• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Chaldanya

  • Rank
    It's So Fluffy!!

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
  • ICQ

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    London: South of God's own city

Recent Profile Visitors

7,614 profile views
  1. Feminism - Post-apocalypse version

    Honest to god, Lily, this gives me life.
  2. Feminism - Post-apocalypse version

    This is the feminist thread, buster. There will be no joy here!
  3. Feminism - Post-apocalypse version

    You'll get no disagreement from me at all. It's the extra work on top of a full time job that still disproportionately falls to the woman. And even given the partnership model of a SAHM/out to work husband* the SAHM is on call 24/7 and the husband tends to come home and thinks he goes to work all day he doesn't have to do anything around the home (am on a message board for moms and this is a feature of many conversations). *so, I'm aware I'm being hideously heteronormative here mainly because I don't have the knowledge of other partnerships/relationships. if anyone has info/anecdotes etc they'd like to bust out to help me, all gratefully received.
  4. Feminism - Post-apocalypse version

    So in the UK, you get mandatory 6 weeks at 90% ( you HAVE to take that it's ilegal for you to go back to work less than 6 weeks after birth - happy to be corrected if I'm wrong), thereafter you get statutory pay for then next 7.5 months which comes in at about £500 per month. And then you're entitled to 3 months without pay. The company must keep a position open for you on your return. Now, some companies are a lot more generous for instance my work gives 6 months full pay, 3 months statutory. Men get a rougher deal by far. They are guaranteed 2 weeks paternity leave and whilst you can split the parental leave the man isn't as likely to be paid for it. This needs to be addressed. If we can help sort out the disparity in who looks after the children then I think a lot of good will come of that. And from a personal point of view, I would have loved it if we could have afforded to switch primary care giving - I think my post natal depression wouldn't have been as brutal or as long if I could have gone back to work earlier. Mlle Zabzie: to your point re: working in the home not being seen as work. I didn't want to touch that with a barge pole but it's something that C4JS has hinted at previously in this thread i.e. he seems to not consider the work within a house to not be work because it's not paid for. And tbf, it's a pervasive attitude, I think. That if a woman is a SAHM she's sitting on the settee watching Jeremy Kyle and eating jam doughnuts and nothing goes into looking after children and running a house...
  5. Use of the term "Triggered"

    Ooh, forgot to reply to this To clarify a bit, the usage I'm noticing is mostly self-referential, as in "when you said _____, that triggered me", or something to that effect. There's almost never any explanation beyond that about what the result of said triggering is, but presumably it isn't suicide as these people seem to live on to whatever event triggers them next. Surely if someone said "speaking about war/rape/domestic violence, triggered me" it's plainly obvious what the problem is, no? And speaking from experience I could not have discussed with anyone anything about my experience that triggered me. So asking for an explanation even if you feel it's not a genuine reaction to trauma is probably not a nice thing to do.
  6. Use of the term "Triggered"

    Maybe so, but I tell ya, if someone has said that something upsets them I think it's OK to be considerate of that.
  7. Use of the term "Triggered"

    Triggering is quite a bit different from "something upset me". It can be a visceral reaction to something that takes you back to relieve a traumatic time in your life. Mostly it was around content warnings for rape or issues with veterans and PTSD. As an aside, I don't think it's up to anyone to diagnose someone else's cause of trauma.
  8. Feminism - Post-apocalypse version

    I agree with all of this. Especially around greater support from governments to assist in childcare. I'm not sure where you are from the but charges in the UK are just insane. Full time childcare from after maternity leave ends was approximately £1200 per month - now that's in London maybe it's cheaper elsewhere but fates alive it's eyewatering. But I think that maybe a tangent that doesn't belong here...
  9. Feminism - Post-apocalypse version

    conversely, I had my first and that's when my career kicked up a notch after maternity leave. And a few of my friends have gone back to work after the child has gone to full time school because they missed their career. so, y'know, different strokes. You called me out (not very nicely, it must be said) for using an anecdote before and now you're doing the same. Just an observation. (Aside: Also, not for nothing sometimes the cost of childcare is often prohibitive enough that going back to work just clear nursery fees by a couple hundred pounds per month can see a waste of time for some and because in hetero partnerships the man earns more (typically), it's the woman that drops the job or goes part time.)
  10. Feminism - Post-apocalypse version

