X Close

Does feminism have mummy issues? Boomer grannies have lost the plot

Who flourished in Absolutely Fabulous?

Who flourished in Absolutely Fabulous?


January 25, 2023   6 mins

Freud didn’t really understand women. This is not an original point: it was first made by Freud himself. According to his biographer Ernest Jones, Freud admitted: “The great question that has never been answered, and which I have not yet been able to answer, despite my thirty years of research into the feminine soul, is ‘What does a woman want?’”

Nonetheless, he had a go at making sense of us — and especially how we mature. Male children are, he thought, animated by an infantile desire to possess their mother and destroy their father: the Oedipus complex. But things are different for girls, who must first get over their resentment at their mother for having birthed them without a penis. Only having done this, Freud thought, would women come to identify with their mothers and embrace female gender roles. Though Freud never used the term, Jung dubbed it the “Electra complex”, and it stuck.

Freud’s convoluted attempts to make sense of women have been largely discarded by modern psychology. But the “Electra complex” does capture something important and true: relationships between mothers and daughters can be both intensely close and also, at the same time, bitterly ambivalent.

Lighter fuel was poured on this cauldron of woes last week, in an article celebrating three older women hell-bent on smashing every grandmotherly stereotype out there. There’s no need, we gather, for a grandmother to sit about “patting her blue rinse while knitting quietly in a corner” as former Page 3 girl Jilly Johnson puts it, or “under pressure to tone down our behaviour and stay in the kitchen”, as journalist Jane Gordon scornfully suggests.

Instead, grandmothers are taking a leaf from Demi Moore’s book and embracing their “hot kooky unhinged grandma era”. In this vision, the role of grandma is to be “unconventional”: challenging authority, flouting routines, giving your grandkids inappropriate things for breakfast, and doing “crazy things” with them. It left me wondering what their adult daughters make of “fun, crazy ‘Glammy’” and “Bubbie Bonkers”?

Perhaps it doesn’t matter. The women featured are an actress, a journalist and a model: hardly representative of everyday life. Surely most grandmas aren’t like this? Except that boomer-age “Glammies” abound in real life too. The American conservative writer Helen Roy grumbled recently that “boomer grandparentism” means liberally dispensing parenting advice, while withholding all practical help and insisting on being called anything but “Grandma”.

The response resembled an intergenerational online bloodbath, which rather suggests the topic is something of a sore point. And nor is anecdotal evidence of “Glammies” difficult to find. Emma, 31, a London-based mother to one toddler, reports that her mother-in-law claimed to be “too busy” to travel 90 minutes to see her first grandchild – all the while training for her first marathon.

It’s not a British phenomenon either: Clare, 30, from South Carolina, tells me that her own mother has little interest in helping with Clare’s baby and young toddler, often “because she has a hair/Botox/facial appt, which she must travel cross-state to attend”. Ellie, 30, a New England mother of two under two, tells me “Our parents are just not interested in cultivating a deep relationship with us or our daughters.” Instead, her mother live-posts her “brief, rare” granny visits to social media for her friends — and never offers to wash up. And she scornfully rejected an offer to live rent-free closer by, in exchange for helping with childcare, as a hostile attempt to reduce her to “just a grandma”.

For a young, conservative-leaning mum, with visions of an interconnected, resilient extended family, her own parents’ determinedly atomistic approach to grandparenthood has been profoundly disappointing, Ellie tells me. As she puts it: “Spiritually and emotionally, we feel robbed.”

But the attrition of dependency between mothers and daughters cuts both ways. It’s difficult to disaggregate help with childcare from advice on childcare; and young mothers are often fiercely defensive about such unsolicited advice. Mumsnet is full of threads raging at mothers and mothers-in-law who dare to offer parenting tips.

The transmission of female-specific forms of knowledge across generations seems to have come unstuck, across the board. But this isn’t just about parenting: in feminist politics, too, Susan Faludi has written about a “matricidal” tendency within the women’s movement. That is, instead of handing the baton on to younger generations, every wave of feminism rejects the achievements of those women who went before. The result is that, as Faludi puts it, “At the core of America’s most fruitful political movement resides a perpetual barrenness.”

Faludi attributes this phenomenon — which, she points out, wasn’t a feature in first-wave feminism — to the colonisation of the women’s movement by the individualistic imperatives of consumer capitalism. But in any case, the upshot is a structural problem for feminism and mothers alike. And it’s grounded in the tension between what’s needed for “personhood” in the modern liberal sense, and what’s most conducive to flourishing as a mother.

Older cultures have a better grasp of that sense of flourishing — but usually convey it obliquely. Somewhere on my shelves, for example, I have a matryoshka doll: a smiling, apple-cheeked wooden woman famous from Russian toymaking, who opens at the middle to reveal a smaller, smiling, apple-cheeked woman, who in turn opens to reveal another, smaller one and so on.

This traditional toy contains a germ of literal truth: for every female baby is born with all the eggs she’ll ever have, already in her uterus. And this means every mother of a daughter carries the germ of her own grandchildren inside her own body, within her unborn granddaughter. As such, matryoshka dolls capture a profound insight about how mothers contain one another in an organismic sense.

We do so in a social sense, too — when it works. In Mom Genes, her 2021 book on “the science of moms”, Abigail Tucker shows how the mothers most likely to flourish are those with good support networks — which often means having your own mother close at hand. After my own daughter was born, I was ill for some weeks — and when my husband had to go back to work, my mother was there, weathering my convalescent peevishness and helping in un-glamorous ways: making me a sandwich, changing sheets, watching my newborn so I could shower without fretting.

This kind of presence isn’t just for moral support, but has a teaching dimension too. Caring confidently for little children is as much a skill as a matter of instinct. For most of human history, this has been passed on via informal knowledge transfer between generations of women, and within extended families.

In contrast, both the Mumsnet advice-rejecters and the “Glammy” grandmothers take, as a basic premise, the idea that mothers don’t need their mothers in any practical sense. Instead, the job of a “Glammy”, per Jane Gordon, is not to support a mother but to circumvent her: “to be as unconventional as possible by helping them to question [
] the rules society and their parents impose on them.”

Somehow, passing the matriarchal baton has become hopelessly fraught. And it is within modern liberal feminism that the reason for this comes into focus. Faludi quotes an older feminist attendee at a NOW conference who grumbles: “I’m so sick of these young women treating us like a bunch of old bags who need to get out of the way.” I dare say some of the older women whose advice is spurned by angry Mumsnetters may feel much the same. But much of the motive force in modern liberal feminism has concerned pursuing “the radical notion that women are people”, as Marie Shear wrote in 1986. And to be a “person” has come, today, to mean being as far as possible a self-fashioning, unencumbered liberal subject on the model first set out by Jean-Jacques Rousseau — for women, as well as men.

But if the ideal is to be unencumbered, what are we to make of those ways we depend on others, or others on us — especially in mothering, or being mothered? When I became a mother, this paradox shattered my reflexive youthful liberalism. And if unencumbered personhood makes mothers invisible, it’s worse still for grandmothers. For here lurks a double dose of caring, combined — in a world hyper-focused on women’s youth and beauty — with the steady fading of both.

The feminist Victoria Smith denounces the wider political consequences of this in her book Hags — notably in the political marginalisation of older women. It is, she suggests, powered in part by misogyny, but also by a liberal feminism that is, she tells me, “obsessed with youth”.

Inasmuch as women only really fit the Rousseauean “unencumbered” template while young and child-free, perhaps the obsession makes sense. Strikingly, though, it reverberates not just across feminism but also anti-feminism: it’s common in the manosphere to characterise every woman over the age of 30 as “used up”, having “hit the wall” and run out of viable eggs to fertilise.

Both mothers and daughters, then, are under pressure to claw their way out of the matryoshka doll toward ‘personhood’. Given this, the miracle should be that many functioning mother/daughter relationships still remain — however fraught with ambivalence some of these may be.

Should this continue, the nightmare vision is of a world where mothers and daughters no longer retain even today’s fragile, conflicted interdependence, and instead just orbit one another like work colleagues, or perhaps shopping pals. But if there’s even an iota of insight in Freud’s strange account of the Electra Complex, it’s in suggesting that every generation of women somehow becomes our mothers by rebelling against them.

And in some cases, today, this means rebelling against the injunction to be ever less encumbered. Ellie tells me she and her husband struggle constantly with how to start from scratch, building an extended family — but also that this isn’t a reason to give up, or to pretend that they can just “go it alone”. Rather, she says, it’s a reason to be there for her own future extended family: “I just hold out for the long-term vision of helping with our grandchildren.”

I suspect Ellie is far from the only mother who dreams of a life that’s perhaps a little less free, but is also infinitely warmer and more nurturing than the individualistic one that has sold us as emancipation. For such women, the work ahead is matricidal, in the sense of rebelling against recent generations of women. But it’s also, paradoxically, matriarchal too: the painstaking lifetime task of putting the matryoshka back together again.


Mary Harrington is a contributing editor at UnHerd.

moveincircles

Join the discussion


Join like minded readers that support our journalism by becoming a paid subscriber


To join the discussion in the comments, become a paid subscriber.

Join like minded readers that support our journalism, read unlimited articles and enjoy other subscriber-only benefits.

Subscribe
Subscribe
Notify of
guest

365 Comments
Most Voted
Newest Oldest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
William Shaw
William Shaw
1 year ago

Infinite agency.
Zero responsibility.

Galvatron Stephens
Galvatron Stephens
1 year ago
Reply to  William Shaw

Feminism in four words.

leculdesac suburbia
leculdesac suburbia
1 year ago

Gee. My feminism entailed helping women in fear for their lives after years of beating escape from their abusers w/o abandoning their children, or helping women just brutally raped. Around 3k women each year in the US are murdered by their male partners–the handful of males murdered by female partners typically have a bunch of felony batteries and TROs in their wake.
Male violence against women=male entitlement in four words.

Galvatron Stephens
Galvatron Stephens
1 year ago

Male violence against women could be anything. If a woman is killing a man’s child and he pushes her away, that is male violence towards the woman. Is it entitlement?

However tragic it may be that 3k women die of domestic violence every year, it is statistically tiny.

Last edited 1 year ago by Galvatron Stephens
John Holland
John Holland
1 year ago

The fact that such idiotic comment gets ‘6’ upticks here is pretty depressing.

