Woman's Hour

I do agree with that tactic as it gives a very real visual example (which it is less possible to ignore) of what happens when women can't afford any, or adequate, sanitary protection. This is apparently a problem when families are suffering severe financial hardship.

I don't think I would have had the guts to do it myself though.

Question for everyone. Do you support the action taken by two women against imposing tax on sanitary products who appeared on/in the media 'free bleeding' in white jeans?

There are various ways of expressing feminist credentials and it's the strident/in your face methods that I cannot stand. Many women are working quietly effecting changes in their own spheres of influence at grass roots level. That's where change has to begin. I'm also puzzled as to why the trickle down effect from us to our dd and dgd hasn't seemed to have had a more significant impact in terms of career choices. Have we failed?

I should have inserted "more balls than a man of equivalent ability"

I agree with Anya and her last two posts here.When my DH did his engineering degree at Uni ( way back when) there were no women at all in the group.When my DD's were teenagers we only knew one of their friends who was determined to do an engineering degree, she was scarily intelligent and also feisty, but she had to contend with a lot of general discouragement and merriment about her choice of subject.Have no idea what things are like now, but suspect it may not be much better, and the girl herself has to be determined to do it. There are still far far more people doing arts degrees, they seem to be steered into it.

I am confused, Marmark, by your post. In one sentence you say "You radical feminist do absolutely nothing for women" and in the next "You people telling a woman she can't because she's female are wrong,very wrong."

Contradiction?

Plus, while it is true that a woman can do anything she chooses, she still needs more balls than a man to carry that through to the top - and then she is accused of "losing her feminity" and being a dyke.

Maggie I think the term is still used in a derogatory manner by some men and women, especially some much older women.

I'm bemused by the views expressed here I honestly thought that the vast majority of women, and certainly those of my generation, would define themselves as feminists. Surely feminism is just the belief that women should be equal to men in all areas - economic, political, cultural, etc, etc - and a feminist would support initiatives to end gender inequality. To the benefit of men as well as women. It's not about stopping women baking, or men engineering. It's about giving everybody equal opportunities to do what they want. And of course men can be feminists too.

I haven't listened to Woman's Hour for years, so can't comment on that specifically.

Sorry to disagree Marmark1

Theoretically you are correct and in certain jobs women can progress as quickly as men, should they so wish, and things are getting easier. But there comes a level, above which it does become much harder for woman to break into male dominated top positions. Yes, the glass ceiling does still exist, kept firmly in place by the dinosaurs who live it the canopy.

Women are generally not encouraged into careers such as engineering and this starts at a very early age. It's not a matter of 'discouraging' them, or that they 'have no interest' but families, society, the education system all have a part to play.

The same was true of careers like medicine where mainly men became doctors and women nurses. Happily, that situation does not exist anymore but it took many brave pioneers and a change in society before this was achieved.,

Don't get where you're coming from marmark.
First, I don't see anyone here pushing a 'radical feminist' agenda.
Second, it's a bit naive to say that anyone can do anything.
Of course they can if they have the qualities you point out plus other advantages like encouragement, educational opportunity, possibly financial backing .
Anyone can find him/herself disadvantaged however and may need people to keep pushing for equal opportunities for everyone - much as you're seeing here.
Please point out a post where someone simply says 'you can't do that because you're a girl,'.
It's not that black and white.

And presumably JessM,those male people at engineering dept,are there because they want to be.Maybe most female people have no interest in engineering.Are you saying they must be forced into it? And please don't say they don't have the same opportunities.You must know that is wrong.

You radical feminist do absolutely nothing for women,I'm the one who's jumping mad now.
A person today,I repeat,be he male or be she female,can do what ever they want.They need ability,capability and determination.You people telling a woman she can't because she's female are wrong,very wrong.

And I'd invite you jingle to stand outside the engineering department of any university. I think you'll notice something of a gender imbalance.

I know that rosequartz but if at no stage in their school career has any attempt been made to sell those subjects to girls there is not a lot of prospect they will take an interest. In India vast numbers of women obtain qualifications in programming. I have sited through thousands of CVs of software engineers and I'd estimate about 2% are from women and most of them are Indian.

TriciaF Men do die earlier than women but I don't think there has been any evidence to suggest that this is because their lives are more demanding than women's.