    I'm not sure why its such a sore point to simply state that there are generalised differences between the sexes. Anyone who has lived more than 5 years on this planet will have noticed it anyway. Really? You can't understand it? Women have been told for a very long time that they couldn't do certain things because they were women. "You're just better at being nurturing because you're a woman", "Women just aren't as good as men at thinking logically, it's just the way they're wired". I guarantee you all women will have heard those at some point in their life and it's then backed up by the entirety of society saying it as well. So yeah, it's a sore point...
  11. Feminism - Post-apocalypse version

    No I'm sure there is a level of sexism involved in those fields as well. But just as a counterpoint to what other people have mentioned here, we should always be aware that in general terms men and women are not exactly the same, they will in general be drawn more in one direction or another and not just because of cultural processing, but because of who they are and things they excel at. Thats just a part of life and we should acknowledge it when trying to examine why imbalances happen. Y'know I've seen it myself with my son. He's four years old. Up until about a year ago he couldn't give a crap if a toy was "meant" for him or not (he had a doll and a pushchair) but now we'll be told what is and is not for girls and boys and he likes something but doesn't want it because boys aren't supposed to play with such things (this is hearbreaking by the way that it has started so young). And it's funny how this has coincided with them naturally becoming more involved playmates now instead of side-by-side play and interacting with children who are told these things and parrot them back. So yeah, keep telling yourself that we are naturally drawn one way or another because biology or some such.
  12. Feminism - Post-apocalypse version

    @Theda Baratheon there you go, expecting someone new to the thread to do the reccommended reading. Silly!
  13. Feminism - Post-apocalypse version

    I have a problem with it as a version of history because it paints men as oppressors, and women as victims, something that isn't 100% of the story, and it clouds our judgement as to how we perceive the world nowadays This is the point that everyone has a problem with tbh. Because I'm sorry if it hurts your feelings but it was absolutely the case. Women were simply not people in the eyes of the law and there was no protection except that could be garnered from the men in their life. There was no fall back for women. If your man wanted sex and you didn't? Tough. No such thing as rape in marriages. If your man wanted to hit you? Go right ahead, there's no come back on you because how else are you supposed to keep the women in line. Want your own possessions? Good luck, your husband owns EVERYTHING. We speak about toxic masculinity to try to balance the the issues that men face so they can be addressed and perhaps get to a place where men are supported and can speak out about domestic violence, rape and mental health issues. We can do both but you seem to want to gloss over the very real oppression that women face (oppression that still happens in this world). WTF? You are in a feminist thread, by all the fates man, at least be on board with the idea that women were absolutely oppressed by society and lawmakers (who were all men, btw). And with that, I'm done. I don't feel like you are arguing in good faith. I feel that you have come in here to make an argument about fucking terminology of all things.
  14. Feminism - Post-apocalypse version

    I find this unspeakably sad and it sounds lonely. I have a few really close intimate friends outside of my relationship with my husband that help me keep an even keel. I hope that as I bring up my son I can find a way not to let this filter through and he has the same fulfilment that I find with other platonic intimate relationships./end non-productive contribution to thread
  15. Feminism - Post-apocalypse version

    Then you are not reading clearly at ALL. Toxic masculinity is about the expectations set by society (including women) that define what it is to be a man and how men should define themselves). And I just want to hammer this point home. In history women were not seen as people. It is why they could be owned. It is why they could be raped in marriage. It is why they couldn't own property. It is why everything they did own or were bequeathed passed to their husband on marriage (why do you think Elizabeth the first didn't want to marry?). Of course they were worshiped (you hope) and looked after (you hope) because that's what one does with their possessions. And it is disingenuous at best to say otherwise. Or to say that the roles were beneficial. Surely, that's a given in this thread. Surely?