Ed Carden
Ed Carden
1 year ago

And yet the most violent of relationships isn’t male/female nor even male/male but female/female; that’s right, lesbians have the worst record for domestic violence. It’s because you’ve paired together 2 of the same sex where most likely both are feminists which means as a woman they are never wrong but teh problem is that their partner is also a woman and so they can’t both be never wrong. In a Male/Female relationship the majority of men put up with this b/c men can’t hit a woman without consequences but 2 women certainly can go at each other.

Your experience is just that “Your” experience and not necessarily reflective of most of what happens or is.

Emre S
Emre S
1 year ago
Reply to  Ed Carden

the most violent of relationships isn’t male/female nor even male/male but female/female

This was quite an interesting factoid.

jane baker
jane baker
1 year ago
Reply to  Emre S

Two women can’t share a kitchen

jane baker
jane baker
1 year ago
Reply to  Emre S

Two women can’t share a kitchen

Emre S
Emre S
1 year ago
Reply to  Ed Carden

the most violent of relationships isn’t male/female nor even male/male but female/female

This was quite an interesting factoid.

James Kirk
James Kirk
1 year ago

I resent the implication all men batter their wives, demonstrably false.

John Holland
John Holland
1 year ago
Reply to  James Kirk

She didn’t imply that at all, so your “resentment” is misplaced.

Samir Iker
Samir Iker
1 year ago
Reply to  James Kirk

These feminists would of course oppose any efforts to name and shame minority communities that have far higher crime rates against women.

What is also ironic is that those who claim women are helpless, weak victims of men (ignoring male victims because they don’t matter) are also precisely the same demographic that demand equal pay for female footballers, allowing women in the army or liberally adding female superheroes or action stars in movies. Because girl power, women are as strong as men, etc.

I read a term somewhere, maybe here or YouTube – Schrödinger’s feminism. Women can be both helpless victims or strooong, until you open the box and figure out what’s more convenient.

John Holland
John Holland
1 year ago
Reply to  James Kirk

She didn’t imply that at all, so your “resentment” is misplaced.

Samir Iker
Samir Iker
1 year ago
Reply to  James Kirk

These feminists would of course oppose any efforts to name and shame minority communities that have far higher crime rates against women.

What is also ironic is that those who claim women are helpless, weak victims of men (ignoring male victims because they don’t matter) are also precisely the same demographic that demand equal pay for female footballers, allowing women in the army or liberally adding female superheroes or action stars in movies. Because girl power, women are as strong as men, etc.

I read a term somewhere, maybe here or YouTube – Schrödinger’s feminism. Women can be both helpless victims or strooong, until you open the box and figure out what’s more convenient.

Wilfred Davis
Wilfred Davis
1 year ago

Male violence against women.

They really ought to pass a law against that.

I mean, men shouldn’t be entitled to do that, should they?

Kat L
Kat L
1 year ago

We are a country of 330 million
about half of those are men. Not excusing it but it isn’t common place in everyday life here.

Samir Iker
Samir Iker
1 year ago

The fact that feminists couldn’t care less about male victims of domestic violence (about 1/3rd of the total, zero resources or help), or the mostly male victims of workplace accidents, homelessness or suicides, just underlines his point.
Plenty of men officially (as police, lawmakers or simply good samaritans) step on to help females.

Feminists on the other hand?
Always victims, no responsibility, introspection or accountability.

B Emery
B Emery
1 year ago
Reply to  Samir Iker

Samir. Every feminism discussion you have a meltdown about feminists destroying everything.
Every thread I go after you, you wimp out.
Sorry to piss on your bonfire AGAIN (sorry I know you don’t like womens ‘violent verbal politics’ was it last time?) but once again. I ask you. Where are your sources for your woman hating tropes?

John Holland
John Holland
1 year ago
Reply to  B Emery

I think we know Samir’s “sources”- a lifetime of repeated rejection. Which is sad, but not a reasonable basis for a philosophy.

B Emery
B Emery
1 year ago
Reply to  John Holland

Yeah bless him, he posts like one who has much to learn. I keep scaring him off too.
I’ll keep roasting him. He needs to come out and slap down my verbal politics, I was hoping for at least a vain attempt, a bit of sport. Come on Samir, I’ve got loads of verbal politics. They used to say at home I never know when to shut up. Right of coarse. But it doesn’t stop me from carrying on.

AJ Mac
AJ Mac
1 year ago
Reply to  B Emery

Cheers to you and John for pushing against a persistent, predictable tide on this comment board! I hope your informed, contra-lunatic-ranting stance reflects the views of more readers than screens would indicate. In any case, your pushback is welcome. Keep calm and carry on then.

John Holland
John Holland
1 year ago
Reply to  AJ Mac

I’m intrigued as to why this site- which has consistently interesting and varied articles- attracts such a relentlessly nutty right-wing sort of commenter, way outside the normal range of opinions one meets in life, thank God.
I suppose it’s all down to the dreaded ‘algorithms’, which are used to seek out the dispossesed, the angry and fringe conspiracy theorists, and in this case, the poor, delicate chaps who think the world went to pot the day women were given the vote, or the Witchfinder General lost his day-job. I have to remind myself that this isn’t the norm, it’s a strange collection of self-selecting individuals and just one of the odd manifestations of online demographics, even though they like to think of themselves- as such extremely vocal types invariably do- as the ‘silent majority’.

Kirsten Walstedt
Kirsten Walstedt
1 year ago
Reply to  John Holland

You and me both! Every time I read an excellent article on here my feeling of satisfaction immediately plummets when I see the retrograde comments. If only the audience lived up to the content.
Let’s stick together!

Judy Johnson
Judy Johnson
1 year ago
Reply to  John Holland

I agree with you and Kirsten. Periodically I have to take a break from reading the comments. It isn’t that I mind if they are right or left-wing but that the commenters from the right seem to se their opinions as facts.

AJ Mac
AJ Mac
1 year ago
Reply to  John Holland

Exactly. Well said. Only saw this about a week after your post but yes I was hoping to liberate (liberalize?) that “silent majority” saying from its Nixonian origins.
One hypothesis: This website lets a lot of comments through, and far-right commenters may not encounter that liberty on relatively mainstream–i.e., not insistently-wackadoodle–websites, especially for rat-a-tat back-and-forth exchanges [?].
Not to brag but I’m leading the downvotes right now.

Kirsten Walstedt
Kirsten Walstedt
1 year ago
Reply to  John Holland

You and me both! Every time I read an excellent article on here my feeling of satisfaction immediately plummets when I see the retrograde comments. If only the audience lived up to the content.
Let’s stick together!

Judy Johnson
Judy Johnson
1 year ago
Reply to  John Holland

I agree with you and Kirsten. Periodically I have to take a break from reading the comments. It isn’t that I mind if they are right or left-wing but that the commenters from the right seem to se their opinions as facts.

AJ Mac
AJ Mac
1 year ago
Reply to  John Holland

Exactly. Well said. Only saw this about a week after your post but yes I was hoping to liberate (liberalize?) that “silent majority” saying from its Nixonian origins.
One hypothesis: This website lets a lot of comments through, and far-right commenters may not encounter that liberty on relatively mainstream–i.e., not insistently-wackadoodle–websites, especially for rat-a-tat back-and-forth exchanges [?].
Not to brag but I’m leading the downvotes right now.

B Emery
B Emery
1 year ago
Reply to  AJ Mac

Thank you! Lol minus three votes. The lunatics are strong on this platform..

John Holland
John Holland
1 year ago
Reply to  AJ Mac

I’m intrigued as to why this site- which has consistently interesting and varied articles- attracts such a relentlessly nutty right-wing sort of commenter, way outside the normal range of opinions one meets in life, thank God.
I suppose it’s all down to the dreaded ‘algorithms’, which are used to seek out the dispossesed, the angry and fringe conspiracy theorists, and in this case, the poor, delicate chaps who think the world went to pot the day women were given the vote, or the Witchfinder General lost his day-job. I have to remind myself that this isn’t the norm, it’s a strange collection of self-selecting individuals and just one of the odd manifestations of online demographics, even though they like to think of themselves- as such extremely vocal types invariably do- as the ‘silent majority’.

B Emery
B Emery
1 year ago
Reply to  AJ Mac

Thank you! Lol minus three votes. The lunatics are strong on this platform..

AJ Mac
AJ Mac
1 year ago
Reply to  B Emery

Cheers to you and John for pushing against a persistent, predictable tide on this comment board! I hope your informed, contra-lunatic-ranting stance reflects the views of more readers than screens would indicate. In any case, your pushback is welcome. Keep calm and carry on then.

B Emery
B Emery
1 year ago
Reply to  John Holland

Yeah bless him, he posts like one who has much to learn. I keep scaring him off too.
I’ll keep roasting him. He needs to come out and slap down my verbal politics, I was hoping for at least a vain attempt, a bit of sport. Come on Samir, I’ve got loads of verbal politics. They used to say at home I never know when to shut up. Right of coarse. But it doesn’t stop me from carrying on.

Samir Iker
Samir Iker
1 year ago
Reply to  B Emery

You in turn remind me of an amusing exchange with a feminist on twitter.
I pointed out that one third of domestic violence victims are men.
She got quite enraged, and shrilly pointed out that while 1 in 4 women are victims of DV, the corresponding levels for men were only “1 in 8”.

So, sorry to disappoint you, but you are free to pretend that
A. Men aren’t a third of the victims of domestic violence, or account for most workplace accidents, homelessness or suicides
Or
B. Feminists display absolute contempt for the above, and predominantly focus on portraying women as victims

And as for not liking womens ‘violent verbal politics’ , it isn’t a personal experience or view.
I suggest you ask your female friends aged 30 plus, whether they would prefer a male or female boss.
Go on. You might get surprised.

B Emery
B Emery
1 year ago
Reply to  Samir Iker

Ah sport! Well done samir. I salute you.
I’m not that invested in battling stats on this, it’s not a subject I’m that invested in but I’ve started so I will finish.
You still have provided no source for your assertion :

‘The fact that feminists couldn’t care less about male victims of domestic violence (about 1/3rd of the total, zero resources or help), or the mostly male victims of workplace accidents, homelessness or suicides, just underlines his point.’

