More feminist propaganda on the BBC

Watch
the mezzil
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#1
Report Thread starter 6 years ago
#1
http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode...e-of-the-sexes

What do people think of this?
0
reply
Georgie_M
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#2
Report 6 years ago
#2
A load of rubbish... And I am a feminist.
0
reply
the mezzil
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#3
Report Thread starter 6 years ago
#3
I found it pathetic. The best she could come up with was some students at the university of Stirling singing on the bus.

Yes, patriarchy right there. :rolleyes:

She is a dinosaur, of the prudish age.
0
reply
the mezzil
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#4
Report Thread starter 6 years ago
#4
(Original post by Georgie_M)
A load of rubbish... And I am a feminist.
Quite right. "Documentaries" like this one are clearly biased and with an anti male gender. It does nothing helpful for the cause of gender equality.
0
reply
Georgie_M
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#5
Report 6 years ago
#5
(Original post by the mezzil)
Quite right. "Documentaries" like this one are clearly biased and with an anti male gender. It does nothing helpful for the cause of gender equality.
I'm tired and I can't remember any specifics but i generally go the impression that although there was the occasional valid point the whole thing was very badly presented. And as you say didn't do much for the cause largely by misrepresenting certain arguments. And I found the presenter (I can't remember her name) rather antiquated.

Oh god am I going to get accused of sexist slander now?
0
reply
the mezzil
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#6
Report Thread starter 6 years ago
#6
(Original post by Georgie_M)
I'm tired and I can't remember any specifics but i generally go the impression that although there was the occasional valid point the whole thing was very badly presented. And as you say didn't do much for the cause largely by misrepresenting certain arguments. And I found the presenter (I can't remember her name) rather antiquated.

Oh god am I going to get accused of sexist slander now?
No, I just can't see any valid being made.

A song on a bus and a comedy club? Really? Is that what feminism has come to?

The presenter is a typical reserved, antiquated conservative middle class woman, who thinks that any reference to sex should be hushed up, because of course, sex = evil and free speech should be controlled and censored. A dinosaur.
0
reply
Georgie_M
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#7
Report 6 years ago
#7
(Original post by the mezzil)
No, I just can't see any valid being made.

A song on a bus and a few t shirts? Really? Is that what feminism has come to?

The presenter is a typical reserved, antiquated conservative middle class woman, who thinks that any reference to sex should be hushed up, because of course, sex = evil and free speech should be controlled and censored. A dinosaur.
Well obviously we would disagree on the validity of any points because I am a feminist and you are an anti - fem. I can't be arsed for another 'debate' on this issue.

Although I liked the presenter in many ways, on this topic I found her just incredibly irritating. I think her and Germaine Greer were coming at it from the same patronising perspective to be honest.
0
reply
the mezzil
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#8
Report Thread starter 6 years ago
#8
(Original post by Georgie_M)
Well obviously we would disagree on the validity of any points because I am a feminist and you are an anti - fem. I can't be arsed for another 'debate' on this issue.

Although I liked the presenter in many ways, on this topic I found her just incredibly irritating. I think her and Germaine Greer were coming at it from the same patronising perspective to be honest.
Yeah, I believe in equality, not feminism.

Girls don't need muppets like her to stand up for them. It is in fact sexist to assume that woman are weak and can not stand up for themselves, which is what this programme is conveying.

Girls, if you are being sexually harassed, report it to the police. Apart from that, I can't see any valid points being made in the documentary.
0
reply
DiddyDec01
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#9
Report 6 years ago
#9
I have watched a full 2 minutes and it like being in a TSR feminism thread. As soon as the phrase "misogyny" pops up combined with "its because women are getting more powerful" you know it is some third wave feminist chatting complete ****e.
0
reply
Georgie_M
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#10
Report 6 years ago
#10
(Original post by the mezzil)
Yeah, I believe in equality, not feminism.

Girls don't need muppets like her to stand up for them. It is in fact sexist to assume that woman are weak and can not stand up for themselves, which is what this programme is conveying.

