Comments on: The Bottom Rung of the Ladder /2010/10/12/the-bottom-rung-of-the-ladder/ A feminist pop culture adventure Thu, 14 Oct 2010 12:11:31 +0000 hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=5.6 By: Brave Sir Robin /2010/10/12/the-bottom-rung-of-the-ladder/#comment-27 Thu, 14 Oct 2010 12:11:31 +0000 http://www.badreputation.org.uk/?p=20#comment-27 Love this article. I don’t really care whether I’m described as a feminist or a feminist sympathiser, cos labels seem unimportant, but the whole concept of equality just seems self evident to me.

One thing that has made me really angry in the not so distant past is some statements from people about how pushes for equal pay will have to wait until the recession has passed. This mindset seems to view equality as a privilege, something that can only be granted when times are good. *Angry face* It shouldn’t even be a question, it should be so fundamental that no one even blinks. Sigh.

]]> By: Lizzie B /2010/10/12/the-bottom-rung-of-the-ladder/#comment-26 Thu, 14 Oct 2010 10:19:15 +0000 http://www.badreputation.org.uk/?p=20#comment-26 I love you so hard right now. I’m sick and tired of people being scared to call themselves a feminist because they think it means rejecting femininity as well as men, not shaving and not wearing make up. While I understand the root of those things among some feminists, not all feminists are like that – a bit like not all lesbians are dungaree-wearing bull dykes. The next person who tells me that they are not a ‘feminist’ I’m bitch-slapping, I swear. So, you don’t think women are equal? Great, thanks, nice to have met you, lets never do this again.

Feminist means equality, not superiority and not rejection. Dammit, it’s not a clique or cult. Feminism should be so mainstream people don’t even bat an eyelid about it.

]]> By: Jenni /2010/10/12/the-bottom-rung-of-the-ladder/#comment-25 Wed, 13 Oct 2010 16:33:18 +0000 http://www.badreputation.org.uk/?p=20#comment-25 Bookmarking this for when I need to show it to men I know!

]]> By: Gabrielle /2010/10/12/the-bottom-rung-of-the-ladder/#comment-24 Tue, 12 Oct 2010 10:52:24 +0000 http://www.badreputation.org.uk/?p=20#comment-24 In reply to Stephen B.

I’m looking forward to sticking around to read, hopefully we won’t have any more problems :o)

]]> By: Stephen B /2010/10/12/the-bottom-rung-of-the-ladder/#comment-23 Tue, 12 Oct 2010 10:37:31 +0000 http://www.badreputation.org.uk/?p=20#comment-23 In reply to Gabrielle.

Hi Gabrielle,

Regarding the “man-parts” term, I was referring to that precise problem: that it’s this criteria which is used by the majority, that it’s overly simplistic and that the people sweeping others into a category based on it aren’t looking beyond the most basic ideas for defining vast numbers of others.

As for intelligent and educated, I just meant that it has led me to be aware of the problems facing women – and that I therefore have no excuse. If I was in a society or personal situation where I was less aware, I might have some more leeway. But I don’t.

This site is most definitely aware of both cis- issues and ableism, and we don’t aim to do either. Sorry if you got that vibe from my post, it certainly wasn’t intended.

]]> By: Gabrielle /2010/10/12/the-bottom-rung-of-the-ladder/#comment-22 Tue, 12 Oct 2010 10:01:58 +0000 http://www.badreputation.org.uk/?p=20#comment-22 This is a new site and I don’t know about their values, but if you’re a group who care about intersectionalism and other privileges besides male privilege I’d like to make a couple call outs. First of all referring to things only being acceptable/valuable if they are “intelligent”/”not absurd” etc is ableist (http://disabledfeminists.com/2009/10/23/ableist-word-profile-intelligence, http://disabledfeminists.com/category/ableist-word-profile). Secondly referring to women as those who “don’t have man-parts” is cis-supremist – it’s defining people and their gender by their genitals; if you honestly meant man parts as including trans men’s vaginas, it really didn’t sound like it. Thanks.

]]>