Surely feminists promote women’s issues? Isn’t that the point?

Or the assertion:

Feminists on the other hand?
Always victims, no responsibility, introspection or accountability.

Sounds a very sweeping statement. Or are you just basing everything on your twitter exchanges?

Ask my female friends if they want a male or female boss? What is that a weird social experiment? What answer would I be surprised to get? I don’t mind either way really as long they’re not a nutter. I certainly don’t think you should be in charge of hiring people any time soon though.

Charles Hedges
Charles Hedges
1 year ago
Reply to  Samir Iker

I have serious doubts about violence statistics because it does not define actual damage which can go from death to the faintest of bruises and the level much pain inflicted. A pinch can be very painful but leave little evidence.
A woman slapping a man very hard who happens to be heavy weight boxer or a very solid prop forward will do little damage, a light frail man could be knocked to the ground.
This is why I consider more thought should be given to relative size, strength and ability to withstand blows of those involved when considering acts of violence.

B Emery
B Emery
1 year ago
Reply to  Samir Iker

Ah sport! Well done samir. I salute you.
I’m not that invested in battling stats on this, it’s not a subject I’m that invested in but I’ve started so I will finish.
You still have provided no source for your assertion :

‘The fact that feminists couldn’t care less about male victims of domestic violence (about 1/3rd of the total, zero resources or help), or the mostly male victims of workplace accidents, homelessness or suicides, just underlines his point.’

Surely feminists promote women’s issues? Isn’t that the point?

Or the assertion:

Feminists on the other hand?
Always victims, no responsibility, introspection or accountability.

Sounds a very sweeping statement. Or are you just basing everything on your twitter exchanges?

Ask my female friends if they want a male or female boss? What is that a weird social experiment? What answer would I be surprised to get? I don’t mind either way really as long they’re not a nutter. I certainly don’t think you should be in charge of hiring people any time soon though.

Charles Hedges
Charles Hedges
1 year ago
Reply to  Samir Iker

I have serious doubts about violence statistics because it does not define actual damage which can go from death to the faintest of bruises and the level much pain inflicted. A pinch can be very painful but leave little evidence.
A woman slapping a man very hard who happens to be heavy weight boxer or a very solid prop forward will do little damage, a light frail man could be knocked to the ground.
This is why I consider more thought should be given to relative size, strength and ability to withstand blows of those involved when considering acts of violence.

John Holland
John Holland
1 year ago
Reply to  B Emery

I think we know Samir’s “sources”- a lifetime of repeated rejection. Which is sad, but not a reasonable basis for a philosophy.

Samir Iker
Samir Iker
1 year ago
Reply to  B Emery

You in turn remind me of an amusing exchange with a feminist on twitter.
I pointed out that one third of domestic violence victims are men.
She got quite enraged, and shrilly pointed out that while 1 in 4 women are victims of DV, the corresponding levels for men were only “1 in 8”.

So, sorry to disappoint you, but you are free to pretend that
A. Men aren’t a third of the victims of domestic violence, or account for most workplace accidents, homelessness or suicides
Or
B. Feminists display absolute contempt for the above, and predominantly focus on portraying women as victims

And as for not liking womens ‘violent verbal politics’ , it isn’t a personal experience or view.
I suggest you ask your female friends aged 30 plus, whether they would prefer a male or female boss.
Go on. You might get surprised.

B Emery
B Emery
1 year ago
Reply to  Samir Iker

Samir. Every feminism discussion you have a meltdown about feminists destroying everything.
Every thread I go after you, you wimp out.
Sorry to piss on your bonfire AGAIN (sorry I know you don’t like womens ‘violent verbal politics’ was it last time?) but once again. I ask you. Where are your sources for your woman hating tropes?

B Davis
B Davis
1 year ago

We talk around each other. Like ships in the night, we steam by these monolithic shapes, vaguely seen, and shout curses at the passing shadows. It’s really rather silly.
Feminism is clearly more than 4 words…but those particular 4 words of William’s capture the worst of it. Heck, they capture the worst of much of what we see everywhere. ‘Infinite Agency / Zero Responsibility’: the current generation which accumulates empty degrees, and 6 figure debt, ignorant & entitled & living in Mom’s basement while waiting for the Loan Forgiveness Fairy to kiss them on their forehead and make it all better (all while shouting Diversity, Inclusivity, and Equity!)
And yes, of course, there is a part of Feminism, particularly in the 1st and 2nd Waves. which insisted, rightfully so, on equal pay for equal work and equal access given equal skills. Who would disagree? But we must also acknowledge that there are other aspects of those 4-Waves which are twisted & poisonous. We can hear those loud & strident voices insisting that there is no difference between men & women (Biologic Essentialism — Oh My!)… that all sex is rape… and marriage a form of chattel servitude, and family a prison. We can see the Activists and Academicians working diligently to make ‘Gender’ performative even as they cancel Women by refusing all definitions, or telling us ‘they’re people with vulvas’.
Tragically, none of those Feminist Ideologies of whatever stripe have succeeded in eliminating violence against women. If anything, we might suspect that the last 50 years of insistence on outcome equality (Where are the female lumberjacks!?)…and the inevitable lowering of quality standards (https://freebeacon.com/latest-news/absolutely-insane-connecticut-law-would-axe-fitness-requirements-for-female-firefighters/) to achieve outcome equality has incited at least some of it.
But no, male violence against women does not equal male entitlement. Male violence is only violence. And men are significantly more violent (not because they feel a sense of entitlement but because they can be violent and are naturally aggressive). Looking at the murders committed in ’21…87% were committed by men…and 78% of the victims were also men. (a different and more dangerous kind of biologic essentialism).

Last edited 1 year ago by B Davis
jane baker
jane baker
1 year ago

I’ve got no sympathy with those women because they pick up anything in trousers,that’s got a p***s,of course rather than suffer the still real stigma of being a man- less spinster. They usually live in neighbourhoods where that weird isolated,lonely woman who no one talks to is thought to be a witch and they encourage their children to throw stones at her,and the fact she HASNT GOT A MAN is perceived as sinister and disturbing. Bunch of fat,drunken,tattooed slatterns.

Alan Osband
Alan Osband
1 year ago

3k is a tiny number compared to the number of cohabiting heterosexual couples . Who would have guessed men were so gentle and forbearing ?

Galvatron Stephens
Galvatron Stephens
1 year ago

Male violence against women could be anything. If a woman is killing a man’s child and he pushes her away, that is male violence towards the woman. Is it entitlement?

However tragic it may be that 3k women die of domestic violence every year, it is statistically tiny.

Last edited 1 year ago by Galvatron Stephens
John Holland
John Holland
1 year ago

The fact that such idiotic comment gets ‘6’ upticks here is pretty depressing.

Ed Carden
Ed Carden
1 year ago

And yet the most violent of relationships isn’t male/female nor even male/male but female/female; that’s right, lesbians have the worst record for domestic violence. It’s because you’ve paired together 2 of the same sex where most likely both are feminists which means as a woman they are never wrong but teh problem is that their partner is also a woman and so they can’t both be never wrong. In a Male/Female relationship the majority of men put up with this b/c men can’t hit a woman without consequences but 2 women certainly can go at each other.

Your experience is just that “Your” experience and not necessarily reflective of most of what happens or is.

James Kirk
James Kirk
1 year ago

I resent the implication all men batter their wives, demonstrably false.

Wilfred Davis
Wilfred Davis
1 year ago

Male violence against women.

They really ought to pass a law against that.

I mean, men shouldn’t be entitled to do that, should they?

Kat L
Kat L
1 year ago

We are a country of 330 million
about half of those are men. Not excusing it but it isn’t common place in everyday life here.

Samir Iker
Samir Iker
1 year ago

The fact that feminists couldn’t care less about male victims of domestic violence (about 1/3rd of the total, zero resources or help), or the mostly male victims of workplace accidents, homelessness or suicides, just underlines his point.
Plenty of men officially (as police, lawmakers or simply good samaritans) step on to help females.

Feminists on the other hand?
Always victims, no responsibility, introspection or accountability.

B Davis
B Davis
1 year ago

We talk around each other. Like ships in the night, we steam by these monolithic shapes, vaguely seen, and shout curses at the passing shadows. It’s really rather silly.
Feminism is clearly more than 4 words…but those particular 4 words of William’s capture the worst of it. Heck, they capture the worst of much of what we see everywhere. ‘Infinite Agency / Zero Responsibility’: the current generation which accumulates empty degrees, and 6 figure debt, ignorant & entitled & living in Mom’s basement while waiting for the Loan Forgiveness Fairy to kiss them on their forehead and make it all better (all while shouting Diversity, Inclusivity, and Equity!)
And yes, of course, there is a part of Feminism, particularly in the 1st and 2nd Waves. which insisted, rightfully so, on equal pay for equal work and equal access given equal skills. Who would disagree? But we must also acknowledge that there are other aspects of those 4-Waves which are twisted & poisonous. We can hear those loud & strident voices insisting that there is no difference between men & women (Biologic Essentialism — Oh My!)… that all sex is rape… and marriage a form of chattel servitude, and family a prison. We can see the Activists and Academicians working diligently to make ‘Gender’ performative even as they cancel Women by refusing all definitions, or telling us ‘they’re people with vulvas’.
Tragically, none of those Feminist Ideologies of whatever stripe have succeeded in eliminating violence against women. If anything, we might suspect that the last 50 years of insistence on outcome equality (Where are the female lumberjacks!?)…and the inevitable lowering of quality standards (https://freebeacon.com/latest-news/absolutely-insane-connecticut-law-would-axe-fitness-requirements-for-female-firefighters/) to achieve outcome equality has incited at least some of it.
But no, male violence against women does not equal male entitlement. Male violence is only violence. And men are significantly more violent (not because they feel a sense of entitlement but because they can be violent and are naturally aggressive). Looking at the murders committed in ’21…87% were committed by men…and 78% of the victims were also men. (a different and more dangerous kind of biologic essentialism).

Last edited 1 year ago by B Davis
jane baker
jane baker
1 year ago

I’ve got no sympathy with those women because they pick up anything in trousers,that’s got a p***s,of course rather than suffer the still real stigma of being a man- less spinster. They usually live in neighbourhoods where that weird isolated,lonely woman who no one talks to is thought to be a witch and they encourage their children to throw stones at her,and the fact she HASNT GOT A MAN is perceived as sinister and disturbing. Bunch of fat,drunken,tattooed slatterns.

