do you believe in the patriarchy?

And how fecking generous am I being to the menfolk here eh?

The alternative is that, men as a group, are dominating, violent and consider themselves superior, as a part of their make up.

In a way it doesn't really matter - both are wrong. Women deserve full human status - it is not for men to decide whether we do or not.

Patriarchy is the power of the fathers: a familial-social, ideological, political system in which men - by force, direct pressure, or through ritual, tradition, law and language, customs, etiquette, education and the division of labour, determine what part women shall or shall not play, and in which the female is everywhere subsumed under the male.

I don't agree that patriarchy is the first or original reason for oppression but this statement is correct, however where, in what time did patriarchy take root as the dominant social order. It happened when we settled the land and started to trade in the excess of commodities first created through farming. That is the birth of patriarchy. Before that point women too shared in all forms of productive labour and nomadic people curtailed sexual excess because pregnant women made poor hunters. It was necessary to keep the population down and women could not be burdened by repeated pregnancy.
When we started to use coinage and create commodities and a need to create a means of common exchange, women became little more than breeding machines, breeding the patriarchs workforce to farm the land.

namechangeguy I did hesitate over the use of 'hatred' but I couldn't really think of another word.

Notice I didn't say hatred of women (although I do think that exists in patriarchy).

I said; I think there is an element of hatred too - hatred that women, and only women have the power and ability to bear children.

I think some of the hatred that exists nowadays is based in contempt. When you historically control, subjugate and oppress a group of people, you don't respect them. You hold them in contempt and that contempt breeds hatred and resentment.

The need for power and control within society is true - always has been, always will be. Establishing a male family line seems deeply buried in the psyche, even as far as trivial matters like perpetuating the surname down the years. It was the use of 'hatred' that threw me -it seems like such a leap. The rest of it I have no problem with.

It's not jealousy and it isn't about envying women the experiences of pregnancy, childbirth, breastfeeding or mothering.

I think it was about power. Children were a resource to be controlled and they were the future of a family (and therefore the patriarch's) line, and the future of society. They were also the inheritors of property.

Hence actions to control women's fertility and sexuality, a culture of women and children as chattel, hence the hierarchy which places women under men. Hence heteronormativity, hence marriage and all the rest of it.

If you want to have authority over children, you need to have authority over mothers.

Everything I have read about patriarchal society leads me to be convinced by this explanation. Otherwise why the oppression, why the hierarchy? If gender roles were a natural biological evolution that came about in an organic fashion as a logical consequence of biology and a non political partnership, there would be no need for the strict hierarchy and power structures (nor the violence).

Dittanny

"If you're going around claiming there is no patriarchy, and denying worldwide male violence against women and girls and its political implications"

I have not denied male violence against women and girls. I said that men are more often the victim of male violence (as in % of homicide victims worldwide) which to me doesn't indicate and 'all out male assault on the female half of the human race'.

"Where's your evidence that women and girls make up the majority of the population? It might be true in the west, but I'm not sure it is elsewhere."

...you didn't say women and girls in your original statement, you said women and children -

'I think there is an element of hatred too - hatred that women, and only women have the power and ability to bear children.'

This point is where I always look at my screen and think 'WTF!?' I can understand that at an individual level, for some mentally unbalanced men, this could be true. But as a gender, how could men come together and feel this? Or how could society construct an environment where men were coerced, even unwittingly, to feel this way? On a practical level, carrying a baby is 9 months of increasing physical effort, discomfort, coupled with hormonal and body changes. The bit at the end is, as a minimum, exhausting both physically and mentally. In the past, and even now, giving birth can actually be life threatening. I am NOT trying to teach anyone to suck eggs here - I just want to know, how could you be jealous of that?

Beachcomber -

"Patriarchy is primarily driven by male desire for control and authority over children IMO. I think there is an element of hatred too - hatred that women, and only women have the power and ability to bear children."

That is where I think we differ.

I think the shape of society (which includes patriarchy) has been driven by the desires of men and women and the things that have enabled them to survive and leave offspring in the past. I think a view of the world that says that only the actions of men have shaped it is only half the story.

But as an overarching concept that the shape of society has been driven by male hatred of women, through a series of choices taken by men to opress women since the year dot, with women as perpetual victims, that I don't believe in.

I don't think that definition is being used by anyone on the thread though Himalaya.

I read a very good definition of patriarchy the other day;

Patriarchy is the power of the fathers: a familial-social, ideological, political system in which men - by force, direct pressure, or through ritual, tradition, law and language, customs, etiquette, education and the division of labour, determine what part women shall or shall not play, and in which the female is everywhere subsumed under the male.

I think it is important to keep in mind that the origins of patriarchy are considered to be founded on a desire to control women's reproductive role/abilities. Women carry and bear children and men don't. Patriarchy is primarily driven by male desire for control and authority over children IMO. I think there is an element of hatred too - hatred that women, and only women have the power and ability to bear children.

Garlicbum - yes as a shorthand for "society on balance etc..." and yes in many times and places as a recognisable political system yes I see that. (and I'm aginst it).

But as an overarching concept that the shape of society has been driven by male hatred of women, through a series of choices taken by men to opress women since the year dot, with women as perpetual victims, that I don't believe in. I think it overestimates group action and intentionality and underestimates the survival and reproductive drivers acting at an individual level for both men and women - and unless we understand those I don't think we can unpick them.

But thanks for trying to get everyone to agree! On a practical action level I don't think there is so much to disagree on.

Fair point dittany. You are right. It is real, like capitalism

just not as quantifiable. No one will argue that capitalism doesn't exist but plenty dispute the existence of patriarchy.

"Society deals with gender in a way that, on balance, harms women"

• This is a good-enough recognition of the patriarchy, is it not?

Goth, Himalaya, Dittany, Eats - You may well have just encapsulated the heart of the "let's don't shout" thread :)

Dittany - If feminists don't need other people to tell them what they are, then I don't think Himalaya needs you to categorise her feminism and how valid it is for her.

The definition Himalaya has quoted is one that many women subscribe to and IMO, anything that gets women on board and makes them think "Yes, I believe in that and I want to be a part of making it happen", is a good thing.

I'd take inclusiveness over ideological purity any day.

Lots of positive things in that quote Porto (08.21) but they should all apply both ways equally - all that last line of stuff - I need that too !!

Dittany - yes it is very liberal feminism. But it is a start

Him - Sounds like you are a feminist. Not a radfem perhaps, but a feminist yes. Great that you are a feminist

EBAL - I have been thinking about this, because I always thought I was a feminist.

I have read some of the definitions of feminism someone posted as a feminism 101 link on another thread.

E.g. " If you believe in, support, look fondly on, hope for, and/or work towards equality of the sexes, you are a feminist."

And "There are just two pieces of dogma in my feminist tent:

-Society deals with gender in a way that, on balance, harms women.
-This is a problem that must be corrected."

I agree with those so I guess I still am. (.... Unless those definitions are wrong)

yes we live in patriarchal society
its multifaceted and not everyone experiences it to same extent
i also think its enacted and maintained by both genders - men and women use and abuse class,position,opportunity

Yuk!

"?when a man can listen to woman's feelings without getting angry and frustrated, he gives her a wonderful gift. He makes it safe for her to express herself. The more she is able to express herself, the more she feels heard and understood, and the more she is able to give a man the loving trust,acceptance,appreciation,admiration,approval, and encouragement that he needs.?

Oh, read it, Himalaya, it's good for a few major eye-rolling sessions.
Summary: Women are like waves. Men like their caves.
Eyes rolling yet?

Porto - Totally agree!

I've never read it.