Do FWR posters want a matriarchy?(205 Posts)
I think not. I think that the majority of posters on this board don't want the unfair advantage men have replaced by an unfair advantage for women. They want equality for men and women and while that equality would require men to give up some of their privilege I think that everyone, including men, would be better off as a consequence. I also do not think that most posters on this board wish to see women prevented from being SAHMs or choosing traditionally female occupations if that is what they wish to do.
I would like to understand the opinions of other posters, because I think there's a lot of "well, most posters on this board think <insert straw feminist discrediting belief here>" and I personally feel that this is unjustified.
Well, that threw a spanner in the works, Beach
In this link
it makes reference to some prominent feminists who have espoused Matriachial societies;
'In her book Scapegoat: The Jews, Israel, and Womens Liberation, Andrea Dworkin stated that she wanted women to have their own country, "Womenland," which, comparable to Israel, would serve as a "place of potential refuge".
There are plenty more referenced in there. So it isn't all feminists, is it? ( a question, not rhetorical)
Do you believe in any genetic/hormonal drivers of behaviour? Or is all human behaviour merely a social construct? And, if that is the case, what are the behavioural drivers of the other great apes? Are we completely different or merely more evolved? If the latter, we are going to share some influences. If the former, you are harking to creativity.
Yep, that old (undiscredited) theory: evolutionary psychology.
It is far harder for an employer. It is not that much harder to arrange a temp for 6 months than for three. On the other hand, finding twice as many temps and dealing with all the transitional arrangements would be a huge additional headache.
you dont need twice as many temps. The parents wouldnt be able to take that leave at the same time. The current allowance would be split between the family to use as they wished. Infact it would allow both the mother and father to take less time off than the mother would under current mat leave rules.
How many women are comfortable having a discussion with their husbands where their husbands assume that they have an equal right to maternity leave to them? Really? Not theoretically.
It is my belief that this is a non issue.
And what is the workround for breast feeding in a truly equal society? Can men demand their wives/partners make expressed milk available to them in the same way a wheelchair user can demand a lift be installed?
Men making demands on their wives/partners breasts is not the same as a wheelchair user demanding to have a lift installed. By any stretch of the imagination.
I'd imagine, in a healthy relationship this would be discussed by the parents. Some would feel that mum being off for the first six months then switching to formula/reducing the feeds was fine. Others might feel it appropriate to express milk. Others will mix feed from the beginning etc... Etc...
Why does your vision for equality in maternity rights result in men making demands on their wives? Bizarre.
"Why does your vision for equality in maternity rights result in men making demands on their wives? Bizarre."
That was my thought too....
Larry, I don't get that thing about comfort discussing breast feeding. I cannot comment about other people's relationships. I can tell you that my wife and I discuss far more personal stuff than that.
Re breastfeeding - if that is fundamental to your parenting joint decision, then arrange your time accordingly.
For me, it should be a fundamental right to split childcare. They are not 'her' children, they are 'ours'. Companies need to get their heads round this. This archaic concept that someone who works 10 hours a day, 5 days a week, from 18 - 65 is a good employee, is frankly bollocks. Companies who offer the best, most enlightened work/life balance will attract the brightest and best employees. The best/happiest employees get the job done, to a higher standard, than those who are stressed out and frazzled. And honestly, yes, I can imagine it.
I work for a multi-national IT company. My manager works 4 days a week, as she has young kids. She is smart, knows her job, lets us do ours. She is a better manager than most of the blokes I have worked for. And this is not for validation from other posters on here - it's a fact.
Well said, beach.
mungo - my swearing isn't terribly adult? How precisely does this comment fit with your laudable desire for me not to comment on someone else's 'style' (not that I did)? You are being hypocritical.
I do not see why this thread needed to devolve into arguments over why childcare is a feminist issue. As usual, the topic has been derailed by posters who feel the most important thing they can do, is to disagree with feminists rather than to offer support. If you cannot see why that is tedious, and why it makes it very hard to believe in this version of 'equality' which (so we are told) most men want, then think about it: why do you think these issues have been allowed to dominate a discussion that started off being about matriarchy? It happened because someone was letting off steam about companies blaming woman. That was a red rag to those posters who immediately felt the need to leap in, quibbling about how actually, really, it's terribly important to recognize that women have it easy, and it's all 'open to interpretation'.
And lo and behold, we've moved away from discussing matriarchy. Boring.
As of last year mothers and fathers can choose who takes the second six-month period of maternity leave. I expect it will work out fine. People (and indeed companies) are very adaptable when necessary.
