To think that not believing in patriarchy is a deal breaker?

[LemurLederhosen]

I was having a little, semi-lighthearted rant in the kitchen the other day about how long it has taken for me to get the help I need to deal with some really awful perimenopausal symptoms. I’ve been off work for months and despite keeping on and on at my GP, only now have I been referred for a HRT appt. I made the age old comment “if men went through all this they’d have been treated straight away, but that’s patriarchy for you”.

DP then simultaneously eye rolled, exhaled and scoffed the word “patriarchy”. So I asked him why. He told me that clearly I’d been brainwashed by all the rubbish on social media into hating men.

I was shocked. So I said I don’t hate men, patriarchy is damaging to men and women so to eradicate it would make a better world for everyone. What are you on about? He basically implied that it’s all a load of bollocks and that I’m only now going on about it because of social media.

I was genuinely shocked. It was as if he thinks that a load of angry women on social media have invented this concept in the last decade? I reminded him that patriarchy is a deeply ingrained system of oppression and has been around for centuries. I reminded him that I specialised in women’s studies at university (he knows this!) and that my PhD in domestic abuse (he also knows this) wouldn’t have existed in the same way without patriarchy at the helm. I’ve always been passionate about equality (for all I might add) and that not only do I take raising our 2 DDs very seriously, but more so the way we raise our DS to feel free and able to express his feelings and emotions in a positive way. He has his moments for sure. But he’s 7!

I’m just genuinely shocked that after 17 years together I’ve only just worked out that he doesn’t actually believe in patriarchy. Is this a deal breaker? I suppose I’ve kept a lid on a lot of my views - mainly because I get to exercise them a lot in the work that I do so never feel the need to “go off on one” at home, unless I’m responding to a news story or something… but now not only am I not at work but I’m also perimenopausal so in full unfiltered/ unmasked mode!

All the other times he’s huffed when I’ve made similar comments I just thought was his social conditioning making him respond that way so I have challenged him and eventually he’s gone quiet… but now I know he flat out thinks its made up bullshit I mean what am I meant to do? He’s a good person, but clearly has never had his world view challenged as much as I’m challenging him now? Maybe he’s just been humouring me all these years - which make me really quite angry. I just don’t know what to think… or maybe he was trying to wind me up?! Which again isn’t good… or funny…

I'd roll my eyes too. You have no clue what oppression really means living in Britain in the 21st century.

True, and I think an entire discussion could be had as to why the medical establishment is more comfortable using men as front line guinea pigs for medical research instead of women. Is it really a disadvantage that by the time a treatment is tested on women, it has at least been proven safe and effective by testing on men? For example, the monthly injection I have to shut down my ovaries as I had ER+ breast cancer was originally developed and tested on men with prostate cancer before it was tested on women.

I'm sure the research was helpful in gauging the effects on the men's ovaries.

I don’t imagine many, if any, men feel emasculated simply by someone telling them that the patriarchy exists, and it’s perfectly possible for men to believe that the patriarchy exists in some form or other without being emasculated…

What would be emasculating is being married to someone like the OP who insists, on pain of divorce, that you must concur with her worldview without question that men are to blame for her problems. That’s less about having standards, and more about domination.

Imagine if a man told another man to explain the “truth” to his wife. The pro-OP posters on this thread would be falling over themselves with the cry of “mansplaining”! But then double-standards are rife on MN.

Having said that, I think that’s a good idea (why shouldn’t men or women feel able to explain to the partner what they believe)… The OP and her DH should be able to discuss matters and explain their perspectives, all with a view to better understanding each other.

Sadly, the OP doesn’t seem interested in this approach. She just wants him to agree with her unquestioningly, with any alternative perspectives being relationship-ending.

I would argue that men suffer because of patriarchy as well as women. Patriarchy relies on toxic masculinity to maintain its subjugation of women. Men must be seen to be strong, unfaltering, objective, etc. which over time has resulted in men suppressing their emotions, and it coming out in other ways such as alcohol and substance abuse, violence and poor mental health, which could and most likely does lead to the high suicide rates of men.

It would be ridiculous to end an otherwise good relationship over this.

Why are you asking anyway?
By doing so, all you're doing is supporting the idea that women don't know their own minds.
Also being off sick for months with menopausal symptoms.

Oh what the hell: I'm not saying this thread is untrue but it has a lot of click baitery to it.

Exactly. Seizing upon a statistic without context, and then crying “patriarchy” doesn’t help anyone. It just makes women feel embittered and aggrieved, and it pits them against men, even those that they are closest to.

