talkpolitics | Erin Pizzey tells her own story.

To start with, I'm not about to take any article on a MRA blog seriously. If you want to advance your cause you may want to vet your sources more carefully.

Next, I agree completely with

malasadas, even if what she has described did happen in exactly that way, to use it to discredit all of feminism is distasteful and dishonest.

the MRA blog liifted the story complete from the Daily Mail, but even the Left wing guardian , in an interview with her acknowledges the salient points - that the feminist Movement, such as it was in the UK at the time, threw her out for refusing to stand bhind the bombing of Biba.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2001/nov/26/gender.uk1

Seeing as ms Pizzey has successfuly sued before, the fact that the mail and the blog can both run the extract as her own work leads me to suspect that this is genuinely her view.

Me, Ii draw a distinction between 1st and second wave feminiism, and I believe that the third wave was demonstrably different from the second as well.

To me, Pizzey was the authentic Feminist of the era, not the women who wanted to bomb Biba, but that's my opinion.

Speaking as someone who actually grew up in a home with a violent and drunken father, I think that Ms Pizzey must be credited with having the idea and carrying it through.

I also make her right in saying that being male does not equal being dysfunctional. Whenever WAFE have used the slogan ' until women and children are safe' on their posters, it has always been a woman and a girl until recently, and I flagged this up to them.

The problem is that domestic violence is mostly perpetrated by men, but it harms boys as well - a fact that often goes unacknowledged.

I am not using Erin pizzeys quote to discredit feminism as an entire movement, but I think it is a valid criticism of 2nd Wave Feminism that it got hijacked by a virulently anti male agenda, and that we can be pro women without being anti men.

Equal pay, a big plank in the progressive platform , came about in the UK through women taking direct action in the workplace , and bypassing the Unions to go straight to the Labour Government, who produced legislation that was taken up around the world.

Again, this was more sort of mainstream that the radical anti capitalist version that Pizzey says she found in the feminist movement at the time.

In short, Pizzey and people like her went with existing structures, or created institutions and movemnts that took hold and are around today. For her, and for the Dagenham strikers, it was not about abandoning men and the family and destroying capitalism , it was about changing the law and bringing in fairer conditions.

I don't know if she describes herself as a Feminist, but she did more for families in our position than bombing Biba would ever accomplish .

but I think it is a valid criticism of 2nd Wave Feminism

But she didn't make that distinction did she? This article was posted in 2008 so many reading it will rightfully draw from it a criticism of the modern feminist movement. She also did not recognize the radical feminists of the day as a fringe movement, she claimed they took over the movement.

Do I agree with radical feminism? No, I feel much more can be accomplished by taking a moderate stance. But I can certainly understand the anger and hatred behind many of the 2nd wavers at the time.

Heck, since this is all about testimonial, I'll just offer my own:

I was in college from 1987 to 1991. This was probably the height of second wave influence in academia -- young radicals in college in the late 60s were now tenured full professors and the backlash of the 1990s was not really in swing yet. By any anti-feminist accounting, I should have had extraordinarily unpleasant experiences at the hands of feminists on campus.

Never happened. I took no fewer than 4 courses that were overtly feminist in content and several more with professors who came at their work from a feminist critical perspective. I was an active and welcome participant in all of their courses. I was never made to believe that I had to shut up and/or apologize for my gender. I wrote papers that critiqued some feminist scholarship and got A's on them. One of my overtly feminist professors gave me a citation for the work I did in her class. Another sponsored me for a Rhodes Scholarship application.

The only time I ever felt "marginalized" by feminists in this time period was in regards to rape and domestic violence advocacy where, not unsurprisingly, my help was accepted but not as hotline volunteer -- considering that a male was voice was not likely to be reassuring to a victim calling for help from male perpetrated abuse. So I wrote literature -- and was even encouraged and helped in setting up resources specifically aimed at helping MALE victims overcome their shame and come forward.

On livejournal, I have had a long history with a prior journal in feminist discussion fora that was almost entirely positive. For some reason, a lot of those discussion communities seem to have morphed from discussion fora to "safe space" communities that prize affirming women (women of a particular perspective, mind you) over discussion. THOSE spaces often seem overtly hostile and in possession of unspoken rules of participation that devalue or attack interlopers.