Girls, if you are being sexually harassed, report it to the police. Apart from that, I can't see any valid points being made in the documentary.
I think the most valid point which was made was the fact that people assume women have equality now just because they have the same rights as men. This reinforces sexist behaviours (which you typically see on TSR threads interestingly enough) because 'well you have equality now quit your moaning.

I am sure you'll disagree strongly with that.
0
reply
DanB1991
Badges: 17
Rep:
?
#11
Report 6 years ago
#11
(Original post by Georgie_M)
I think the most valid point which was made was the fact that people assume women have equality now just because they have the same rights as men. This reinforces sexist behaviours (which you typically see on TSR threads interestingly enough) because 'well you have equality now quit your moaning.

I am sure you'll disagree strongly with that.
Tbh Masculism would argue the same... just because men and women have equal rights now on paper does not mean men have the same rights as women.

For example Feminist's time and time again like to simplify sexism, such as the pay gap and in the process get the aspect and actual type of sexism involved wrong. Then it makes them look like they're simply attacking men and thus they get a bad rep. Then said angry male individuals get even more angry about the whole sexist criminal and family justice system and thus arises the Masculism movement.

The main problem me and my girlfriend (who is a feminist) had with the documentary was the fact nothing they raised was a unique problem to women and applied in equal respects to men. It was pretty laughable at times. The only real issue to arise from the programme was the kind of "sexual harassment" culture we now have and even then many women (the main example being lesbians) can actually be even worse!
0
reply
Huskaris
Badges: 16
Rep:
?
#12
Report 6 years ago
#12
As I've said before. If the things that feminists clutch to nowadays as "sexism" are taken seriously, it shows us how far we have come, and some would argue gone too far.

Another big example would be women eating on the tube vs men taking up too much space on the tube.

Men taking up too much space, fine. Women eating on the tube, sexist, resulting in the creator getting a lot of abuse and then shutting it down.

They hypocrisy is unbelievable.
0
reply
Georgie_M
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#13
Report 6 years ago
#13
(Original post by DanB1991)
Tbh Masculism would argue the same... just because men and women have equal rights now on paper does not mean men have the same rights as women.

For example Feminist's time and time again like to simplify sexism, such as the pay gap and in the process get the aspect and actual type of sexism involved wrong. Then it makes them look like they're simply attacking men and thus they get a bad rep. Then said angry male individuals get even more angry about the whole sexist criminal and family justice system and thus arises the Masculism movement.

The main problem me and my girlfriend (who is a feminist) had with the documentary was the fact nothing they raised was a unique problem to women and applied in equal respects to men. It was pretty laughable at times. The only real issue to arise from the programme was the kind of "sexual harassment" culture we now have and even then many women (the main example being lesbians) can actually be even worse!
Yes I said previously on this thread I didn't really agree with the programme on a whole and don't think it came across very well.

Would you like to elaborate on why feminists simplify the pay gap issue? I mean I have studied this quite extensively and it is far from a simple issue. And it is not represented as a simple issue in feminist literature.

I might be wrong but it seems as though you have garnered your opinion of feminism from popular discourse which does not necessarily represent the diversity of feminist academia.

I have explained this a few times on TSR but different types of inequalities require different interpretations. In order to overcome them it isn't enough to say I disagree with inequalities you have to understand them. That means examining each type of inequality separately because they tend to be reproduced and recreated differently as well as having varying effects.

Feminists don't think that there are only inequalities against women. Many feminists also study racial, class or disability inequalities (for example) and how these intersect with gender inequalities. The reason gender biases against women have received more attention traditionally than men's inequalities is because historically women have been subject to more inequalities.

Of course feminists focus on women's issues that is their subject matter, if individuals wish to concentrate on men's inequalities feminists don't have an issue with that.
0
reply
DanB1991
Badges: 17
Rep:
?
#14
Report 6 years ago
#14
(Original post by Georgie_M)
Spoiler:
Show
Yes I said previously on this thread I didn't really agree with the programme on a whole and don't think it came across very well.