It’s interesting that any attempt to place stats like this into context is shot down by some posters without any attempt to counter them. Those women who do this seem to prefer wallowing in self-pity and victimhood rather than actually wanting to recognise the facts.

The brand of strident feminism that defaults to using “patriarchy” to explain all their woes is deeply toxic, and I hope the OP realises this before she throws her marriage away over it.

With all due respect, you sound utterly bonkers (and very hard work)!

Well said.

As if any grown up adult (tautology) would leave over something like this anyway.

Fecking ridiculous.

@SummerAsh, you ever heard a man or a male social/political group called 'strident'?

It means squeaky, by the way.

Sometimes it is necessary for people to suppress their emotions.

If people-men and women - did not suppress their emotions and gave in to every little fucking feeling the world would grind to a halt.

Are you being hopelessly disingenuous, or have you really never noticed how boys & men are socialised to permit only a very limited emotional range? How they have almost no mechanisms to process fear, embarrassment, anxiety and sadness?

It's a long way from that to 'giving in to every little fucking feeling', fgs.

That’s an interesting perspective and I think you may have a point.

Despite what I have written, I do believe that women have historically been oppressed by patriarchal structures, but that feminism has largely been successful in dismantling these in past decades. However, I don’t deny that remnants of patriarchal structures and mindsets persist, and which need to be challenged.

What I object to is when each and every issue that adversely affects women is automatically put down to the malevolent hand of the “patriarchy”, and by implication, today’s men…. And moreover that this “fact” is so clear, obvious and true, that it simply can’t be challenged, and that to do so automatically makes you misogynistic, anti-women and, well, just an all-round “bad” person with whom it’s impossible to have a friendship or relationship. This is feminist extremism, and it’s toxic.

But then it can be women who are partly the cause of that… Many women just aren’t attracted to a man who is overly emotional… they prefer the stoic, “manly” types.

I don't care enough about this to be honest.
I don't particularly like men who can't control their emotions.
In any case, men aren't women and women should not expect them to behave like them.

I doubt any man who overshares his feelings is going to be attractive anyway.
It turns me off when a man treats me like his mother.

There's always been healthy outlets like sport for men to release their emotions into anyway. It's called letting off a bit of steam.

Little less time on 'date nights' and more on a game of squash, rugby, football, whatever, perhaps.

Nobody is to blame.
A man who overshares is simply not sexy to most women.

How many women love either a 'bad boy' or a surrogate father?

I think you could have chosen a better example than HRT availability, which only applies to women and therefore makes it impossible to quantify differences in outcome between women and men.

If your husband is genuinely unaware of the patriarchy (even if he did not have the correct term to describe his male privilege and dominance), then he is indeed not very clever. I am surprised that you have never discussed this with him, or never noticed this about him. You do not seem particularly observant.

That's not PPs point. The point is that the expectations on people to not give into their emotions so the world keeps turning are not set consistently for the two sexes.
Women are seen as creatures of emotion. Softer, more sensitive, less resilient to the hard knocks. This means we are permitted to be 'weak' in times of trouble and give in to emotion, seek support. Men on the other hand are supposed to be creatures of strength and action, above their emotions.
What started as a myth to underline male superiority (rationality and strength versus emotion and weakness) has turned into something of an own goal. Because men are expected to live up to this at all times, and are judged when they don't.
Hence we get men suppressing perfectly natural human responses. Pretending they are coping when they're not. Failing to seek support on emotional issues. Expressing sadness and disappointment in toxic (but manly!) ways such as anger and violence.

Lots of women love 'bad boys'.

The evidence is all around us.

Yet women are telling them they have to be emotionally open, share every feeling and be vulnerable yet the reality is these men are not attractive to them.

Because they simply aren't.

Most women like a generally good man who is stoic and not falling apart over everything.

That's the truth.

Most women like a generally good man who is in touch with his feelings and able to discuss issues without being driven to 'solve' everything and/or evade discomfort by getting pissed, getting sweaty, hitting someone or having an affair. Or topping himself.

This may come as a shock to some emotionally constipated PPs.

Most men prefer a woman who copes well with life, is cheerful and positive and offers more support to them than she requires from them.
Unless a man has a white knight complex he doesn't have much patience for a woman who is constantly falling apart either. That's also the truth.
However what we're talking about here isn't tolerance within a relationship for a partner who can't cope with life. We're talking about that in society, the tolerance for a man displaying emotions is lower.
This doesn't mean that women withhold reasonable levels of support from their male partners if they are need it. Quite the reverse. Women are much more inclined to offer it. Hence men confiding in female friends in times of emotional turmoil more readily than male ones.

But who do you imagine is holding men as a class to different standards? Clue — it’s not women!

It’s men AND women.