do you believe in the patriarchy?

[bejeezusWC]

A poster on another thread said she views feminism as the struggle against patriarchy. That is how I view it too. I believe that is considered the rad fem stance?

Another poster said she didn't believe in patriarchy

I don't geddit

Why/how are women so unequal if not for patriarchal societies? WHO has been oppressing us?

Please tell me what you think, if you don't believe in patriarchy

bluegrass -actually not in every species is it the largest and most powerful animal who dominates. Even with pets, my small dog totally dominates my much larger labrador. An animal has to have the desire and personality to be dominant. In some species that seems to have to go alongside being the largest e.g. gorillas, but not in every species

EatsBrainsAndLeaves

The same is often true with humans. Although the acronym swmbo is often used partially as a joke, it is not completely joking. It is rarely the case IMO that men are completely dominant in a marriage and sometimes it is the female who is more dominant. It's not a healthy relationship if one person always calls the shots. I would say that my marriage is pretty equal and if my wife wants something she always gets her way in the end.

Sorry I am a bit late on the thread but I really must take up Larry on his comment Generally, girls do better at project related work and boys at exams under time pressure. Is that due to conditioning or biology?

I took the 11+ in the 1950s. It was a sudden death exam. Grammar schools allocated 50/50 places to boys and girls. To get into grammar school girls had to achieve higher pass marks than boys. Why? Because otherwise there would have been a higher proportion of girls in grammar schools than boys as a higher proportion of girls passed this exam under time pressure than did boys.

On the OP's point. Yes, of course we live (still) in a patriarchal society. I have always chosen to put two fingers up to it, and if the patriarchy thinks I am behaving inappropriately for a woman then the patriarchy can go to hell.

Inde, I don't think men and woman are the same. We are quite clearly two biological sexes.

Quite evidently we are different; women carry and bear children - that is the main difference, and in feminist analysis, it is the foundation of our oppression.

There is no need to do Nazi experiments to find out the truth of femininity and masculinity. A trip round the world or a flick through a history book, clearly show that what is considered to be feminine/masculine has varied considerably throughout history, and varies geographically and culturally. We are clearly dealing with social constructs.

Anyway, we are just back to the argument that it is the natural order for men to oppress women (an argument people used to make about black slavery).

I think the patriarchy is very complex about who dominates whom and I think it is much much more than a simple statement than men oppress women.

And to link it to slavery - did all white people oppress black people? Who was part of the system?

You've got alpha males - those who think they're top dog, who give a shit about no one else and keep the systems the way it is.

Anyone who is not alpha male is dominated and their values and worth are not recognised. Unfortunately society seems to value alpha males and they and their values are kept in place.

Too much infighting amongst the rest leads to alpha males keeping their place.

Society needs to develop ways of tackling such values and developing a new set of values which values all and sees value in all.

The recent thread on equal parenting was very interesting and certainly threw up and debated a number of ways business and parents could change so the woman was not always the one sacrificing her career for childcare obligations.

That's just one area where society can be challenged and values / attitudes modified.

Women have children and women nurture and feed children. I don't have a problem with being defined as mother first, I chose to have children but I am also worker, partner, daughter, feminist, woman, socialist........

I wonder why in recent years women are being encouraged to breast feed? I agree nothing seems more natural but some of the argument made in favour of breast feeding are quite nonsense. Just wondered what others thought.

I think the term 'patriarchy' is getting bandied around in a way that it just becomes a meaningless filler word. Dito 'political analysis'. I prefer the much derided strive for equality as it's more tangible than talk about some not-nearer defined post-revolutionary world.

But is so insidious. Those Alpha Males were brought up probably mainly by women. Women who expected one thing for their sons and something a bit different for their daughters. I know I was encouraged to get an education and a career - as it would help me attract one of said Alpha Males.....

My Dad is an alpha male - when I look at him and how he expects to be treated, listened to and how he treats my step mum, it makes my blood boil. Thing is - my sister has a lot of the similar personality traits I can see in my Dad - but what is seen as "bad" in her is seen as good in my Dad.

Personally, I think arrogance, overbearingness, an inability to listen to other people, an inability to admit you're wrong and an ability to ignore other people's feelings and ride roughshod over them is a negative personality trait, regardless of sex.

I still don't know why my step mum stays with my dad.

I do.

Mainly because I see, read or hear about the punishments and rewards of resisting or complying with the Big P every single day.

To miss out the "men" bit out of "rich, white men" running the show seems odd to me.

(I mean, "I do" in terms of the thread title question, not whether I know why enimmead's SM stays with her Dad)

I think the patriarchy is very complex about who dominates whom and I think it is much much more than a simple statement than men oppress women.

Of course there is a class system and a caste system within patriarchy.

And to link it to slavery - did all white people oppress black people? Who was part of the system?

It is generally accepted that although not all white people actively oppress black people, white people as a group, benefit from white privilege. In other words, we benefit from white supremacy - we benefit from the oppression of people of colour. White people benefit from the social construct of race.

Basic politics.

I think the term 'patriarchy' is getting bandied around in a way that it just becomes a meaningless filler word. Dito 'political analysis'. I prefer the much derided strive for equality as it's more tangible than talk about some not-nearer defined post-revolutionary world.

Is it tangible though?

I mean without identifying why women are not considered equal as a matter of course (we clearly aren't).

I don't really see how a political movement is going to get very far without engaging in a bit of political analysis. How odd.

Yeah, but it just seems to never go any further than analysis. What are the actual actions which follow the analysis, which are to bring about change?

The way we react to our partners. The messages we give our children. Last night I even took my dad to task over some of the things he had shared on FB.....I told him it was unacceptable. I would never have dreamed of doing that in the past....

Are you being serious WidowWadman?

Or just complacent?

What gives you the idea that I'm just complacent?

Your above post.

Loads of actions - how we interact with the world around us, the different points of view we throw into discussions, how we bring up our children, the noises we make when listening to a friend, the donations we make, the publicity we give news stories and our take on them, the (undervalued) strength we give to others by voicing opinions and viewpoints that aren't often heard. Oh, and getting laws changed. And refuges set up. And writing to the DPP to point out shit sentencing. It's the little stuff .

What is complacent about the question what all this analysis leads to? I'm not complacent, I just still haven't found out what the aim of the analysis is, and the means of how to achieve it.

To me, a lot what is called "analysis" here, seems to be little more than navelgazing.

There's talk of "after the revolution", and "once male supremacy is ended", but nobody has actually outlined what that world is supposed to look like.

Just how you want equality to look like, WW. It's just that some of us want it a bit quicker. To mis-quote a genius line - "What are we, limestone?"

Rulers - that answer doesn't make much sense, especially in the light of the negative comments which are made about "choicy choicy" feminists and those who want equality.

I personally want equality now. Can't get quicker than that.

So what are your actions to achieve that?

And why do you think the inequality exists in the first place? And why and how is it maintained?

The aim of analysis is to organise women.

Talk of 'after the revolution' is a figure of speech - often used wryly as we know that the revolution is far far away.

Analysis serves to bring women together in united activism - it shows us that our experiences are not random individual events with no rhyme or reason, but systematic.

All the big feminist analysts were activists - feminism is a grass roots movement.

All the feminists I know in RL are involved in some sort of activism. Which is why we have rape crisis centres and DV shelters and marches and conferences and law changes and equal pay and support for trafficked women and women having a voice.

I don't know if you are an activist, but please don't assume that others are not.