Would you like to elaborate on why feminists simplify the pay gap issue? I mean I have studied this quite extensively and it is far from a simple issue. And it is not represented as a simple issue in feminist literature.

I might be wrong but it seems as though you have garnered your opinion of feminism from popular discourse which does not necessarily represent the diversity of feminist academia.

I have explained this a few times on TSR but different types of inequalities require different interpretations. In order to overcome them it isn't enough to say I disagree with inequalities you have to understand them. That means examining each type of inequality separately because they tend to be reproduced and recreated differently as well as having varying effects.

Feminists don't think that there are only inequalities against women. Many feminists also study racial, class or disability inequalities (for example) and how these intersect with gender inequalities. The reason gender biases against women have received more attention traditionally than men's inequalities is because historically women have been subject to more inequalities.

Of course feminists focus on women's issues that is their subject matter, if individuals wish to concentrate on men's inequalities feminists don't have an issue with that.
Well concerning the pay gap feminism tends to ignore the whole gender role issue being the most important part of the problem causing women to drop out of work to raise kids or will work part time to help balance their gender role with providing an income. After this they usually ignore the fact women tend to choose jobs typically undertaken by women (such as secretary or care work etc). Finally feminist's also ignore the fact other women are actually the biggest problem a woman can come across if they attempt to break the whole "glass ceiling" as women are actually the most likely to stop another women getting a job or promotion.

This video gives many of the real facts concerning the wage gap which most normal people with experience in the job sector will agree with. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EwogDPh-Sow

It shows a woman working in the same job for the same amount of time will on average earn 98% of what a man earns, while we want to aim for 100% it's as close we are going to get. The wage gap is only noticeable when you compare the average female wage to the average male wage and that's because more women undertake part-time work, more have time off mid career and finally more enter lower paid job sectors.

By comparison most feminist academic pieces like to claim men are less likely to hire or promote a woman based on their sex alone, but in reality it tends to be their education may be in the wrong sector or time they have had off to raise kids. By comparison men who had had an identical education or time off, as such women, will still be in the same situation. Look at feminist work as it likes to claim a male lead conspiracy and men don't want to share "power" (whatever that means) with women. As such feminism pieces often claim men want to prevent women breaching the glass ceiling and will not promote or respect women due to sexism.

The main problem I have with feminism in it's current form is it always has aimed for gender equality, not just for women but also men, but they only do so when it suits them. I also have an issue with the whole "women have faced more inequalities than men" argument seeing it ignores the systematic suffering that men suffered just because of the gender they were born. It's about time feminism got past the whole "us and them" attitude that it seems fixated on which I think was highlighted in the documentary the OP linked.
0
reply
Georgie_M
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#15
Report 6 years ago
#15
(Original post by DanB1991)
Well concerning the pay gap feminism tends to ignore the whole gender role issue being the most important part of the problem causing women to drop out of work to raise kids or will work part time to help balance their gender role with providing an income. After this they usually ignore the fact women tend to choose jobs typically undertaken by women (such as secretary or care work etc). Finally feminist's also ignore the fact other women are actually the biggest problem a woman can come across if they attempt to break the whole "glass ceiling" as women are actually the most likely to stop another women getting a job or promotion.

This video gives many of the real facts concerning the wage gap which most normal people with experience in the job sector will agree with. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EwogDPh-Sow

It shows a woman working in the same job for the same amount of time will on average earn 98% of what a man earns, while we want to aim for 100% it's as close we are going to get. The wage gap is only noticeable when you compare the average female wage to the average male wage and that's because more women undertake part-time work, more have time off mid career and finally more enter lower paid job sectors.

By comparison most feminist academic pieces like to claim men are less likely to hire or promote a woman based on their sex alone, but in reality it tends to be their education may be in the wrong sector or time they have had off to raise kids. By comparison men who had had an identical education or time off, as such women, will still be in the same situation. Look at feminist work as it likes to claim a male lead conspiracy and men don't want to share "power" (whatever that means) with women. As such feminism pieces often claim men want to prevent women breaching the glass ceiling and will not promote or respect women due to sexism.