Also, it is a great way of cementing namechangeguy's point that childcare is an equal responsibility.
Is Dworkin's idea of 'womanland' the same thing as the concept of 'matriarchy'? Isn't she talking about separatism and, as the quotation puts it, 'refuge'? That is surely different from 'matriarchy', since that word means 'rule of the mothers'.
It is quite telling that even when women seek a refuge away from men, they are accused of trying to 'rule' - and I'm not just thinking of this thread, I'm thinking back to the separatism threads about a year ago. On those, people were constantly commenting about how threatening they found the idea of women being separatists. Even though separatism is purely about women staying away from men, it's not some covert attempt to raise a feminist army and crush the patriarchy by force.
LRD, doesn't equality in childcare move feminism forward massively towards its aims, for all the reasons stated?
"it's not some covert attempt to raise a feminist army and crush the patriarchy by force."
<imagines the feminist army preparing its lethal manoeuvres>
Yes, I think equality in childcare does move feminism forward. But I do think it is a bit of a side issue and I think it's a pity we've ended up discussing it when the original topic was interesting in itself.
When you jumped in to argue with my post in response to larry's points about 'equality' and its meaning, you told me that you don't get to define anything - but it does feel as if that is what's happening on this thread. You're defining an agenda and saying 'let's talk about this instead of the topic'.
Not to be a killjoy, it's just that we talk a lot about issues to do with childcare, and they're interesting issues, and I'm glad we talk about them, but this is one thread about matriarchy and I'd love to hear what beach was saying because I thought it was interesting and not something that's been discussed to death.
I raised the reference to Dworkin for her opinion, not to cause a ruck. The section leading up to the reference said;
While matriarchy has mostly fallen out of use for the anthropological description of existing societies, it remains current as a concept in feminism.
I asked Beach the question is all. I would value her opinion. It isn't derailing.
LRD, Yes swearing isn't adult. I could almost have predicted you would avoid providing any rational for your statements. I asked you to justify your view not to stop posting. Do you make a habit of misrepresenting other posters?
You have repeatedly commented on his style and made assumptions regarding the pattern (which is part of style, give up on the semantics...) of his posts.
Despite being happy to discredit him incorrectly, attach false quotes to him and then go on to pretend you represent others as a group you have failed to actually address any point hes raised. You've failed to address me. You simply accused him of attacking feminists which was false.
You have as yet failed to apologise both for your unfounded attacks or your habit of acting as a spokeperson for feminism which you are not, nor are you entitled to state a viewpoint on behalf of feminists. Now when challenged on your behaviour you pretend you don't want to derail the discussion to avoid having to justify your view.
You voluntarily involved yourself in the discussion about MAT leave. It is relevant many posters are interested and YOU discussed it yourself yet now your claiming that anyone who discussed the point raised by another poster it was in fact saying women have it easy...... again your argument is 'if you disagree with me you are anti-feminist' this is patently untrue and another reason why you should cease claiming to represent me as a feminist.
So for the last time if you wish to attack this gentleman who is arguing for equality please state WHY you disagree with him and me. If you don't and you don't like the derailment (as is your latest argument) probably best to stop attacking him on the point?
I mean, it does feel a bit like you're saying 'c'mon, I'm here talking about moving feminism forward, be happy - it's not on topic but hey, count yourself lucky that I'm discussing feminism at all'.
If that's not the intention I'd be glad to hear it, but do you really not get why this is depressing?
I'd like a matriarchy please. I think everything would be a lot nicer if the world were organised around the reality of human life and need rather than capitalist bollocks.
mungo - I honestly don't care what you think of swearing. Pattern isn't style. I never commented on his style, so please stop pretending I did. If you can find one example, do so. If you can't, I suggest you stop harping on about my style for a start.
I've made it clear why I disagree with this 'gentleman'. If you don't understand, let me know what's the problem and I will try to explain again. But please stop pretending I attacked his style or refused to make my objections clear - it's not true, and it's very rude.
Oh, and sorry, I didn't think the question you asked beach was derailing at all. I thought that was on-topic, FWIW.
mungo... swearing is very common and generally considered totally acceptable on MN. If you don't like it you're probably on the wrong forum.
And what's with the personal attack on LRD?
Imagine if took a totally different start point to the way society is organised.
There are women and men.
Women have babies. They carry them for nine months and then breastfeed them (hopefully) for at least a year. This is best for the baby. Men get to do other stuff with the baby and support the mother.
Both women and men are intelligent and would like to participate in society.
How could we organise it for the benefit of all?
Join the discussion
Please login first.