Hi, I am Hully's DS. Hully said I could ask you a question!

[Hullygully]

For R.S i have been asked to think, and collect, 10 key points WHY women have suffered from sexism in the past. I can think of HOW, but I am interested in WHY. I would be really interseted and grateful in any thoughts you may have! Thanks!

Arse - have to go - guests here - will check back later.

Because before contraceptives, most of a woman's adult life was taken up with being pregnant, feeding infants and raising children, giving her far less time and attention to devote to power games and tribal politics. Its easy to assume that women have sole responsibility for children when they have to nurse them for the first few years anyway.

Because gaining power historically often involved bloodshed and risk, and women had made huge investments in raising their children and were less inclined to risk them. Men can produce more offspring for far less energy, with multiple partners, women cannot, and therefore have to protect those she has. So she can't take the risks.

Because, as has been said above, once you have a concept of ownership and inheritance, men need to control women to ensure that it is their offspring that they raise and pass their land to.

I know he won't see this until later, but I do think it's important to add that 'the past' is not one 'sexist' event; masculinity and femininity have been imagined in different ways in different times and places. In some of those times and places - England between 1915 and 1918 springs to mind - ideas of masculinity were probably more destructive than ideas of femininity. A lot of what many people now see as 'the past' is based on ideas about the late C19, which are often based on generic ideas about 'the Victorians' and bear minimal relation to the complex realities of the era. It's not very difficult to argue that for some women, the late C18 was a better time than the late C20, and there's a strong strand of popular feminist history that harks back to a pre-industrial past as a time when women's strengths were recognised and respected more than they have been since. These are all contested discourses, but they do exist - 'the past' is not a steady progress from sexist darkness to the feminist dawn of the 1960s.

This may have already been said but the fact that we get pregnant and then care for children has meant that we've been a bit shackled. We are out of action for quite some time and tied to our children meaning that we can't travel. Our ability to bear and nurture children has led to men trying to figure out what their role is, given that we do the really important stuff like procreation. So they needed to come up with something that made them look useful, so putting themselves in charge of everything else seemed like a good idea. Many women have gone along with this because they have been programmed to believe it's best for everyone. Patriarchy is basically an enormous cult.

On an entirely different point, I would also clarify with your teacher if they believe sexism no longer exists because the way that question is phrased seems rather odd without a particular timeframe.

1. to maintain the power structure of a dominant structure or population (men)

2. to increase the benifits of a more dominant power structure (men)

3. increase the population of a dominat power structure

4. allegience of a more dominant power structure

5. serve gratification a more dominant power structure

6. satisfy desires of a more dominant power structure

7. increase financial gain of a more dominant power structure

hmmmm

8. provide welfare for the dominant power structure

9. maintain power structure during war and conflict through maintaining order of society and industry.

10. a subservient group, ie woman, in history have been precived to be required to maintaing order and structure through carrying out all of the above roles to benifit the strenghth of men.

Another possible reason is life expectancy. The risks from childbirth were high, especially without contraception + you would want to have lots of children to ensure some survived childhood. Women who are living shorter lives full of children, or working hard to survive cannot develop any talents/cannot move outside the home easily/ cannot demonstrate their skills in the same way as a man. It is only the truly unusual or driven women who make an impact on history-those who chose a different path or who had unusual circumstances. Thinking of famous women from history a lot of them were extremely rich, or childless or broke society's rules.

So then it is easier for the other sex to generalise and assume that women are not important/have fewer skills, as there is little evidence that they have.

Still no answers from dadsnet!
What, no 'Suffered? The minxes enjoy it' ??

OK, I'm going to take my courage in both hands and post in FWR for the first time, don't squash me please...

Just in case you want a slightly different starting point and perspective, HullyDS.