Alan Osband
Alan Osband
1 year ago

3k is a tiny number compared to the number of cohabiting heterosexual couples . Who would have guessed men were so gentle and forbearing ?

John Holland
John Holland
1 year ago

Really? What a bizarre assertion. Why specify only women for this claim, and not men?

Ed Carden
Ed Carden
1 year ago
Reply to  John Holland

Truth and reality might have something to do with that. Not all men have been suckered into going along with the feminist non-sense; the societal cancer it is.

John Holland
John Holland
1 year ago
Reply to  Ed Carden

They may be the “truth and reality” for a bunch of whining, misogynist incels crying into their laptops, but they ain’t mine dear.

Galvatron Stephens
Galvatron Stephens
1 year ago
Reply to  John Holland

“Incel” is now as tired as “small pee pee”, “mother’s basement” and all the other insults for people who object to feminism. Do better.

John Holland
John Holland
1 year ago

It’s not an insult, it’s a self-description. It’s what these sad people call themselves. You’ll find them easily enough, should you want to, if you type ‘I hate feminists’ into your computer.
I’ve never heard of “small pee pee”- how quaint. Do you mean small d**k?

Last edited 1 year ago by John Holland
John Holland
John Holland
1 year ago

It’s not an insult, it’s a self-description. It’s what these sad people call themselves. You’ll find them easily enough, should you want to, if you type ‘I hate feminists’ into your computer.
I’ve never heard of “small pee pee”- how quaint. Do you mean small d**k?

Last edited 1 year ago by John Holland
Galvatron Stephens
Galvatron Stephens
1 year ago
Reply to  John Holland

“Incel” is now as tired as “small pee pee”, “mother’s basement” and all the other insults for people who object to feminism. Do better.

John Holland
John Holland
1 year ago
Reply to  Ed Carden

They may be the “truth and reality” for a bunch of whining, misogynist incels crying into their laptops, but they ain’t mine dear.

Galvatron Stephens
Galvatron Stephens
1 year ago
Reply to  John Holland

Which claim are you referring to?

John Holland
John Holland
1 year ago

The claim that feminism is “infinite agency, zero responsibility”.

Galvatron Stephens
Galvatron Stephens
1 year ago
Reply to  John Holland

I did not specify women anywhere in that assertion. I specified an ideology, not a demographic as such.

Andre Lower
Andre Lower
1 year ago
Reply to  John Holland

To which the answer (regarding “evidence”) is: John (are you really a John, I wonder?…) where do you live? Under a rock, perhaps?

John Holland
John Holland
1 year ago
Reply to  Andre Lower

Why would I not be a ‘John’? Are we already into conspiracy theories, so soon? Are you ‘really an ‘Andre’, I wonder…..?’ How do I know you’re not a robot from the future, sent to destroy humanity? Or, even worse (help!) Andrea, a WOMAN!!!!!
And no, I don’t live under a rock, thanks for asking- I live in the normal world, with a wife, a couple of jobs and a family, with normal friends of both sexes; rather than the wierd, online Men’s Victimhood Society that most of the commenters here seem to spend an unhealthy amount of time in.
You should try it, Andre. It’s not nearly as scary as some people here think it is. You might even get laid, if you’re lucky….

Andre Lower
Andre Lower
1 year ago
Reply to  John Holland

No conspiracy theories, on my side at least. Just the infantile habit of posting as a man when you’re a woman, quite common these days. As for the ad hominem disparaging, it only lets everyone realize how mature you are… Anyways, enough of attention to you.

John Holland
John Holland
1 year ago
Reply to  Andre Lower

Oh my God, it turns out I’m a woman! Thanks for telling me, Andre, or Andrea, or whatever you are.
By the way, look up the meaning of ‘ad hominem’- it doesn’t mean what the standard dumb internet usage thinks it is.

John Holland
John Holland
1 year ago
Reply to  Andre Lower

Oh my God, it turns out I’m a woman! Thanks for telling me, Andre, or Andrea, or whatever you are.
By the way, look up the meaning of ‘ad hominem’- it doesn’t mean what the standard dumb internet usage thinks it is.

Andre Lower
Andre Lower
1 year ago
Reply to  John Holland

No conspiracy theories, on my side at least. Just the infantile habit of posting as a man when you’re a woman, quite common these days. As for the ad hominem disparaging, it only lets everyone realize how mature you are… Anyways, enough of attention to you.

John Holland
John Holland
1 year ago
Reply to  Andre Lower

Why would I not be a ‘John’? Are we already into conspiracy theories, so soon? Are you ‘really an ‘Andre’, I wonder…..?’ How do I know you’re not a robot from the future, sent to destroy humanity? Or, even worse (help!) Andrea, a WOMAN!!!!!
And no, I don’t live under a rock, thanks for asking- I live in the normal world, with a wife, a couple of jobs and a family, with normal friends of both sexes; rather than the wierd, online Men’s Victimhood Society that most of the commenters here seem to spend an unhealthy amount of time in.
You should try it, Andre. It’s not nearly as scary as some people here think it is. You might even get laid, if you’re lucky….

Galvatron Stephens
Galvatron Stephens
1 year ago
Reply to  John Holland

I did not specify women anywhere in that assertion. I specified an ideology, not a demographic as such.

Andre Lower
Andre Lower
1 year ago
Reply to  John Holland

To which the answer (regarding “evidence”) is: John (are you really a John, I wonder?…) where do you live? Under a rock, perhaps?

John Holland
John Holland
1 year ago

The claim that feminism is “infinite agency, zero responsibility”.

Ed Carden
Ed Carden
1 year ago
Reply to  John Holland

Truth and reality might have something to do with that. Not all men have been suckered into going along with the feminist non-sense; the societal cancer it is.

Galvatron Stephens
Galvatron Stephens
1 year ago
Reply to  John Holland

Which claim are you referring to?

Cathy Carron
Cathy Carron
1 year ago

As a movement, ‘feminism’ is dead – it lost the plot a while back…

Last edited 1 year ago by Cathy Carron
William Shaw
William Shaw
1 year ago

Accountability is kryptonite to women.

John Holland
John Holland
1 year ago
Reply to  William Shaw

Aren’t women horrible, Will? Absolutely awful.
If only us men could live together without them, just us strong, naked, lithe chaps, muscles all glistening in the purifying sunlight, limbs glistening like sweaty bronze….. far, far from `Mummy and her suffocating, emasculating embrace…

John Holland
John Holland
1 year ago
Reply to  William Shaw

Aren’t women horrible, Will? Absolutely awful.
If only us men could live together without them, just us strong, naked, lithe chaps, muscles all glistening in the purifying sunlight, limbs glistening like sweaty bronze….. far, far from `Mummy and her suffocating, emasculating embrace…

leculdesac suburbia
leculdesac suburbia
1 year ago

Gee. My feminism entailed helping women in fear for their lives after years of beating escape from their abusers w/o abandoning their children, or helping women just brutally raped. Around 3k women each year in the US are murdered by their male partners–the handful of males murdered by female partners typically have a bunch of felony batteries and TROs in their wake.
Male violence against women=male entitlement in four words.

John Holland
John Holland
1 year ago

Really? What a bizarre assertion. Why specify only women for this claim, and not men?

Cathy Carron
Cathy Carron
1 year ago

As a movement, ‘feminism’ is dead – it lost the plot a while back…

Last edited 1 year ago by Cathy Carron
William Shaw
William Shaw
1 year ago

Accountability is kryptonite to women.

Galvatron Stephens
Galvatron Stephens
1 year ago
Reply to  William Shaw

Feminism in four words.

William Shaw
William Shaw
1 year ago

Infinite agency.
Zero responsibility.

Emre S
Emre S
1 year ago

The way I see this is, any ideology that centres itself around selfishness will be unwilling to pass the baton on (why be selfness for the next generation if your point is about being selfish), and eventually starve itself out unable to continue. Or reading it backwards, any ideology or society that’s dying out because it can’t have continuity may have been doing so because they adopted a selfish ideology some time back.
Judging by birthrates, Western society (esp Europe) is quite literally dying out. This may be because of a selfish ideology adopted a while back.

leculdesac suburbia
leculdesac suburbia
1 year ago
Reply to  Emre S

Modern Western culture is an “ideology that centres itself around selfishness”–would you call any movement that asks for rights not to be battered and raped w/ impunity “selfish?” Was the Civil Rights Movement “selfish?”

Emre S
Emre S
1 year ago

“raped w/ impunity” – I hope you’re not referring to marriage with that.
I would have in mind things like drug use, lack of commitment to raising children or family, lack of interest in creating a community / knowing your neighbours, lack of respect for hard work or on its inverse being focused solely on financial success at the expense of others – that kind of thing. None of these are unique to Western societies of course, but a liberal system based on “experiments on living” obviously won’t be there to tell you not to do these things.

Warren Trees
Warren Trees
1 year ago

Sorry, but your comment has to be called out as being utterly obnoxious and infantile.

John Holland
John Holland
1 year ago
Reply to  Warren Trees

What exactly was “obnoxious” about it?

Galvatron Stephens
Galvatron Stephens
1 year ago
Reply to  Warren Trees

Standard Culdy Sack comment sadly.

Last edited 1 year ago by Galvatron Stephens
Romi Elnagar
Romi Elnagar
1 year ago
Reply to  Warren Trees

“Infantile.” Now THERE’S good word for characterizing something a woman says. I notice Suburbia’s comment was something more than name-calling, unlike your reply.

John Holland
John Holland
1 year ago
Reply to  Warren Trees

What exactly was “obnoxious” about it?

Galvatron Stephens
Galvatron Stephens
1 year ago
Reply to  Warren Trees

Standard Culdy Sack comment sadly.

Last edited 1 year ago by Galvatron Stephens
Romi Elnagar
Romi Elnagar
1 year ago
Reply to  Warren Trees

“Infantile.” Now THERE’S good word for characterizing something a woman says. I notice Suburbia’s comment was something more than name-calling, unlike your reply.