But you know what? I'm 42 years old. White. Male. I have a Ph.D. I have tenure. The fact that a handful of livejournal communities may be hostile to my input on feminist issues is a monumentally insignificant slight, and I do not NEED to own the conversational floor there the way that I do in so many other locales. I am admittedly perplexed and disturbed by the trend as it effects some communities outside of livejournal, but I think feminism is dynamic enough to survive it.

If there is a problem with some feminist discussions as they exist in this internet space it is in the habit of some feminists in assuming all males are in possession of the privilege, both earned and unearned, that I have in my specific circumstances. Identity politics could stand a good period of coalition building across communities -- including working class people of all colors, genders, sexual orientations and nationalities.

I am glad to hear of your good experiences with feminism in college, but not surprised, I am (slightly) younger than you and this was the feminism I grew up with and was exposed to as well.

As for the part about LJ communities, I actually agree fully with you, but apparently to do so means I am pandering to the men. However, I dislike this current trend of hostility over honest reflection and discussion and as I grow older I've come to realize that much more can be accomplished by listening and guiding than outright anger. I am certainly not going to say that the younger generation has no right to express feminism in this way, or that they are wrong to do so as I believe every woman should be able to choose their own path and method of feminism, but I do wish I could be afforded that same consideration.

Anger certainly has its place and there are many men who it is warranted against but to have nothing but knee-jerk responses is not productive. It may feel good at the time but if we truly want to advance feminism and women in general more is needed.

Now, hopefully I have pandered to you enough ;)

but apparently to do so means I am pandering to the men.

It is a charge that gets levelled at anyone who has the guts and the gall to say that "patriarchy hurts men too" .

And again, I think we have to look at the fact that economics drivess everything.

If women want funding for women's groups, it is argued, women have to 'fight their corner' - and it seems that for every dollar/ pound/euro that men somehow gain somewhere, women tend to lose one.

I am not so sure that I agree entirely with the idea that this is a 'zero sum game'.

As I have already said, women earn 105 of the world's income and own a mere 1% of iits property, and that is something that we should all address.

But initiatives like the Tobin tax, the Gameen bank, the drive for female literacy and women's rights in thedeveloping world, the poorer nations, whatever you wan to call it - I mean, why shouldn't a man be concerned about such things? What makes it 'a woman's issue' that men should not think about and vote on?

Poverty, like domestic violence, takes a greater toll of female lives, I grant you, but whereas a woman taking it on can expect Germaine Greer and co to get behind her, a man in the same situation can expect to be attacked, second guessed and undermined by people who call themselves 'Feminists'.

Well I don't know that I would go so far as to say that patriarchy hurts men. I think men make out just fine under a patriarchal society. I will say that rigidly assigned gender roles harm men.

Who says that men should not be concerned with womens iniatives? I think it is more a case that many men are not and that often the ones that are wish to take over the cause rather than work with the women on it. I think that is where a lot of the anger comes from, that men are still listened to and respected more in the world, especially in business so their voices tend to drown ours out when they get involved.

I think men make out just fine under a patriarchal society. when I was 19, I got thrown out onto the street. i was told on wednesday that i had to be out by friday, because my dad did not like his 19 yr old son intervening to prevent him hitting his wife. I have been in and out of therapy for PTSD for many years - and I don't call this ' doing fine under the patriachy', thanks.

I will say that rigidly assigned gender roles harm men.
well, it is a start, I guess.

But like I said, I got abandoned by my dad when i was born and society never helped my mother take care of me even though she wanted to - over the years, Ii got taken into care, was sexually abused, physically abused, emotionally abused...
And you want to say you are not sure that patriarchy hurts men ?
I think I can trace most of what happened back to this notion of what society thought at the time, and most of it sucked and still does.

Doubtless, there are guys like Dubya Bush who just fine under the present system, but the fact is he is rich, and white, and well connected. take all that away from him and lets see how good the system looks after men who are black, or working class, for instance.