The main problem I have with feminism in it's current form is it always has aimed for gender equality, not just for women but also men, but they only do so when it suits them. I also have an issue with the whole "women have faced more inequalities than men" argument seeing it ignores the systematic suffering that men suffered just because of the gender they were born. It's about time feminism got past the whole "us and them" attitude that it seems fixated on which I think was highlighted in the documentary the OP linked.
You have illustrated my point rather nicely, thanks. The things that you say feminism ignores in regards to the pay gap are the very things which feminists study, it is quite clear you have never really studied feminist theory. Everything you have mentioned is studied at length by feminist. Most of the feminists arguing what you have said were rad fems in the 70s. They are not prominent theories in contemporary feminist literature.

I do agree that there are some theories which create too much of an us and them mentality. However as I said men's inequalities and women's are different so can't be studied in the same way. So when you say they only want gender equality when it suits them, that is a complete misrepresentation of feminism. Of course they do not study men's inequalities, feminism is the study of women's inequalities (not superiority either).

Outside of feminist literature women's issues have largely been ignored. It is a well known and accepted phenomena I.e 'the missing voice of women in anthropology'.
When phenomena have been studied it has largely been men's experiences of those phenomena that has been highlighted, feminism also seeks to redress this imbalance.
0
reply
DanB1991
Badges: 17
Rep:
?
#16
Report 6 years ago
#16
(Original post by Georgie_M)
You have illustrated my point rather nicely, thanks. The things that you say feminism ignores in regards to the pay gap are the very things which feminists study, it is quite clear you have never really studied feminist theory. Everything you have mentioned is studied at length by feminist. Most of the feminists arguing what you have said were rad fems in the 70s. They are not prominent theories in contemporary feminist literature.

I do agree that there are some theories which create too much of an us and them mentality. However as I said men's inequalities and women's are different so can't be studied in the same way. So when you say they only want gender equality when it suits them, that is a complete misrepresentation of feminism. Of course they do not study men's inequalities, feminism is the study of women's inequalities (not superiority either).

Outside of feminist literature women's issues have largely been ignored. It is a well known and accepted phenomena I.e 'the missing voice of women in anthropology'.
When phenomena have been studied it has largely been men's experiences of those phenomena that has been highlighted, feminism also seeks to redress this imbalance.
Haha! I'm constantly having to read feminist theory.... kind of a cornerstone of my sociology course :rolleyes:

It may just be what our lecturer's reading list contains... she does seem like one of the older 70's style of radical feminist (not hardcore radical). However even if I was to pick up a random piece of feminist literature it will still have all the hallmarks of what many see as radical feminism, "male bashing". The amount of times I read a piece that does a bit of male bashing only to end with "but this is not to diminish males suffering concerning this issue".

It's very frustrating to read what seems like a promising piece only for it to descend into "male bashing", simplistic over simplified arguments and theories using the whole male conspiracy argument. It's something many more casual writers or feminist's have been calling out for a long time now, it's the main reason the majority of women do not see themselves as feminist's.

Obviously the vast majority of women are actually feminist's by definition, but the whole feminist movements seems to be represented by a more hard-line, militant and radical element in it's academic literature, representation in wider culture and it's figure heads. It's about time women took back feminism from such individuals who quite frankly for a long time now have given feminism a bad name. Sadly however the "old guard" of feminism consistently rejects any individual who attempts to do so.

Christina Hoff Sommers is in fact one of my favourite feminist's for that very reason.
0
reply
Georgie_M
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#17
Report 6 years ago
#17
(Original post by DanB1991)
Haha! I'm constantly having to read feminist theory.... kind of a cornerstone of my sociology course :rolleyes:

It may just be what our lecturer's reading list contains... she does seem like one of the older 70's style of radical feminist (not hardcore radical). However even if I was to pick up a random piece of feminist literature it will still have all the hallmarks of what many see as radical feminism, "male bashing". The amount of times I read a piece that does a bit of male bashing only to end with "but this is not to diminish males suffering concerning this issue".