Galvatron Stephens
Galvatron Stephens
1 year ago

The right not to be battered and raped already exists. It’s why people proven to have violated those rights go to jail.

John Holland
John Holland
1 year ago

Occasionally, yes. Not very often.
The Met Police officer Carrick has finally been arrested after raping at least 12 women over a period of 20 years, despite a number of accusations against him, during which he was promoted several times. “Nasty” was his Met nickname, apparently.

Galvatron Stephens
Galvatron Stephens
1 year ago
Reply to  John Holland

The rights exist otherwise the laws would not be in place.

John Holland
John Holland
1 year ago

Yes. I realise that. And I have a right not to be burgled, but whether the police are inclined to investigate a burglery, to bring a case to court, or the courts to prosecute it, is an entirely different issue.

John Holland
John Holland
1 year ago

Yes. I realise that. And I have a right not to be burgled, but whether the police are inclined to investigate a burglery, to bring a case to court, or the courts to prosecute it, is an entirely different issue.

Galvatron Stephens
Galvatron Stephens
1 year ago
Reply to  John Holland

The rights exist otherwise the laws would not be in place.

Romi Elnagar
Romi Elnagar
1 year ago

I think one of the sticking points on your comment is “proven.” That’s a high bar to cross when police won’t even test a rape kit or listen to a woman’s complaints to begin with.
I guess the police have more IMPORTANT things to do than listen to a woman’s “infantile” complaints, regardless of how “shrilly” they are lodged.
Did I miss any of the dog-whistles used for women in this comments thread?
“Accountability is kryptonite to women.”
“Zero responsibility.”
“…the obsession with patriarchy is overdone.”

Last edited 1 year ago by Romi Elnagar
John Holland
John Holland
1 year ago

Occasionally, yes. Not very often.
The Met Police officer Carrick has finally been arrested after raping at least 12 women over a period of 20 years, despite a number of accusations against him, during which he was promoted several times. “Nasty” was his Met nickname, apparently.

Romi Elnagar
Romi Elnagar
1 year ago

I think one of the sticking points on your comment is “proven.” That’s a high bar to cross when police won’t even test a rape kit or listen to a woman’s complaints to begin with.
I guess the police have more IMPORTANT things to do than listen to a woman’s “infantile” complaints, regardless of how “shrilly” they are lodged.
Did I miss any of the dog-whistles used for women in this comments thread?
“Accountability is kryptonite to women.”
“Zero responsibility.”
“…the obsession with patriarchy is overdone.”

Last edited 1 year ago by Romi Elnagar
Emre S
Emre S
1 year ago

“raped w/ impunity” – I hope you’re not referring to marriage with that.
I would have in mind things like drug use, lack of commitment to raising children or family, lack of interest in creating a community / knowing your neighbours, lack of respect for hard work or on its inverse being focused solely on financial success at the expense of others – that kind of thing. None of these are unique to Western societies of course, but a liberal system based on “experiments on living” obviously won’t be there to tell you not to do these things.

Warren Trees
Warren Trees
1 year ago

Sorry, but your comment has to be called out as being utterly obnoxious and infantile.

Galvatron Stephens
Galvatron Stephens
1 year ago

The right not to be battered and raped already exists. It’s why people proven to have violated those rights go to jail.

leculdesac suburbia
leculdesac suburbia
1 year ago
Reply to  Emre S

Modern Western culture is an “ideology that centres itself around selfishness”–would you call any movement that asks for rights not to be battered and raped w/ impunity “selfish?” Was the Civil Rights Movement “selfish?”

Emre S
Emre S
1 year ago

The way I see this is, any ideology that centres itself around selfishness will be unwilling to pass the baton on (why be selfness for the next generation if your point is about being selfish), and eventually starve itself out unable to continue. Or reading it backwards, any ideology or society that’s dying out because it can’t have continuity may have been doing so because they adopted a selfish ideology some time back.
Judging by birthrates, Western society (esp Europe) is quite literally dying out. This may be because of a selfish ideology adopted a while back.

Pat Rowles
Pat Rowles
1 year ago

Ellie, 30, a New England mother of two under two, tells me…her mother …scornfully rejected an offer to live rent-free closer by, in exchange for helping with childcare, as a hostile attempt to reduce her to “just a grandma”.

“Hi Mom, what say you completely rearrange your life to be a free, on-demand babysitter for my kids? What? You won’t?!”

Ben Jones
Ben Jones
1 year ago
Reply to  Pat Rowles

That was my reaction too (Gen X not a Boomer)

Nunya Business
Nunya Business
1 year ago
Reply to  Pat Rowles

This was my reaction as well, and that’s from a Gen Z baby. Who would want to be unable to say no to any childcare demands, no matter how last minute or unreasonable, on pain of jeopardising your housing arrangement?

Emre S
Emre S
1 year ago
Reply to  Pat Rowles

Funny – I know plenty of people who do that for their families but they’re not white English people.

Warren Trees
Warren Trees
1 year ago
Reply to  Emre S

Yes, it seems that this selfish, narcissistic way of life has captured the Anglosphere, in particular. Affluence can be a curse, for sure. Family is still #1 in many other cultures, to their credit and to the Anglosphere’s peril.

Pat Rowles
Pat Rowles
1 year ago
Reply to  Emre S

It’s possible you have a point, but I’m not sure what it is. Is it that, because those people you know do it, “white English” people should also do it? If so, your logic escapes me.

Emre S
Emre S
1 year ago
Reply to  Pat Rowles

It’s more a remark than a point really. You made a comment I understood to say what’s described in the article wasn’t necessarily a reasonable ask – which was heavily agreed with/voted by people. Seeing this I remarked this seems to be a white English thing as in my circle it’s fairly common practice.

Pat Rowles
Pat Rowles
1 year ago
Reply to  Emre S

Fair enough. I appreciate your measured reply, and I apologise for misjudging your previous one.

Pat Rowles
Pat Rowles
1 year ago
Reply to  Emre S

Fair enough. I appreciate your measured reply, and I apologise for misjudging your previous one.

Emre S
Emre S
1 year ago
Reply to  Pat Rowles

It’s more a remark than a point really. You made a comment I understood to say what’s described in the article wasn’t necessarily a reasonable ask – which was heavily agreed with/voted by people. Seeing this I remarked this seems to be a white English thing as in my circle it’s fairly common practice.

Fred Bloggs
Fred Bloggs
1 year ago
Reply to  Emre S

And I know quite a few who are white English people.

Warren Trees
Warren Trees
1 year ago
Reply to  Emre S

Yes, it seems that this selfish, narcissistic way of life has captured the Anglosphere, in particular. Affluence can be a curse, for sure. Family is still #1 in many other cultures, to their credit and to the Anglosphere’s peril.

Pat Rowles
Pat Rowles
1 year ago
Reply to  Emre S

It’s possible you have a point, but I’m not sure what it is. Is it that, because those people you know do it, “white English” people should also do it? If so, your logic escapes me.

Fred Bloggs
Fred Bloggs
1 year ago
Reply to  Emre S

And I know quite a few who are white English people.

Peter Johnson
Peter Johnson
1 year ago
Reply to  Pat Rowles

On the other hand we were expected to routinely drag two toddlers across an entire continent for week long stays with family during which neither set of grandparents offered to babysit even for an hour. There is no doubt this issue breeds resentment. I certainly resented it.

Pat Rowles
Pat Rowles
1 year ago
Reply to  Peter Johnson

I can understand your resentment. It will often arise if you accede to other people’s unreasonable expectations. But, as my old dad used to say: “You have a choice: do it, or moan about it; but don’t do it and moan about it.”

Pat Rowles
Pat Rowles
1 year ago
Reply to  Peter Johnson

I can understand your resentment. It will often arise if you accede to other people’s unreasonable expectations. But, as my old dad used to say: “You have a choice: do it, or moan about it; but don’t do it and moan about it.”

Kat L
Kat L
1 year ago
Reply to  Pat Rowles

I love babies so would be happy to assist in rearing my descendants and being an influence in their lives. Many of today’s children don’t know basic fairy tales or nursery songs or games, I would love to pass down that cultural heritage.

Pat Rowles
Pat Rowles
1 year ago
Reply to  Kat L

I genuinely applaud your willingness to pitch in. That being the case, you should look for ways to make it easier for you to do so. It just struck me as massively entitled for someone to think it reasonable to ask someone else, even a parent, to move house because it would make their own life easier.

Kat L
Kat L
1 year ago
Reply to  Pat Rowles

The thing is that families are a bulwark and provide stability and cohesion. You don’t have to give up your own enjoyments and goals to help out. By no means should you be a doormat but why wouldn’t you want to spend a good amount of time with the people who you love the most?

Pat Rowles
Pat Rowles
1 year ago
Reply to  Kat L

I agree with you where family is concerned, but the devil is in the details: from my perspective, the expectation that the mother would determine how much time her mother spends with the grandchild, not the grandmother herself, is implicit in the request that the grandmother make such a major change to her own life.
You ask, “why wouldn’t you want to spend a good amount of time with the people who you love the most?”, but we all have our own idea of what constitutes a “good amount of time”.

Pat Rowles
Pat Rowles
1 year ago
Reply to  Kat L

I agree with you where family is concerned, but the devil is in the details: from my perspective, the expectation that the mother would determine how much time her mother spends with the grandchild, not the grandmother herself, is implicit in the request that the grandmother make such a major change to her own life.
You ask, “why wouldn’t you want to spend a good amount of time with the people who you love the most?”, but we all have our own idea of what constitutes a “good amount of time”.

Kat L
Kat L
1 year ago
Reply to  Pat Rowles

The thing is that families are a bulwark and provide stability and cohesion. You don’t have to give up your own enjoyments and goals to help out. By no means should you be a doormat but why wouldn’t you want to spend a good amount of time with the people who you love the most?

Pat Rowles
Pat Rowles
1 year ago
Reply to  Kat L

I genuinely applaud your willingness to pitch in. That being the case, you should look for ways to make it easier for you to do so. It just struck me as massively entitled for someone to think it reasonable to ask someone else, even a parent, to move house because it would make their own life easier.