Ii guess you will come back with the argument that women who are bklack and working class will still be worse off. well, I did not ordain it thus, and I still say I back the Tobin tax, among other measures.

Yes, the patriarchy both harms and hurts other people more than it has hurt and harmed me - this does not negate the fact that I myself have been hurt and harmed by it.

Edited 2011-06-15 15:21 (UTC)

You had bad things happen to you because that is life. It has nothing to do with patriarchy. Male privilege does not mean every man will have a wonderful, harm-free life, it means that as men you are granted more concessions, more respect, more choices and more opportunities than women in the same situation are.

You had bad things happen to you because that is life.

Life does not have to be this way. Life does not involve your parents not taking care of you for a lot of people.

it means that as men you are granted more concessions, more respect, more choices and more opportunities than women in the same situation are.
Hey, don't forget to mention that being born British also means I get to have an NHS that saved my life, and that lots of Americans don't get that option. Even so, I still think that everyone ought to have healthcare. By the same token, I ought to have had a decent childhood - yes, even me.

as men you are granted more concessions, more respect, more choices and more opportunities than women in the same situation are.
I get that this is true - but this is not to say that this is how it should be, or that I approve of such things. One of the things missing from the ' feminist manifesto' if you want to use the term is "ok, what party do we vote for, what steps do you want me to take to eradicate this problem - where do we start, even" ?

I read 'The war Against Women' by Marylynne French , many years ago. Now she outlines what the problem is - but towards the end of the book, I am thinking "so what is the answer, where are the proposed solutions?" Sadly , the book never told me.

I really hope that the ' 4th wave' that you speak of will clearly spell out the proposed solutions. Will even take the radical step of saying ' yes, there is a solution, something that ~I~ can do to fix what needs fixing.' However, I think that the Green Party, in England at least, is already on it - a political system that works for everyone and not just the upper classes in our society and the western nations in the world.
I mean, there are more specifics to go through than that, but that is it in a nutshell. Reform, not revolution.

Edited 2011-06-15 16:33 (UTC)

You had bad things happen to you because that is life

So, if it was a little girl who grows up in poverty because momma does not get equal pay, you are ok with that ?
Sexual abuse of a twelve yr old girl ?
That is life,and men do that kinda thing - you can't change it!

What does the future hold for me?
Listen , little girl, you either grow up and marry a man who is an utter wimp or an absolute bastard - men can't be anything else, they are incapable of human decency.

Ok, so I was a boy, not a girl, but that last bit was what my mother told me over and over when I was growing up.
And I never listened.

See, my mother used to go in for pat Boxall and all those ' radical feminists' that wrote columns in the papers - and although they went to college and stuff, i really hoped to hear at least one of them say " there is a small chance that a boy can grow up into a decent , law abiding citizen , no matter his background.

Well, they never did get round to saying that.

maybe we will have to wait for a fourth generation feminist to give that to the world. but the fact is, I didn't grow up into a useless drunk like my dad. yes, i have been homeless, jobless and been into therapy a few times, but that was PTSD, not alcoholism.

No- Ii don't accept the fct that i'm priveledged. i acknowledge it , yes, but i can't ~accept~ the idea that it's somehow ok, or ' just a fact of life ' that some kids die before they are 5, or get sexually abused , or get treated as second class citizens because they are black or female or whatever. those of us who know it exists should eradicate evil, not profit from its presence in society.

You specifically stated that men are harmed by the patriarchal society at large. I disagreed with this statement. The patriarchy is designed to help men. Any bad experiences you personally have had, while I feel for you, have nothing to do with that concept. It would be lovely if we could eradicate child abuse but to do so would need a complete overhaul of society, not just dealing with womens rights.

Whether you accept the fact that you are privileged or not is irrelevant, you are. Please note, I am not talking about financial privilege, I am talking of the advantages you are given in society by being a man that I am not given as I am a woman, just as I am given advantages for being a white cis straight woman that POC and members of the LGBT community are not.

(no subject)

mintogrubb.livejournal.com - 2011-06-16 04:49 (UTC) - Expand

(deleted comment)

I see gender roles as more of a social construct than anything to do with the patriarchal system.