The biblical view that the various (bible believing) churches I've been part of have always taught and I've studied is that humanity was created male and female to be in perfect harmony together. 'The fall' when they chose to disobey the one command God had given was both an undermining of this perfect harmony in the incident itself (Adam promptly blames Eve for 'making him' eat as soon as God comes looking for them, she blames the serpent even though people were given stewardship of the animals etc) and then it was a part of the judgement God made that relationships between men and women became selfish and conflicting. So the 'battle of the sexes' in Genesis 3:16 terms is "Your desire will be for your husband, and he will rule over you."

I realise that quoting the bible as if we should actually pay any attention to it is rather inviting ridicule here, but hey ho. And you're 14, so it can't hurt to know that some people (rather a lot of thoughtful, intelligent people I know too) think otherwise.

Anyway, so in a nutshell, the biblical answer to your question would be, because the general human condition that we now endure is for women to seek domination and control over men and for men to seek rule and power over women. As a few people have noted, human history does involve examples where each side has been the more 'successful' although western history largely shows male 'success'.

And yes, 'religion' and its institutions have been fully involved and instrumental in encouraging such subjugation, including christian structures, particularly of women. But that's just because christians are still flawed and fallen human beings, just knowing we're forgiven and awaiting a redeemed and perfect world when we will no longer have to endure such a condition.

OK, that's it. And please, this is just a contribution, not an invitation for jeering.

Hello. I have to go to bed now, but just to say there are some dadsnet answers now, but Mum says they are mainly women! Thanks again. Hully DS.

1. I blame the patriarchy
2. I blame the patriarchy

3 I blame etc

Oh, and itsatiggerday, I may not agree with you, but I appreciate you taking the time to post, all views are interesting and should be considered and thank you!

This is all taking a very Western viewpoint. Many cultures around the globe don't or haven't in the past had what we in the West would think of as sexism, or had some mechanism to control it.
I suggest you ask your teacher to confirm which culture/s he or she is suggesting you explore.

Also, whilst it is true that women in the past in Western countries typically had little power, this was not always the case. Wealthy women owned land and often controlled much of their own future (and if they were widowed could choose to remain a widow and control their own life to a large degree - nuns also had some freedom).

You teacher should also note that patriarchal power structures adversely affected men as well as women, although not to the same extent and whilst this wasn't sexism, it was a form of power-over control. To explore just sexism tends to marginalise other issues, such as those relating to the poor, the disabled, the sick.

If your teacher is trying to get you to align sexism with just religion, this is not a fair picture, for when most religions were developing, an unsupported women was likely to die or was pretty much forced into prostitution. Religion often gave her a better life. Contextualising religions helps comprehend them.

But, and this is last rant, much modern sexism is political and economic - women took on many jobs during WW2, only to have them taken away after so that the returing men could be employed.

You're welcome. I might chew my fingernails for a bit though in case anyone else isn't so generous!

"Many cultures around the globe don't or haven't in the past had what we in the West would think of as sexism, or had some mechanism to control it."

Can you expand on that please? Apart from some very obscure tribal societies, I'm not aware of "many cultures" around the globe not having sexism, or if they do have, what their mechanisms to control it are/ were, I'd be interested to learn more.

I'm interested too.

there are some dadsnet answers now, but Mum says they are mainly women! Thanks again. Hully DS.

I noticed that too,Hullyson. Another "Why" for you to contemplate on another day [gwink]

"Forgetting you're male and I'm female and the whole antagonistic yet unnecessary power dynamic for a moment..."

Do you actually say that to him.? how does he respond?

All these answers are excellent on here I think religion is a huge problem within patriachal societys even in countries like the uk where we see ourselves as pretty secular, the 'moral family' is basically a throwback from very religious times.

difficult - yes, I do, in slightly simpler terms. Because when I start banging on, it's hard for him (particlularly at his age) to suspend defensiveness as he is a male!

He's fine with it, he gets the need to suspend the kneejerk personal response (when reminded).

Not just christianity - almost all preceding religions/cults subjugated women. Mithraism, aztecs and so on.

I think it all comes down to physical strength as the root WHY of women's status. Religions/cults/laws and so on just rationalise it i think.