Caring for Men and Boys. This episode is based on part of a paper authored by Belinda Brown who is an independent quantitative and qualitative researcher, a contributor to The Conservative Woman and a Patroness of the Scottish Family Party; she has an interest in gender issues, including men’s issues; her paper is entitled ‘The Internal Contradictions of Feminism’ which, as the title suggests, explores how feminism has not served all groups of women equally well and includes attention to a subject close to my heart, how, because of the influence of what I would name as radical feminism, men’s positive contribution to women and children is hidden.
Good Guy of the Week is Steve Higgins from Bristol who, in spite of Covid-19 restrictions, was determined to give his girlfriend a fantastic 30th Birthday! He was thoughtful, creative, generous and attended to every detail to give his girlfriend Kerry a wonderful Cornish themed birthday celebration.
Caring for Men and Boys. This episode is based on part of a paper authored by Belinda Brown who is an independent quantitative and qualitative researcher, a contributor to The Conservative Woman and a Patroness of the Scottish Family Party; she has an interest in gender issues, including men’s issues; her paper is entitled ‘The Internal Contradictions of Feminism’ which, as the title suggests, explores how feminism has not served all groups of women equally well and includes attention to a subject close to my heart, how, because of the influence of what I would name as radical feminism, men’s positive contribution to women and children is hidden.
Good Guy of the Week is Steve Higgins from Bristol who, in spite of Covid-19 restrictions, was determined to give his girlfriend a fantastic 30th Birthday! He was thoughtful, creative, generous and attended to every detail to give his girlfriend Kerry a wonderful Cornish themed birthday celebration.
Radical Feminism’s Blind Spots, Less Well-off Women and Men’s Contributions to the Family.
This episode is based on part of a paper presented by Belinda Brown who is an independent quantitative and qualitative researcher, she’s also a contributor to The Conservative Woman and a Patroness of the Scottish Family Party. In her Academia profile she tells us that her current work focuses on what are broadly termed ‘gender issues’. In particular, she is exploring the ways in which feminism has eroded the private sphere through prioritising the external sphere, that of female employment.
Brown also has an interest in making caring work more visible and in supporting and developing it. She also shares an interest in men’s issues, particularly the role of men in society and how current social policy has negatively impacted them and how to help men be better integrated into, and enabled to play a supportive role in, family life.
In this episode I’m firstly going to discuss how radical feminism has disadvantaged 80 per cent of women, and please bear with me while I reflect on this, and then I’m going to discuss the invisibility of men as an essential resource to women and families.
In Brown’s latest tweet, I’ve included her twitter handle in the episode notes, she tells us that ‘feminism teaches women to think of, but not for, themselves. In my own words, feminism, or radical feminism which I choose to focus on, does not encourage critical thinking; it’s a political ideology, a system of beliefs which are delivered as facts, the one and only undeniable, and indisputable world view. This doctrine has the whole weight of academia behind it. Marxist and radical feminist perspectives dominate non-STEM studies in universities and in the helping professions, while more liberal, in the old-fashioned sense, and conservative voices are drowned out, or remain silent for fear of being shamed.
Back in the eighties when I did my first degree, feminism was presented as just one of a range of possible ways of analysing the world; as people who do not wish to promote a particular brand of a product say, ‘other ideologies were available’; other ideologies are not so available today.
OK so back to Brown’s paper; it’s entitled, ‘The Internal Contradictions of Feminism’ which, as the title suggests, explores how feminism has not served all groups of women equally well.
She begins her paper by saying that ‘one of the most striking things about feminism is the extent to which a body of beliefs, based on notions of equality, has produced new inequalities that hardly anyone seems to notice.
Brown is particularly referring to how feminists are being criticised for focussing on issues which are the concern of the rich and privileged such as the number of women in the boardroom or in the broadcasting studio, rather than upon the problems of ordinary women. She highlights the inequalities between a rich, privileged female elite and the majority of other women.
She says these not so noticeable inequalities are a consequence of changes in the employment market; changes that have produced a growing pool of female labour, prepared to work for a lower wage, because their priorities lie elsewhere.
Brown draws our attention to the way that ideas about the family have changed as a result of Marxism having shaped feminist thinking, I would say as a result of Marxist ideas radicalising feminist thinking; how policies based on this ideology have had a very different and positive impact on a rich, privileged 20 per cent minority of women in contrast to a negative impact on the other 80 per cent majority of women. These other women are likely to work in environments which are overwhelmingly female, are made up of females who attach a significantly lower priority to work, are less well paid and are more likely to work part-time.
This has happened, Brown believes, because feminist ideology, influenced by Marxist ideology, has as its traditionally Marxist focus, the workplace, not the home or family. Lastly, before I move on to discuss men as a hidden resource for women and children, I want to draw your attention to the flawed ideas inherent in radical feminism.
Ordinary women, Brown tells us, want to reduce the amount of time spent at work in order to spend more time with their children; it’s only the least well-off of all who regard long working hours as a solution to their problems. For many, the real source of concern, of disadvantage and disappointment is not wishing for more hours in the workplace but for the more hours they wish to spend, and can’t, in their family.