It's very frustrating to read what seems like a promising piece only for it to descend into "male bashing", simplistic over simplified arguments and theories using the whole male conspiracy argument. It's something many more casual writers or feminist's have been calling out for a long time now, it's the main reason the majority of women do not see themselves as feminist's.

Obviously the vast majority of women are actually feminist's by definition, but the whole feminist movements seems to be represented by a more hard-line, militant and radical element in it's academic literature, representation in wider culture and it's figure heads. It's about time women took back feminism from such individuals who quite frankly for a long time now have given feminism a bad name. Sadly however the "old guard" of feminism consistently rejects any individual who attempts to do so.

Christina Hoff Sommers is in fact one of my favourite feminist's for that very reason.
Yes but don't you think those women just stand out purely because they are controversial? And therefore people associate feminism with them, anyone who has really radical views tends to be the most noticeable and shout the loudest even if they are a minority. Similar to how in the animal rights movement the rads get the most attention even thought they are a tiny minority, the animal rights movement is often associated with these radicals.

I think if you study sociology and feminist perspectives in sociology then you really should have a better grasp of feminist theory. Maybe your lecturer is doing you a disservice. When I did a report on the gender pay gap in the NHS (for example) if I had failed to indicate the majority of feminist theories and said something like 'feminists ignore the real underlying causes of the gender pay gap' (for the reasons you gave). I would have failed for clearly having very little understanding of the subject matter and not having read widely enough.

I think as well that you may misunderstand what patriarchy is , I think it is often read as a 'male conspiracy' but that's a rather simple understanding of what it is rather than it being a simplistic theory. Having said that I do understand why some have issue with the concept of patriarchy.

Also in regards to caveats, all academic literature has them because there are no grand theories which really take in to account the breadth and width of human existence. It is perfectly acceptable to focus on one topic and offer caveats.
0
reply
DanB1991
Badges: 17
Rep:
?
#18
Report 6 years ago
#18
(Original post by Georgie_M)
Spoiler:
Show
Yes but don't you think those women just stand out purely because they are controversial? And therefore people associate feminism with them, anyone who has really radical views tends to be the most noticeable and shout the loudest even if they are a minority. Similar to how in the animal rights movement the rads get the most attention even thought they are a tiny minority, the animal rights movement is often associated with these radicals.

I think if you study sociology and feminist perspectives in sociology then you really should have a better grasp of feminist theory. Maybe your lecturer is doing you a disservice. When I did a report on the gender pay gap in the NHS (for example) if I had failed to indicate the majority of feminist theories and said something like 'feminists ignore the real underlying causes of the gender pay gap' (for the reasons you gave). I would have failed for clearly having very little understanding of the subject matter and not having read widely enough.

I think as well that you may misunderstand what patriarchy is , I think it is often read as a 'male conspiracy' but that's a rather simple understanding of what it is rather than it being a simplistic theory. Having said that I do understand why some have issue with the concept of patriarchy.

Also in regards to caveats, all academic literature has them because there are no grand theories which really take in to account the breadth and width of human existence. It is perfectly acceptable to focus on one topic and offer caveats.
Obviously I would do wider reading into the specific subject if I was going to do an essay or exam regarding feminism. It's only TSR though so I will only provide a generalised theory based on most of what I've read. I'm not going to go, this feminist thinks X, this feminist think's Y, this feminst thinks Z... this feminist thinks X but not Y and will ignore Z etc etc etc.

However what I do find is many feminist works, while they may disagree on moot points, many do conform to mainstream feminist culture (even within academia). I do understand the definition of patriarchy, but when you read even some rather well known academic books, it does seem the writer views, men as a whole decided certain aspects of patriarchy as they think it benefits men as a whole.

I do understand different feminist's have different views (think you've done me a bit of a disservice there). However most feminist's that completely question contemporary feminist view often are sidelined and widely criticized. The whole point was a generalized view of mainstream feminist culture, you will obviously get variations but that normally goes without saying.