Research has shown that, even when women are working full time, they are much more likely to be responsible for the bulk of the domestic chores and for dealing with childcare/family issues. Men have been found to be much more reluctant to go to the doctors when they have troubling symptoms and are thus presenting for diagnosis and treatment when illnesses are at a more advanced stage. They are much less likely to have close friends in whom they can confide; consequently their stress levels tend to be higher. They are more likely than women to find retirement difficult and, after retirement, to lead more socially isolated and physically inactive lives. I feel at least some of these factors contribute to a slightly shorter lifespan for men than women.

You don't have to do an 'A' level in Engineering to pursue a career in engineering - even doing a maths and physics degree can be the lead to a Masters in Engineering too.

Schools do not steer girls in a direction away from the subjects they are interested in doing. Not unless they are obviously incapable of fulfilling the requirements for that particular subject.

Many girls schools these days specialise in subjects like Engineering.

Yes women are still steered towards some subjects in school and away from others. Talking to a young friend about A level choices. In a school that claims to priorities STEM subjects. She said that she was unlikely to choose IT or Engineering A levels as she had no idea what those subjects involved. She subsequently achieved 13A* grades plus an AS level (at 16 and 1 month) but 2 potentially lucrative career paths already off the agenda.
It is only because I jumped up and down that she is doing Chemistry as an A level subject. The head teacher was signing off on a very limiting selection of subjects.
It is my personal view that the worlds of engineering and software would benefit from a better gender balance.

And I'd like to add violence to your list Penstemon - there is some violence perpetrated by women on men - but a great deal more in the other direction.

"There may be more women in the workforce (of all types) but I believe that the numbers of those who are in 'top' positions and in receipt of the higher incomes are more generally men. Proportionately out of balance...so it is not equal."

Perhaps because men are biologically programmed to be go-getters in the (bread-winning) workplace?

"Young women in school /college are less likely to take maths /physics or pursue it to degree level even when they get similar or better A level results than their male peers. Proportionately out of balance...so it is not equal."

Perhaps those subjects are not so attractive to girls because of (again) inbuilt biological differences.

"More women take the lead in childcare even when they are in 'equal' jobs to the child's father. Proportionately out of balance...so it is not equal."

Perhaps nature ensuring women fulfill their biological role?

"Many more women suffer from sexual harassment than men. Proportionately out of balance...so it is not equal."

Well, men have always been the ones on the lookout, and with the instincts, to sew their seed wherever they possibly can. Again down to biology.

Well said penstemmon

There may be more women in the workforce (of all types) but I believe that the numbers of those who are in 'top' positions and in receipt of the higher incomes are more generally men. Proportionately out of balance...so it is not equal.

Young women in school /college are less likely to take maths /physics or pursue it to degree level even when they get similar or better A level results than their male peers. Proportionately out of balance...so it is not equal.

More women take the lead in childcare even when they are in 'equal' jobs to the child's father. Proportionately out of balance...so it is not equal.

Many more women suffer from sexual harassment than men. Proportionately out of balance...so it is not equal.

The list goes on...this is why we still need feminism. If WH sometimes tackles these issues through personal stories then good!

Until someone finds a way to stop the mysoginistic, sadistic and sickening porn on the internet and other media we'll never be able to be seen as equals.

Young men are growing up believing women have no pubic hair and absolutely love violent sex - it seems to be a losing battle.

It's not just about childcare though is it? Is it ok for a young woman , dressed in jeans and sweatshirt to get hassled by men in the street ? Is it ok for the likes of Mary Beard to get mercilessly trolled on Twitter just cos she's a woman on tv? ( I could go on) There's just so many issues which need to be tackled.

Well I certainly wouldn't want to be called up to fight in wars and kill the enemy. A few women would, and good luck to them.
The things that first me cautious about feminism were that at the time more male babies died at birth than females, so we're inherently stronger and can fight our own battles. Could be different now.
And men died at an earlier age than women, because of their hard stressful lives. I think this is changing too, as more women are joining the stressed-out workforce.

And I don't care if that's unfashionable. Or old fashioned. It's fact.
I agree.

Despite the fact that Nick Clegg fought for equal parental rights for men, it has not had a large uptake.
I wonder why?

Perhaps because many women would really prefer to be at home nurturing their babies than expressing their milk and rushing off to the office, hospital, factory. But it's frowned upon - Patricia Hewitt and her reports that 'Stay-at-Home Mums are a Problem'; now the baton has been taken up by David Cameron.

I think it's down to biology. Women do the child-bearing. It's natural that they should be the main child-carers. Men should be the bread winners.

And I don't care if that's unfashionable. Or old fashioned. It's fact.