(deleted comment)

My definition is a system where males are the authoritarian figures, to the detriment of women. I've honestly never heard of including gender roles, which are much more of a social construct than a product of any authority, in this definition. Even if the patriarchal system was dismantled, beliefs about gender roles would still stay in place.

Edited 2011-06-15 23:07 (UTC)

(no subject)

mintogrubb.livejournal.com - 2011-06-16 04:57 (UTC) - Expand

I was in college at pretty much the same time, taught by those same professors, and never found an anti-male message being taught. I'm a woman and perhaps not as sensitive to hearing that message, but there were plenty of men in my classes. They seemed quite comfortable and welcomed there and were never discouraged from bringing in their own perspective.

Identity politics could stand a good period of coalition building across communities...

Collectivisms, such as nationalism, racism, sexism, and the various forms of tribalism are inherently exclusionary. What you're saying in the quoted phrase is a contradiction, an oxymoron. "Identity politics" is inherently tribalistic and divicive.

Oh.

Yes, this is true - however, I think that we who are white working class need to be aware that People of colour face the same problems as we do, and that by banding together with them , we can make changes happen that benefit everyone.

Politics is honor among theives. "Banding together" to "make changes" is merely a euphemism for ganging up to do unto others before they do unto "us." "Politics" is not an answer; it's the problem.

Do you have an alternative strategy, other than launchinga a 'pre-emptive strike' against anyone you happen to disagree with ?

Eschew the pursuit of power over others. Take as one's ethics the position of universally preferable behavior.

"It is clear that war is not a mere act of policy but a true political instrument, a continuation of political activity by other means"
— Karl von Clausewitz, On War

"Make yourself an honest man, and then you may be sure that there is one less scoundrel in the world."
— Thomas Carlyle

I can certainly get behind the idea of renouncing power over others, in the sense of becoming a public servant rather than someone trying to sell something.

However, it has happened before that I am summoned to assista female passenger who is being sexually harrassed on a train. She is saying that she wants to make a complaint to the police.

Ok, I am not harrassing her myself, but this other guy is. Do I call the police - who will doubtlessly execise the power of the State and put him in cuffs? If he tried to escape , should I tackle him? Or is it best to let this person , and every other pickpocket and miscreant against the public good go, for the sake of liberty?

Ppersonally I think that gandalf had the right idea. In the LotR trilogy, he does not compell King Theoden to take up arms against Saruman , but does encouragee him to resist the evil encroaching upon the land.

I wonder what your take on this is.

Re: Essentials matter

montecristo.livejournal.com - 2011-06-17 11:30 (UTC) - Expand

Re: Essentials matter

mintogrubb.livejournal.com - 2011-06-17 17:33 (UTC) - Expand

Re: Essentials matter

montecristo.livejournal.com - 2011-06-17 20:19 (UTC) - Expand

But she didn't make that distinction did she?
To be honest, I don't think that Feminists back then would introduce themselves as ' 2nd Wave Feminists' at parties, do you?

But I can certainly understand the anger and hatred behind many of the 2nd wavers at the time.

Me too, but I disagree on the solutions that many proposed.

Maybe it is because I'm a man, but I sensed that the whole thing about gender roles in our society at the time was fatally flawed.

I mean, my dad was allowed credit on his own name, in spite of the fact that he was a feckless drunk- whereas my mother was not allowed credit at all, on account of her being a woman.

And a woman who went out to work got less money for the same hours on the same job as a man. hhow was she supposed to look after her kid like that when her husband had run out on her?

Seriously, changes in legislation needed making, and men could have, indeed, *should* have been at the front in the union and the workplace, in the political parties and the voluntary organisations, working to make that happen.

As you said yourself in a recent entry on this community 'men should not apologise for being men'. But the minute a guy steps up and criticises the patriarchy himself... well, where exactly does any support come from?

I don't agree with Pizzey entirely, any more than I totally accept Florence Nightingale as a flawless heroic figure - even so, I get that they both made serious contributions to the general wellbeing of society and on balance were agents of progress.