I know many feminists (and even those technical feminist's who call themselves anti-feminism) who question the view I posted above, however I cannot on top of my head (due to the sheer quantity I have read) such feminist's who do agree with mainstream feminist culture.
0
reply
Georgie_M
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#19
Report 6 years ago
#19
(Original post by DanB1991)
Obviously I would do wider reading into the specific subject if I was going to do an essay or exam regarding feminism. It's only TSR though so I will only provide a generalised theory based on most of what I've read. I'm not going to go, this feminist thinks X, this feminist think's Y, this feminst thinks Z... this feminist thinks X but not Y and will ignore Z etc etc etc.

However what I do find is many feminist works, while they may disagree on moot points, many do conform to mainstream feminist culture (even within academia). I do understand the definition of patriarchy, but when you read even some rather well known academic books, it does seem the writer views, men as a whole decided certain aspects of patriarchy as they think it benefits men as a whole.

I do understand different feminist's have different views (think you've done me a bit of a disservice there). However most feminist's that completely question contemporary feminist view often are sidelined and widely criticized. The whole point was a generalized view of mainstream feminist culture, you will obviously get variations but that normally goes without saying.

I know many feminists (and even those technical feminist's who call themselves anti-feminism) who question the view I posted above, however I cannot on top of my head (due to the sheer quantity I have read) such feminist's who do agree with mainstream feminist culture.
Sorry I was being a bit rude! I do actually agree that feminism does men a disservice and at the same time makes feminists seem like man haters - for example 'rape culture' which seems to paint all men in a very unflattering light (I disagree with this theory on that point).

Sorry I am sure you have read a lot but this whole TSR fallacy about the pay gap really annoys me. So many on here seem to say women doing the same job get paid the same amount therefore there is no gender pay gap. But this actually is not what feminists argue, theories such as 'sex typing' as well as socially constructed gender roles in the home (leading to women having to do most childcare/housework) are argued as the reason there is a gender pay gap. It's about why women choose certain roles and why they have more breaks and work part time. It's a question of nature vs. nurture at that point but a pay gap does exist just not within the same roles any more. I haven't read any modern feminism which claims that.
0
reply
DanB1991
Badges: 17
Rep:
?
#20
Report 6 years ago
#20
(Original post by Georgie_M)
Sorry I was being a bit rude! I do actually agree that feminism does men a disservice and at the same time makes feminists seem like man haters - for example 'rape culture' which seems to paint all men in a very unflattering light (I disagree with this theory on that point).

Sorry I am sure you have read a lot but this whole TSR fallacy about the pay gap really annoys me. So many on here seem to say women doing the same job get paid the same amount therefore there is no gender pay gap. But this actually is not what feminists argue, theories such as 'sex typing' as well as socially constructed gender roles in the home (leading to women having to do most childcare/housework) are argued as the reason there is a gender pay gap. It's about why women choose certain roles and why they have more breaks and work part time. It's a question of nature vs. nurture at that point but a pay gap does exist just not within the same roles any more. I haven't read any modern feminism which claims that.
I do admit "most" feminist's do actually comment on the gender roles or "sex typing" to some degree. However they then have this weird urge to back their statements with something such as pay gap statistics and the old sexual discrimination in the workplace view or something similar completely out of context.

The amount of time I've read a feminist piece and all of a sudden it does something like that and I think "WHY!! you had something there!!". Your reading may be different, but I tend to find they will skim over the points you mentioned before completely destroying it with the rubbish I was on about earlier.

Then just wait until you get a feminist on a chat, panel or news show (which in reality most men and women will see) and they will completely ignore the points you raised above which is completely frustrating seeing the wasted potential (in my opinion) modern feminism has in wider society.
0
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Back
to top
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

Do you have the space and resources you need to succeed in home learning?

Yes I have everything I need (288)
55.71%
I don't have everything I need (229)
44.29%

Watched Threads

View All