do you believe in the patriarchy?

Men won't be stronger when female babies are issued with tazers at birth.

SAF - I agree i hope we are capable of organising things in fairer ways and we should (although I don't think we are not animals)

I am not trying to misinterpret.

Krumbum just above your post says "I do not believe that patriarchy is natural.... I think it is socially constructed. This is a fairly common statement about the patriarchy on here. It does seem to suggest that there is a natural state of human being without "patriarchy".

I have never read a patriarchy explanation based on biology that goes back further than 'men were stronger and wanted to control women's fertility, so they used violence' which as I said begs the question why men were stronger, and why womens body's bothered with concealed ovulation before "patriarchy".

Of course you can say none of this matters, it's all in the dim and distant past, but for me it matters that the explanation for the world is robust (otherwise we are just guessing
in our approach). I don't think "patriarchy" is consistent with a naturalistic explanation of the world, unless like 'god' you make it a vague catch-all term.

It doesn't really bother me whether somebody thinks patriarchy is a consequence of class oppression, or that racism is a consequence of patriarchy, or if somebody has a particular focus on how different kinds of inequality intersect.

What is important is that we are aware these structures exist and attempt to change them.

Look, there are countless examples in the UK and worldwide of how women are disadvantaged relative to men, whether you look at income, career achievement, levels of violence suffered, participation in governance and business, you name it.

If you don't believe that this is because of systematic and structural conditions that sustain a status quo intended to privilege men, then how do you account for it? Is it just a coincidence?

It is a red herring to point to biology or childbearing or any of that as an excuse. As I said earlier, in a less patriarchal society it would not be at all difficult to work out a way for women to have children and not suffer professionally -- because that would be seen as a priority.

Pointing to individual people who have overcome discrimination proves nothing. Collectively, women are disadvantaged relative to men. Pointing that out is not self-pitying or whinging, it is stating the bloody obvious.

I believe in Kyriarchy /en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kyriarchy That oppressions intersect with each other in different ways.

I think where that differs from what others have said, it that instead of believing that patriarchy is the root of all oppressions, I believe it is a strand in a whole plait of oppressions: race, class, disability. If men and women were equal, all these problems would still exist, so they must also be addressed.

Also, you can see these strands of oppression in action in how different groups are played off against each other.

bows down

Start a fucking thread, already, and stop moaning on because people aren't talking about what you want them to be talking about. Or at least put your pov forward instead of just sniping. It's boring as fuck. Posters here care about women. Don't you see that?

It's not worth my time to explain to you that you are ignoring lots of other influences. Such a narrow understanding of the world.

And, don't forget, you are as much a part of this board as anyone else. You can start threads too in relation to the areas that concern you.

So, tell us about your favoured organisations that are making a difference, ES. Stuff to help women is the shizzle and all that. Let's get behind them.

Er, ES read what I wrote, before you start flinging crap around. Did I say anything is down to patriarchy?

Yes, because right now I'm all out of patience with everything being twisted to suit your agenda. It's ridiculous and frankly a poor demonstrations of women fighting for equal rights. Victim, victim, victim is all I read on this board. It's defeatist and procrastination.

I think people will post a lot on MN about their own smaller problems as a distraction from more serious problems in their own lives that they want to avoid thinking about or they don't feel comfortable discussing.

In fact that happens in life in general, not just on MN.

Do you need to be so rude ES?

"Male scientist oppress female scientist" -no, it's certainly not operating exclusively on a micro level. This is an individual vs group thing again, isn't it?

One day, when we have have been reduced back down to manageable numbers by an asteroid or nuclear war or cimate change (wooo!) or something, I hope that we can grow the fuck up and resource, ability and effort allocate better.Not in some commie-hippy sense, but just in a way that doesn't fuck pretty much everyone over in the process.

Or, as my (male) boss said today "I wish they'd all fuck off to Cocksville, Arizona and let us all get on with it." And he is no feminist.