Ben Jones
Ben Jones
1 year ago
Reply to  Pat Rowles

That was my reaction too (Gen X not a Boomer)

Nunya Business
Nunya Business
1 year ago
Reply to  Pat Rowles

This was my reaction as well, and that’s from a Gen Z baby. Who would want to be unable to say no to any childcare demands, no matter how last minute or unreasonable, on pain of jeopardising your housing arrangement?

Emre S
Emre S
1 year ago
Reply to  Pat Rowles

Funny – I know plenty of people who do that for their families but they’re not white English people.

Peter Johnson
Peter Johnson
1 year ago
Reply to  Pat Rowles

On the other hand we were expected to routinely drag two toddlers across an entire continent for week long stays with family during which neither set of grandparents offered to babysit even for an hour. There is no doubt this issue breeds resentment. I certainly resented it.

Kat L
Kat L
1 year ago
Reply to  Pat Rowles

I love babies so would be happy to assist in rearing my descendants and being an influence in their lives. Many of today’s children don’t know basic fairy tales or nursery songs or games, I would love to pass down that cultural heritage.

Pat Rowles
Pat Rowles
1 year ago

Ellie, 30, a New England mother of two under two, tells me…her mother …scornfully rejected an offer to live rent-free closer by, in exchange for helping with childcare, as a hostile attempt to reduce her to “just a grandma”.

“Hi Mom, what say you completely rearrange your life to be a free, on-demand babysitter for my kids? What? You won’t?!”

Rob N
Rob N
1 year ago

I feel the obsession with ‘patriarchy’ is overdone. The belief has become an unchallenged cult, blamed for everything.

It is hardly surprising that with women having and caring for babies and children, and men being more suited to a physical protection role that they had different spheres of control.

Inevitably most men don’t want to be told when or how to risk their lives by a woman who is not going to fight but instead want to make such decisions with their comrades who they will fight with. This then leads to male control of war and the pre war state, which ultimately covers a lot of areas. Not the household though where the woman has traditionally been in charge in most cultures.

Now that war is being taken away from the individual (militarily, culturally and legally) it is reasonable for woman to want more control over their life. However this is leaving men with a reduced and uncertain role and is making our society less able to withstand violent threats when they arrive. And they will and are.

At some point we will regret the loss of the maleness that we used to have. Probably in the next decade.

Emre S
Emre S
1 year ago
Reply to  Rob N

I don’t think it’s a coincidence that the arrival of nuclear weapons and really the detente in the Cold War, and the start sexual revolution/women’s emancipation follow each other. In all likelihood, the patriarchy narrative was made possible basically because of nuclear weapons.
To add to the above, nuclear weapons may not be able to keep us in peace indefinitely. Some day, some nation may be able find an asymmetric weapon, or find means to hack into others’ weapon systems. That’s where today’s danger lies for me.

Last edited 1 year ago by Emre S
Samantha Phillips
Samantha Phillips
1 year ago
Reply to  Emre S

Men no longer preoccupied by war can divert their energies to protecting the family identity of female and male from the ravaging war being waged against the family unit by ideology cults who have invaded our establishment our schools hospitals prisons etc? (Aka Tavistock and mermaids) Maybe our warrior men are not superfluous but can help defend womanhood and womens safe spaces?

William Shaw
William Shaw
1 year ago

Women have been fighting for themselves for decades at the expense of men. It’s time men woke up and fought for themselves. No more sacrifices for a section of humanity that hates us.

John Holland
John Holland
1 year ago
Reply to  William Shaw

Oh dear- was Mummy mean to you?

William Shaw
William Shaw
1 year ago
Reply to  John Holland

Your contribution to this thread seems to be ad hominem disparaging remarks directed at anyone with whom you disagree.

John Holland
John Holland
1 year ago
Reply to  William Shaw

You don’t think perhaps that the accusation of “ad hominems” (which is misplaced, as you seem to follow the standard misunderstanding of the term as meaning ‘personal insult’, which it doesn’t), when applied to a thread largely consisting of a bunch of angry men getting increasingly bilious about women who don’t behave as they think they should, is just a little ironic? You just whined that most women “hate you”, for God’s sake. That’s not exactly Socratic in its dispassionate intellectualism, is it? What do you want, a bowl of ice cream and a hanky?
If you don’t like “ad hominem” (sic) disparaging remarks directed at anyone with whom you disagree (ie, the great majority of women), you must strongly dislike most of the stuff here.

B Emery
B Emery
1 year ago
Reply to  William Shaw

I was fully enjoying it. You Americans don’t understand British humour at all do you? There’s little left when all hope of rationality has abandoned ship to crazy American feminist rants.

John Holland
John Holland
1 year ago
Reply to  William Shaw

You don’t think perhaps that the accusation of “ad hominems” (which is misplaced, as you seem to follow the standard misunderstanding of the term as meaning ‘personal insult’, which it doesn’t), when applied to a thread largely consisting of a bunch of angry men getting increasingly bilious about women who don’t behave as they think they should, is just a little ironic? You just whined that most women “hate you”, for God’s sake. That’s not exactly Socratic in its dispassionate intellectualism, is it? What do you want, a bowl of ice cream and a hanky?
If you don’t like “ad hominem” (sic) disparaging remarks directed at anyone with whom you disagree (ie, the great majority of women), you must strongly dislike most of the stuff here.

B Emery
B Emery
1 year ago
Reply to  William Shaw

I was fully enjoying it. You Americans don’t understand British humour at all do you? There’s little left when all hope of rationality has abandoned ship to crazy American feminist rants.

Aidan A
Aidan A
1 year ago
Reply to  John Holland

This not a nice comment. Totally unnecessary.

John Holland
John Holland
1 year ago
Reply to  Aidan A

Whereas a comment by a man whining that women are hateful and men need to “fight” back is both “nice” and “necessary”
Good grief.

John Holland
John Holland
1 year ago
Reply to  Aidan A

Whereas a comment by a man whining that women are hateful and men need to “fight” back is both “nice” and “necessary”
Good grief.

Andre Lower
Andre Lower
1 year ago
Reply to  John Holland

John, the downvotes should be enough for you to realize just how much your opinion is appreciated over here. Do yourself a favour and go join some feminist march somewhere, please? People are trying to discuss as adults here, and you are sticking out like a sore thumb.

John Holland
John Holland
1 year ago
Reply to  Andre Lower

Andre, dear, the reason this blog is called ‘unHerd’ is precisely because it supposedly prides itself on NOT being a repository for the kind of braying “herd” mentality that infests the internet these days.
Sadly, you represent exactly this braying herd mentality, the sort of group-think clone who cannot cope with a different viewpoint, and merely wants to sit in some half-witted echo-chamber of your own ‘thoughts’ , unchallenged by anything or anyone. In which case, why not just sit in a darkened room and talk to yourself? You’ll be guaranteed not to be upset by a differring opinion.

John Holland
John Holland
1 year ago
Reply to  Andre Lower

Andre, dear, the reason this blog is called ‘unHerd’ is precisely because it supposedly prides itself on NOT being a repository for the kind of braying “herd” mentality that infests the internet these days.
Sadly, you represent exactly this braying herd mentality, the sort of group-think clone who cannot cope with a different viewpoint, and merely wants to sit in some half-witted echo-chamber of your own ‘thoughts’ , unchallenged by anything or anyone. In which case, why not just sit in a darkened room and talk to yourself? You’ll be guaranteed not to be upset by a differring opinion.

William Shaw
William Shaw
1 year ago
Reply to  John Holland

Your contribution to this thread seems to be ad hominem disparaging remarks directed at anyone with whom you disagree.

Aidan A
Aidan A
1 year ago
Reply to  John Holland

This not a nice comment. Totally unnecessary.

Andre Lower
Andre Lower
1 year ago
Reply to  John Holland

John, the downvotes should be enough for you to realize just how much your opinion is appreciated over here. Do yourself a favour and go join some feminist march somewhere, please? People are trying to discuss as adults here, and you are sticking out like a sore thumb.

John Holland
John Holland
1 year ago
Reply to  William Shaw

Oh dear- was Mummy mean to you?

Galvatron Stephens
Galvatron Stephens
1 year ago

Problem is, when you have spent decades pathologising males and their agency, you might not get the response you wish for when you appeal for their aid.

Feminism helped create a world where men are at a loss as to what they are supposed to be and where male activity is constantly subject to outside approval. The same kind of men who will be aware of the trans issue are the same kind of men who would be horrified of being called a sexist, and as such, are equally horrified of being called a transphobe. Men know that they will be condemned whatever they do.

Ironically the men who hold the most traditional views on gender are the working-class types feminists would never dream of associating with and who couldn’t care less what feminists think.

Last edited 1 year ago by Galvatron Stephens
John Holland
John Holland
1 year ago

Most men are doing ok- they have jobs, families, friends, they watch sport, go to the pub, secretly look at a bit of porn, do the gardening and even change nappies. They aren’t “condemned” by anyone for doing these things.
They don’t tend to spend their time crying to everyone about their victimhood and how they suffer under such a cruel dystopian nightmare. Maybe you should give it a try.

Galvatron Stephens
Galvatron Stephens
1 year ago
Reply to  John Holland

I was obviously referring to men’s role in society. Men are seen as optional, at best. Greater minds than yours are concerned, female and male.

John Holland
John Holland
1 year ago

Men clearly aren’t seen as “optional” by anyone other than a few fringe figures who can be safely ignored by any sane person.
You might think they are “great minds”, but 99% of normal humans think they just need to get laid and find a hobby.

John Holland
John Holland
1 year ago

Men clearly aren’t seen as “optional” by anyone other than a few fringe figures who can be safely ignored by any sane person.
You might think they are “great minds”, but 99% of normal humans think they just need to get laid and find a hobby.

Galvatron Stephens
Galvatron Stephens
1 year ago
Reply to  John Holland

I was obviously referring to men’s role in society. Men are seen as optional, at best. Greater minds than yours are concerned, female and male.

tom carson
tom carson
1 year ago

My only problem with this line of thinking is it portrays men as helpless victims of the unreasonable demands of women. I personally find that cringe worthy. Men find great comfort in strong established roles and are very hierarchical. The women’s movement smashed that up. We have been called to reimagine what bravery, commitment and sacrifice look like. Instead of relying on mum to affirm our manhood. We all know what manhood looks like, especially women. It’s time to take our hands off it and get on with it without constantly looking for female approval.

