered a woman who described herself as a feminist. Whenever I broach the subject I get accused of trying to push women into working when they would rather be spending their time mothering.
The feminists I met at University were my fellow students of English Literature. They were admirers of SCUM http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SCUM_Manifesto and wore a double-headed axe around their necks, supposedly to render us all equal by chopping off penises. I wasn't so keen on that policy, but they made lots of inarguable points about male chauvinsim in literature and society which were quite an eye opener to me after ten years at boys' boarding schools. After I graduated I expected to hear feminist arguments in all walks of life. But it never happened, and I feel rather let down.
It seems to me that once the broad mass of Western women had got something close to equal opportunities they lost interest in feminism and left it to a handful of extremists like Sheila Jeffreys who bang on about porn and anal sex and lap dancing and are easy to marginalise. Now that women here have got more or less what they want they don't seem minded to help their sisters in developing countries who are routinely bought and sold, beaten, raped, enslaved and kept under virtual house arrest. Or maybe they are but they're muzzled by a male-dominated media? I really have no idea.
When Blair invaded Iraq he gave a humanitarian justification based on the suffering of a minority of Iraqis. I would love to have seen feminists advance the argument that Blair should also have invaded scores of other countries on the grounds that the scale of the suffering and exploitation of women there is many times greater. I want to see feminists having such an influence in Western politics that it's perfectly normal to have UN sanctions against any country that doesn't give equal rights to women. But I'm certain this will never happen. Not enough people care. Why don't they? I was hoping that the so-called Blair Babes would set a new agenda (and crucify the people who gave them their label) but it never happened, did it?
I've been attracted to feminism since I was a student and consider myself to be a feminist. But nobody I meet seems interested in the subject, and I can't remember the last time I encountered a woman who described herself as a feminist. Whenever I broach the subject I get accused of trying to push women into working when they would rather be spending their time mothering.
The feminists I met at University were my fellow students of English Literature. They were admirers of SCUM http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SCUM_Manifesto and wore a double-headed axe around their necks, supposedly to render us all equal by chopping off penises. I wasn't so keen on that policy, but they made lots of inarguable points about male chauvinsim in literature and society which were quite an eye opener to me after ten years at boys' boarding schools. After I graduated I expected to hear feminist arguments in all walks of life. But it never happened, and I feel rather let down.
It seems to me that once the broad mass of Western women had got something close to equal opportunities they lost interest in feminism and left it to a handful of extremists like Sheila Jeffreys who bang on about porn and anal sex and lap dancing and are easy to marginalise. Now that women here have got more or less what they want they don't seem minded to help their sisters in developing countries who are routinely bought and sold, beaten, raped, enslaved and kept under virtual house arrest. Or maybe they are but they're muzzled by a male-dominated media? I really have no idea.
When Blair invaded Iraq he gave a humanitarian justification based on the suffering of a minority of Iraqis. I would love to have seen feminists advance the argument that Blair should also have invaded scores of other countries on the grounds that the scale of the suffering and exploitation of women there is many times greater. I want to see feminists having such an influence in Western politics that it's perfectly normal to have UN sanctions against any country that doesn't give equal rights to women. But I'm certain this will never happen. Not enough people care. Why don't they? I was hoping that the so-called Blair Babes would set a new agenda (and crucify the people who gave them their label) but it never happened, did it?
DotCommunist
So many particulars. So many questions.
capital co-opts your dissidence and sells it back to you nick. As 'girl power' or a che print t-shirt knocked out for a fiver but sourced for 10p from a sweatshop
stethoscope
Well-Known Member
Ah - I've tripped up on a you plural - sorry.
Sorry
It's about looking at these things from a societal/cultural level of privilege/oppression politics, not the personal.
However, it's quite common as a woman discussing these issues to have to defend yourself pretty quickly against men often jumping straight in to accuse you of all sorts (TopCat did it here, Average Joe did it too), and yet women organising themselves to fight societal problems such as male violence against women or rape doesn't mean that they're not interested or think that for e.g. female domestic violence on men or male-on-male DV in gay relationships are not as equally important, it's just that we've had to organise amongst ourselves in order to make our own voices/experiences heard. Besides, I can't and wouldn't talk on behalf of say, DV and the dynamics of it within a gay male relationship.
It's fine for men to say 'you're not including us', but historically when you've had to organise yourself to get your voice heard and to then change aspects of society to the better because a large percentage of men have not seen any problem, then it's difficult to move forward sometimes in a unified/inclusive way. I see the derision and hostility that groups like Southall Black Sisters still have to put up with to this day - both misogynistic and racist.
All inclusive groups - men and women, black and white, straight and gay are a wonderful idea, and I embrace them, but getting equality of issues raised within them can be very difficult. Feminist groups over the years have had their own problems when speaking heavily on the behalf of white het middle class women (and working class, BME and LGBT women have had to form their own groups or fight to make their own voices heard).
Similarly, I have a gay male friend that joined a Men's Rights group once because of the injustices he felt when he accepted his sexuality, split up from his wife and did not get access to his children - and found that particular Men's group to be homophobic - so, then Gay Men's groups gets formed because unity isn't very simple.
Corax
Luke 5:16
I think the historical reasons for feminism are the core reason for the hostility that the subject inspires in some (often otherwise quite 'enlightened', for want of a better word) men.
The history is of course vitally important. Feminism could not and does not exist in isolation to the original injustices that spawned it as a movement. And because the two are inseparable, a lot of the rhetoric draws upon it.
The reaction that rhetoric can produce though, is one of "It wasn't me". Some men will feel as though they are being blamed for the sins of others, purely because of their gender, and this will feel like stereotyping and sexism itself.
To make it perfectly clear though - I'm not condoning or excusing anything, I'm only offering what I think may be an explanation for something that some female posters have appeared to be baffled by.
The history is of course vitally important. Feminism could not and does not exist in isolation to the original injustices that spawned it as a movement. And because the two are inseparable, a lot of the rhetoric draws upon it.
The reaction that rhetoric can produce though, is one of "It wasn't me". Some men will feel as though they are being blamed for the sins of others, purely because of their gender, and this will feel like stereotyping and sexism itself.
To make it perfectly clear though - I'm not condoning or excusing anything, I'm only offering what I think may be an explanation for something that some female posters have appeared to be baffled by.
stethoscope
Well-Known Member
That happens in all circles tbh Corax... heterosexual people might get 'offended' because they feel they are blamed as a 'whole' by LGBT politics/activists for homophobia that exists in society, and etc. But, y'know, it's easy when someone who enjoys certain privileges over another (whether it be based on gender, class, sexuality, ethnicity) to get on the defensive when confronted by language and situations they don't like. Most of the time, it's because those that enjoy certain privileges just don't realise that the things they accept as granted aren't afforded to everyone.
None of this exists without history and context of course.
None of this exists without history and context of course.
trashpony
Hag
A lot of women care very passionately about feminist debate and discussion but don't tend to discuss them on mixed websites like this one. As I alluded to at the start of the thread, over the six years I've been here, women-only marches are derided and scorned, rape discussions always have men saying 'yeah but men get raped too' and while homophobia and racism is pretty much considered unacceptable, sexism is alive and thriving. It gets fucking boring having the same discussions with the same people over and over again. It's wearing actually - you feel like a lone voice in the wilderness and I have to admit that I've given up on the whole because I'm so bloody tired of being shouted down.
If, however, you would like to discuss feminism on an active board which welcomes men, then PM me
ETA: I think your perspective is really interesting and you would spark a very lively debate
stethoscope
Well-Known Member
Yep, this trashy.
Similar threads
- Poll