Scientists get grants through publications. You don't publish, you don't get grants - therefore no real scientific career.

You publish by research. By staying ahead of the game. By keeping informed at conferences.

I am not sure of the profile of successful female scientists who are parents cf non parents. I would bet there is more of a difference between male scientists who are parents and non parents.

You get out of the game for a while - you lose credibility. Whose fault is that and how can it be changed?

I think there's a lot going on in Britain that rarely makes it to the news. I heard that article about women skipping meals to feed their children. I see homelessness on the streets. It makes me so angry - yet you can guarantee that someone will make a smart arse comment about no one should be going hungry in todays country, I've bet they've got flat screen TVs etc.

And I think in some of the more isolated communities, there is a lot of stuff going on like FGM that we don't know about. There was a boy I think who was accused of witchcraft (in this country) and murdered horribly.

So much hate going on. So much not wanting to get involved going on. So much it's not my problem, my life is fine.

Well, a lot of people's lives are not fine in this country.

You've only got to look at AIBU on here to see some problems people have (and I know, I've contributed as well). I don't see anyone saying "AIBU to not feed myself today and give the food to my kids"

80% or patents are registered by men... And... This is down to patriachy? Seriously, this board is full of crap. Wake up.

Eclectic - I don't agree with you!

I do think it is a problem that, for example men and women get science degrees at similar rates but that 80% of patents are registered by men. Clearly this is not an injustice like FGM, but it is still a sign that something is wrong - if nothing else it's a massive waste of resources and potential.

It's not winging to point that out and to try to work out how to solve it (or any number of other issues related to sexual inequality in the west) dont think it's as simple as "male scientists oppress female scientist,
or its all sexism, although im sure theses part of it.

FGM is a human rights issue. There is no human rights Top Trumps that says you can't talk about wheelie bins or healthcare or whatever public policy issues in the UK because people are in a worse state elsewhere.

ES, paygaps do matter. There has been stuff in the media about women in the UK who are skipping meals so they can afford to feed their kids.

As for FGM, it certainly is a UK problem:

www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/hilary-burrage/female-genital-mutilation-britain_b_1573845.html

and to analyse patriarchy YES we acknowledge and look at biology and economics because they are a part of things. but the fact still remains that the biology has been exploited (we're not animals anymore and are capable of organising in fairer ways) and the economics have been based on exploitation. it's not that there was once a great time it's that NOW should become the great time. we are evolved, intelligent, highly resourced and should be capable of designing systems that work for all yet we don't because we live in a patriarchy were the conditions of some are more important than the positions of others.

But you are assuming things about other posters on this forum, Eclectic. It is not my place to tell women with different experiences how to tackle the issues within their own communities. Support I can give (the chocks analogy from earlier). I can still see the over-riding pattern (or one of them) as I see it and will point it out. I frequently check my own privilege, and point out the privilege of others when they are spouting. Not perfect, mind, and never claim to be so. Disagree with me all you like, but attack my politics, not me, even if it is in a group sense.

Himalaya, I would ask you the same questions. Do you see there is inequality vis a vis men and women? If so, why do you think there is and what mechanisms are in place to maintain it? And just for you , what is the best way of explaining the world?

For example FGM is not discussed much in the press. You could live your live without finding out about it..... Ergo discussion about it here is not meaningless.

utter straw man carp though. who on earth here thinks there was a time when men and women very similar to us lived in a eutopia? no one.

who here thinks biology and society are entirely separate?

it is a lovely bit of prose but the arguments it is arguing against are not the arguments of feminists who believe we live in a patriarchal system so...? either you really don't get what it is feminists are saying or you are deliberately misinterpreting what they say

Himalaya. I do not believe that patriarchy is natural as you have said we do? I think it is socially constructed. Gender is something we create to distinguishe and role divide. What makes you think that patriarchy is something that's natural (even though you don't believe the theory)?