John Holland
John Holland
1 year ago

Most men are doing ok- they have jobs, families, friends, they watch sport, go to the pub, secretly look at a bit of porn, do the gardening and even change nappies. They aren’t “condemned” by anyone for doing these things.
They don’t tend to spend their time crying to everyone about their victimhood and how they suffer under such a cruel dystopian nightmare. Maybe you should give it a try.

tom carson
tom carson
1 year ago

My only problem with this line of thinking is it portrays men as helpless victims of the unreasonable demands of women. I personally find that cringe worthy. Men find great comfort in strong established roles and are very hierarchical. The women’s movement smashed that up. We have been called to reimagine what bravery, commitment and sacrifice look like. Instead of relying on mum to affirm our manhood. We all know what manhood looks like, especially women. It’s time to take our hands off it and get on with it without constantly looking for female approval.

Rob N
Rob N
1 year ago

I am trying, as, it seems, are quite a few men. Just don’t understand why some men and lots of women seem to support the transcultists.

It is damaging to both sexes/genders and all of society.

In effect we are now at war, just one where guns are not being used. Yet.

Galvatron Stephens
Galvatron Stephens
1 year ago
Reply to  Rob N

The trans agenda dovetails into a lot of the things that helped feminism succeed

1) assertion that a group is oppressed or vulnerable (then women, now trans)
2) a desire for people to be seen as tolerant and inclusive towards this group
3) an opponent group who are seen as discriminatory and cruel to the group (feminism would have painted this figure as an archetype of sexism and male chauvinism, the trans equivalent is what they call a TERF)
4) an environment of liberalism which makes people subconsciously believe freedom is the ultimate end and that the more freedom there is the better.

The trans have two more things going for them

A) for young men who are fed up of the way they feel they are treated by society, they can instantly become part of a progressive “in-group” by becoming trans. Going from male to trans woman means going from the very bottom of the progressive stack right to the very top. Once in the crosshairs of the Left, they are now aiming the gun.

B) a lot of young men will seek to “get back” at women by presenting as one

C) there is a potentially huge social dividend to being trans and young. Trans people can make a LOT of money as social media figures in a way men simply cannot. There is a boy at a local school being “transitioned” by 5 girls. He has instantly boosted his social circle. Being trans is a popular thing amongst the young.

Last edited 1 year ago by Galvatron Stephens
John Holland
John Holland
1 year ago

Most ‘trans’ people are now girls wanting to become boys- more than two-thirds. This does rather contradict your simple theories.

Galvatron Stephens
Galvatron Stephens
1 year ago
Reply to  John Holland

Depends what numbers you look at. The main concern is male to female transition. Then again, you don’t seem to be able to really do much in the comments section other than be obtuse and insult people.

John Holland
John Holland
1 year ago

It’s a fact, in the UK at least- if you have figures that dispute it, please say.
And why is the “main concern” male to female transition? Whose “main concern”, and why? Perhaps you mean YOUR main concern- in which case, why is the one so much more of a “concern” to you than the other?
And yes, many of my comments today have been a bit, er, tetchy- that’s because the comments I’m responding to have been pretty unpleasant misogynist ranting. If someone posts that stuff, they should surely be ‘man enough’ to take it on the chin, no? Or should we blame their Mothers?

Galvatron Stephens
Galvatron Stephens
1 year ago
Reply to  John Holland

Where are your figures from?

The main concern is male-to-female transitioners because these individuals are biological men who are seeking access to women’s spaces. You would know that if you were so knowledgable about the trans issue. Various feminists have written on Unherd about it. You can pollute the comments on those articles too.

“Misogynistic ranting”. Lol. Get a grip. I think you got bullied a lot at school.

John Holland
John Holland
1 year ago

“Where do you get you figures from?” There is no strict authority, but the great majority of studies put the current number at around 2/3rds female to male- see Meier and Lebusky , ‘The demographics of transgender population’.
“Various feminists have written…” I thought you hated feminists, and blamed them for most of the world’s ills? Why are you now telling me I should read these hateful, man-hating harridans? Make your mind up.
“I think you got bullied a lot at school”. Ah. Very good argument. I’ve tried to think of an intellectual counter to that epistemological theory, but I just can’t. Top marks.

John Holland
John Holland
1 year ago

“Where do you get you figures from?” There is no strict authority, but the great majority of studies put the current number at around 2/3rds female to male- see Meier and Lebusky , ‘The demographics of transgender population’.
“Various feminists have written…” I thought you hated feminists, and blamed them for most of the world’s ills? Why are you now telling me I should read these hateful, man-hating harridans? Make your mind up.
“I think you got bullied a lot at school”. Ah. Very good argument. I’ve tried to think of an intellectual counter to that epistemological theory, but I just can’t. Top marks.

Galvatron Stephens
Galvatron Stephens
1 year ago
Reply to  John Holland

Where are your figures from?

The main concern is male-to-female transitioners because these individuals are biological men who are seeking access to women’s spaces. You would know that if you were so knowledgable about the trans issue. Various feminists have written on Unherd about it. You can pollute the comments on those articles too.

“Misogynistic ranting”. Lol. Get a grip. I think you got bullied a lot at school.

John Holland
John Holland
1 year ago

It’s a fact, in the UK at least- if you have figures that dispute it, please say.
And why is the “main concern” male to female transition? Whose “main concern”, and why? Perhaps you mean YOUR main concern- in which case, why is the one so much more of a “concern” to you than the other?
And yes, many of my comments today have been a bit, er, tetchy- that’s because the comments I’m responding to have been pretty unpleasant misogynist ranting. If someone posts that stuff, they should surely be ‘man enough’ to take it on the chin, no? Or should we blame their Mothers?

Galvatron Stephens
Galvatron Stephens
1 year ago
Reply to  John Holland

Depends what numbers you look at. The main concern is male to female transition. Then again, you don’t seem to be able to really do much in the comments section other than be obtuse and insult people.

John Holland
John Holland
1 year ago

Most ‘trans’ people are now girls wanting to become boys- more than two-thirds. This does rather contradict your simple theories.

Galvatron Stephens
Galvatron Stephens
1 year ago
Reply to  Rob N

The trans agenda dovetails into a lot of the things that helped feminism succeed

1) assertion that a group is oppressed or vulnerable (then women, now trans)
2) a desire for people to be seen as tolerant and inclusive towards this group
3) an opponent group who are seen as discriminatory and cruel to the group (feminism would have painted this figure as an archetype of sexism and male chauvinism, the trans equivalent is what they call a TERF)
4) an environment of liberalism which makes people subconsciously believe freedom is the ultimate end and that the more freedom there is the better.

The trans have two more things going for them

A) for young men who are fed up of the way they feel they are treated by society, they can instantly become part of a progressive “in-group” by becoming trans. Going from male to trans woman means going from the very bottom of the progressive stack right to the very top. Once in the crosshairs of the Left, they are now aiming the gun.

B) a lot of young men will seek to “get back” at women by presenting as one

C) there is a potentially huge social dividend to being trans and young. Trans people can make a LOT of money as social media figures in a way men simply cannot. There is a boy at a local school being “transitioned” by 5 girls. He has instantly boosted his social circle. Being trans is a popular thing amongst the young.

Last edited 1 year ago by Galvatron Stephens
tom carson
tom carson
1 year ago

Yes Samantha I think I agree with that. Whenever I see us bemoan the loss of traditional roles I think it is mostly a loss of imagination. Are we saying that we no longer need men to be brave? Do we no longer need men to be protective? Do we no longer need men to be father to children? My God, there is a world of work to do as you pointed out. The traditional roles for men and women do not become superfluous. They just need to be reimagined.

Emre S
Emre S
1 year ago
Reply to  tom carson

Well said.

Emre S
Emre S
1 year ago
Reply to  tom carson

Well said.

William Shaw
William Shaw
1 year ago

Women have been fighting for themselves for decades at the expense of men. It’s time men woke up and fought for themselves. No more sacrifices for a section of humanity that hates us.

Galvatron Stephens
Galvatron Stephens
1 year ago

Problem is, when you have spent decades pathologising males and their agency, you might not get the response you wish for when you appeal for their aid.

Feminism helped create a world where men are at a loss as to what they are supposed to be and where male activity is constantly subject to outside approval. The same kind of men who will be aware of the trans issue are the same kind of men who would be horrified of being called a sexist, and as such, are equally horrified of being called a transphobe. Men know that they will be condemned whatever they do.

Ironically the men who hold the most traditional views on gender are the working-class types feminists would never dream of associating with and who couldn’t care less what feminists think.

Last edited 1 year ago by Galvatron Stephens
Rob N
Rob N
1 year ago

I am trying, as, it seems, are quite a few men. Just don’t understand why some men and lots of women seem to support the transcultists.

It is damaging to both sexes/genders and all of society.

In effect we are now at war, just one where guns are not being used. Yet.

tom carson
tom carson
1 year ago

Yes Samantha I think I agree with that. Whenever I see us bemoan the loss of traditional roles I think it is mostly a loss of imagination. Are we saying that we no longer need men to be brave? Do we no longer need men to be protective? Do we no longer need men to be father to children? My God, there is a world of work to do as you pointed out. The traditional roles for men and women do not become superfluous. They just need to be reimagined.

Sam Sky
Sam Sky
1 year ago
Reply to  Emre S

Many of these grandparents have done their duty, raised the next generation and now want a break from both work and small children and expect the next generation to do their bit now, as they did. Not everyone wants their last years on earth surrounded by horrible little brats running and screaming around, for which they no longer have the energy of youth to tolerate. Especially as the current generation of parents – and our current legal system – forbids giving such brats the corporal punishment – the belt, the ruler to the knuckles that all children were familiar with 50 years ago – they deserve that we used to have. Back when we were (quite properly) expected to be seen and not heard and feared the wroth of adults if we dared to intrude on their adult world with our insufferable childishness.

That other cultures that contributed a mere iota of what the English have think differently strikes me as a moot point.

Last edited 1 year ago by Sam Sky
Samantha Phillips
Samantha Phillips
1 year ago
Reply to  Emre S

Men no longer preoccupied by war can divert their energies to protecting the family identity of female and male from the ravaging war being waged against the family unit by ideology cults who have invaded our establishment our schools hospitals prisons etc? (Aka Tavistock and mermaids) Maybe our warrior men are not superfluous but can help defend womanhood and womens safe spaces?