This less well-off group of women is less likely to be married; if they do have partners, they are more likely to split up and if they marry, they are more likely to be divorced; further, if they have a male partner, they are unlikely to have one that earns more than them; indeed, they are unlikely to find a partner because of a dwindling supply of hardworking, motivated and employable young men.
So now let’s turn to the main part of Brown’s paper that I want to focus on, her discussion of men as a hidden resource. She tells us that if we look behind what she calls the façade of feminism and female independence, we find that the men in the lives of such modern liberated women actually play an important and very useful role; she includes a very interesting statistic here; research has found that among married and cohabiting couples in contemporary Britain, only 10 per cent of mothers with pre-school children are the only earner, the main earner or an equal earner. This means that 90 per cent of mothers with pre-school children are not the only earner, not the main earner and not an equal earner.
Further, Brown quotes, among graduate mothers of three- year-olds, only 20 per cent work full-time; in contrast, a whopping 91 per cent of graduate fathers have full-time jobs.
Surveys suggest that in such situations, women are not clamouring to do more work, although data does show that once their children are at school, this changes. Even then, it is women with partners who are more likely to be able to return to work when their children are older, than those without partners.
In households where both partners work, research has found, men work just as hard as women, albeit more outside the household than in. Brown tells us that men doing more of their hard work outside the home has led feminists to complain that, if only men did more housework and childcare, women could work more outside the home.
However, available evidence suggests that, on the whole, men are very accommodating of women’s work choices, that in both the shorter and longer term, it’s the mother’s employment schedules that determine the levels of paternal involvement, with the father increasing the hours spent on childcare and housework as the mother spends longer at work. Father involvement in housework and childcare enhances life satisfaction for both partners with the result that they live happier lives.
It also appears that overall men do earn more than women, and they also contribute more tax than women, 72 per cent of the total tax take while women do 70 per cent of the domestic spending. Brown says that these figures draw our attention to the contrast between the lives of what she calls ‘a privileged elite’ who have a male partner who contributes significantly to domestic expenditure and those who lack a male partner to make such a contribution.
Finally, in this part of her paper, she talks about how a high level of female employment depends largely on informal childcare with grandparents providing 42 per cent of the care needed and the resident partner providing 20 per cent of the care needed.
So, in concluding my discussion of this part of Brown’s paper I refer to her reporting that women with partners inevitably have far more access to childcare, not only because this can be provided by a partner but also there’ll be two sets of grandparents, rather than one, to give support.
Such resources are especially important to those on low wages. Meanwhile, many ordinary women become more dependent on the state or on poorly paid employment for the lack of an adequate supply of male providers.
So my final thoughts are, radical feminism has made it unfashionable to focus on men’s positive contribution to the family; indeed it’s also made it not very fashionable to focus on the family. While radical feminism drives an agenda where women are perceived as disadvantaged and men as privileged, where women’s need is perceived as a high powered, high paying the majority of women’s needs, to spend more time in the home with their children, supported by their male partner, are being neglected. Sadly, because of radical feminism I believe, what most people get most of their satisfaction from, the family, and the recognition of men’s contributions to that family, are nowhere to be seen on the social policy agenda. I’m really heartened by, and grateful for, Belinda Brown’s scholarship on men’s issues and will be sharing much more of her work in future episodes.
Good Guy of the Week
Steve Higgins, who lives in Bristol shares a passion with his girlfriend Kerry, no it’s not what you’re thinking! It’s the paranormal! He’s a ghost hunter. They are both big fans of the well-loved Cornish landmark on Bodmin Moor, made famous by Daphne Du Maurier in her book of the same title, the Jamaica Inn.
He and Kerry were due to spend her 30th birthday weekend at the inn but, due to Covid 19 restrictions, the hotel is currently closed, and their stay has been cancelled.
However, Steve was determined not to let this spoil his partner's birthday and decided that if he couldn't take Kerry to the Jamaica Inn, he would bring the Jamaica Inn to Kerry.
40 year old Steve spent two weeks and more than £350 to give his girlfriend Kerry the best birthday surprise.
He converted his home into a replica of the celebrated inn, including a reception desk in the hallway, the Daphne du Maurier suite, sadly without the stunning view, hotel-like tea and coffee making facilities and the Smugglers' Bar which the inn is famous for.
His attention to detail was mightily impressive. There were printed versions of door signs and a plush seagull named Craig; he provided Cornish gins and ciders in Jamaica Inn glasses ordered from the inn's online gift shop and a selection of meals off the restaurant's actual menu. Steve also had Cornish chocolate, a Cornish cream tea and a batch of Cornish pasties delivered by post.
For even more authenticity, he added stick-on paper wooden beams to the ceiling, and a fireplace made of cardboard.
Steve told Cornwall Live: "We both love the paranormal and so we love the stories of Jamaica Inn and we love it’s atmosphere. What we’ve both missed the most during lockdown is visiting Cornwall”.
He said, “I tried to make Kerry’s 30th birthday weekend a really memorable one, I wanted to give us both the chance to relove some very happy memories with the elaborate decorations and all the Cornish goodies.
That was such a great thoughtful and romantic gesture Steve. I’m sure Kerry was absolutely thrilled!
Belinda Brown's Twitter and GAB handle
@bbhippopotamus
Steve Higgins paranormal website