Sam Sky
Sam Sky
1 year ago
Reply to  Emre S

Many of these grandparents have done their duty, raised the next generation and now want a break from both work and small children and expect the next generation to do their bit now, as they did. Not everyone wants their last years on earth surrounded by horrible little brats running and screaming around, for which they no longer have the energy of youth to tolerate. Especially as the current generation of parents – and our current legal system – forbids giving such brats the corporal punishment – the belt, the ruler to the knuckles that all children were familiar with 50 years ago – they deserve that we used to have. Back when we were (quite properly) expected to be seen and not heard and feared the wroth of adults if we dared to intrude on their adult world with our insufferable childishness.

That other cultures that contributed a mere iota of what the English have think differently strikes me as a moot point.

Last edited 1 year ago by Sam Sky
Peter Johnson
Peter Johnson
1 year ago
Reply to  Rob N

Well Ukrainian men have been expected to be very traditional whether they like it or not. I am always surprised at how many of them are middle aged in the combat footage. I would have been all over being a warrior when I was 19 – not so much in my middle age.

Samir Iker
Samir Iker
1 year ago
Reply to  Peter Johnson

No feminists in house fires, the Titanic or trenches on the Ukrainian battlefield

CHARLES STANHOPE
CHARLES STANHOPE
1 year ago
Reply to  Samir Iker

Plenty in HM Submarines unfortunately.

Samir Iker
Samir Iker
1 year ago

Three women submariners as fas as I know.
Which may be your definition of “plenty”, but it’s a lot less than the number of women “victims” who have murdered their partners.

Edit: 2016. Could be modestly higher now, I guess.

Last edited 1 year ago by Samir Iker
CHARLES STANHOPE
CHARLES STANHOPE
1 year ago
Reply to  Samir Iker

I agree.
However there has been quite a bit of “bovver “ in HM Submarines in recent years despite the MoD doing its very best to suppress any mention of it.
Courts Martial have been the result and one tabloid has highlighted the scandal, rather amusingly as “UP PERISCOPE “!

John Holland
John Holland
1 year ago
Reply to  Samir Iker

Oh, to be in a long hard vessel full of seamen, Samir….

CHARLES STANHOPE
CHARLES STANHOPE
1 year ago
Reply to  Samir Iker

I agree.
However there has been quite a bit of “bovver “ in HM Submarines in recent years despite the MoD doing its very best to suppress any mention of it.
Courts Martial have been the result and one tabloid has highlighted the scandal, rather amusingly as “UP PERISCOPE “!

John Holland
John Holland
1 year ago
Reply to  Samir Iker

Oh, to be in a long hard vessel full of seamen, Samir….

Samir Iker
Samir Iker
1 year ago

Three women submariners as fas as I know.
Which may be your definition of “plenty”, but it’s a lot less than the number of women “victims” who have murdered their partners.

Edit: 2016. Could be modestly higher now, I guess.

Last edited 1 year ago by Samir Iker
CHARLES STANHOPE
CHARLES STANHOPE
1 year ago
Reply to  Samir Iker

ps. (Useless information.)
You serve IN a Royal Navy vessel not ON.
The only two exceptions used to be H.M.S.Aisne and H.M.S. Opportune. Both now scrapped.

Last edited 1 year ago by CHARLES STANHOPE
Samir Iker
Samir Iker
1 year ago

What you also do ON a navy vessel is to watch out for other ships. Not a hard task, given the extent of navigation aids and radars.
Which is something that the crew of the USN Fitzgerald and KNM Helge Ingstad failed to do, quite miserably, under benign conditions.
Guess what was the common link?

In other news, the royal navy is trying to double the number of women (overall, not those in submarines and stuff) from 1 in 10 currently. Should be good. Strangely, no such initiative for increasing male teachers in schools though.

Samir Iker
Samir Iker
1 year ago

What you also do ON a navy vessel is to watch out for other ships. Not a hard task, given the extent of navigation aids and radars.
Which is something that the crew of the USN Fitzgerald and KNM Helge Ingstad failed to do, quite miserably, under benign conditions.
Guess what was the common link?

In other news, the royal navy is trying to double the number of women (overall, not those in submarines and stuff) from 1 in 10 currently. Should be good. Strangely, no such initiative for increasing male teachers in schools though.

CHARLES STANHOPE
CHARLES STANHOPE
1 year ago
Reply to  Samir Iker

Plenty in HM Submarines unfortunately.

CHARLES STANHOPE
CHARLES STANHOPE
1 year ago
Reply to  Samir Iker

ps. (Useless information.)
You serve IN a Royal Navy vessel not ON.
The only two exceptions used to be H.M.S.Aisne and H.M.S. Opportune. Both now scrapped.

Last edited 1 year ago by CHARLES STANHOPE
Samir Iker
Samir Iker
1 year ago
Reply to  Peter Johnson

No feminists in house fires, the Titanic or trenches on the Ukrainian battlefield

Emre S
Emre S
1 year ago
Reply to  Rob N

I don’t think it’s a coincidence that the arrival of nuclear weapons and really the detente in the Cold War, and the start sexual revolution/women’s emancipation follow each other. In all likelihood, the patriarchy narrative was made possible basically because of nuclear weapons.
To add to the above, nuclear weapons may not be able to keep us in peace indefinitely. Some day, some nation may be able find an asymmetric weapon, or find means to hack into others’ weapon systems. That’s where today’s danger lies for me.

Last edited 1 year ago by Emre S
Peter Johnson
Peter Johnson
1 year ago
Reply to  Rob N

Well Ukrainian men have been expected to be very traditional whether they like it or not. I am always surprised at how many of them are middle aged in the combat footage. I would have been all over being a warrior when I was 19 – not so much in my middle age.

Rob N
Rob N
1 year ago

I feel the obsession with ‘patriarchy’ is overdone. The belief has become an unchallenged cult, blamed for everything.

It is hardly surprising that with women having and caring for babies and children, and men being more suited to a physical protection role that they had different spheres of control.

Inevitably most men don’t want to be told when or how to risk their lives by a woman who is not going to fight but instead want to make such decisions with their comrades who they will fight with. This then leads to male control of war and the pre war state, which ultimately covers a lot of areas. Not the household though where the woman has traditionally been in charge in most cultures.

Now that war is being taken away from the individual (militarily, culturally and legally) it is reasonable for woman to want more control over their life. However this is leaving men with a reduced and uncertain role and is making our society less able to withstand violent threats when they arrive. And they will and are.

At some point we will regret the loss of the maleness that we used to have. Probably in the next decade.

Sue Frisby
Sue Frisby
1 year ago

A thought-provoking article, particularly as it’s very relevant to me. I was a radical ‘80s feminist and I’m now a grandmother. I have been seriously re-thinking my views around women and men for some years and I have been letting go of the idea I must prove myself in the ‘outside world’ at the same time as being a single mother. Even though I was seriously programmed by feminist ideology, it still feels natural to me to home-make and nurture. My spiritual and practical female wisdom is vital for my family.

Sue Frisby
Sue Frisby
1 year ago

A thought-provoking article, particularly as it’s very relevant to me. I was a radical ‘80s feminist and I’m now a grandmother. I have been seriously re-thinking my views around women and men for some years and I have been letting go of the idea I must prove myself in the ‘outside world’ at the same time as being a single mother. Even though I was seriously programmed by feminist ideology, it still feels natural to me to home-make and nurture. My spiritual and practical female wisdom is vital for my family.

Christopher Chantrill
Christopher Chantrill
1 year ago

Yes, dear old Siggi and “what do women want?”
He was wrong, as usual. The question is rather “what do women expect?”
And the answer is that “women expect to be protected,” by men, by mothers, by grandmothers, by government, by first-wave feminists, and Uncle Tom Cobbley.
And yes, when a woman has a baby she needs — expects — a lot of support. That is how to beat the odds on all the things that can go wrong.
I know a mother who says “my job is to keep these kids alive.”
I think she is probably right. But I don’t know if the lasses on Mumsnet would agree.

Phillipa Fioretti
Phillipa Fioretti
1 year ago

In a society like Freud’s the question was ‘What do men want from women?’ and so women were shaped accordingly, focussing on sexual attractiveness and marriagability. It was hammered home that this is how they should be by making it impossible to survive without a man’s protection.

To ask what it was a woman wanted was a question she couldn’t answer as she’d been schooled in meekness and obedience and was allowed little agency.

So Freud could find no answer in his time and was utterly puzzled by the woman that patriarchy had created and shaped. That he could not see the blindingly obvious- that women want to be seen as humans first and ‘women’ afterwards, is an indication of deeply ingrained patriarchy was in his time.

Now we ask what do men want? And if the Internet is any indication, they want to be back on top again, where they can dictate the terms then ridicule women for following them.

I

Steve Murray
Steve Murray
1 year ago

Very perceptive. We frequently see evidence of what you describe in Unherd Comments.

CHARLES STANHOPE
CHARLES STANHOPE
1 year ago

And where does this patriarchy come from?
.the Bible, and the Koran, and thus the three so called Abrahamic Faiths confine women the dustbin. ( perhaps it is something to do with the desert where they came from?)

Although the Romans were not entirely blameless,* at least Roman women in the first century AD had far greater legal and property rights than women in the UK did until the late nineteenth century.

(*The Pater Familias etc.)

Phillipa Fioretti
Phillipa Fioretti
1 year ago

Where does patriarchy come from? Well, it goes way back beyond the Abrahamic religions. I hoped Yolanda Harari would answer that question in his book Homo Sapiens, but he basically said he didn’t know and that it could be stemming from men’s superior strength.
It’s a really fraught question because if it’s regarded as a default, natural state of affairs, then we would all have to just give up striving for equality. And I do think that as animals, there is a strong biological factor. But we are also, social and symbolic beings living on the cusp of gender implosion, so we can implement change and choice.

Those who say it’s a natural thing should be reminded that Nature does not give a toss how we arrange ourselves only that we reproduce. Nature has endowed humans with some seriously self destructive features and we deploy them every day. It would be good if we could rise above patriarchal structures, good for all, I suspect.

Phillipa Fioretti
Phillipa Fioretti
1 year ago