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

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

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.

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.

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.

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?

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.

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.

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.

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.

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

WHY do you think so many women are raped, paid less and do the majority of child rearing and housecare then eclectic? If you don't think it is patriarchy then offer another explanation. Why do so many more women have plastic surgery? Why are so many more strip clubs opening? Why is it playing the victim to acknowledge that these things happen? It doesn't make sense, I personally don't have kids for example but I still care about women that do.

I observe patriarchy whilst at the same time disliking the way it is banded around in some feminist debate (particularly online).

So I can see for example, that society often sets different values for men and women. I can also see that there are often different standards for looks, grooming, behaviour etc. I think some of these are becoming less pronounced, but others moreso.

I do not personally place the level of importance on it that I suspect most people who self identify as radical feminists would, being one of those 'choicy people'

Having said that, I often lose the will with patriarchy arguments online and I can see how others get turned off by it. Too often I've seen posters disagree with a rad fem and be told they don't 'get it' or they 'only think that because they are influenced by the patriarchy'. It becomes doctrinal and is sadly often used as a tool to close down debate (alongside misuse of 'check your privilege' oppression Olympics and a frantic race where the one who claims they have least cutlery wins I hate that bloody spoons metaphor ).

That was a response to the OP incidentally, not the posters above incidentally

Krumbum - there are different reasons for each of them, and combinations of reasons. Why would you expect so many complex situations involving different people and motivations to have a singular answer, and one that can be summed up in one word?

SAF and Rulers - What is the feminist (patriarchy version) explanation for why men are stronger in the upper body/arms?

Oh the patriarchy exists.
In the minds of certain feminists and their recruits.

Ironically the people with the biggest vested interest in its continued existence as those who create power out of using it and as a propaganda tool to control women and beat men.

See Propaganda technics

Big Lie
The repeated articulation of a complex of events that justify subsequent action. The descriptions of these events have elements of truth, and the "big lie" generalizations merge and eventually supplant the public's accurate perception of the underlying events. After World War I the German Stab in the back explanation of the cause of their defeat became a justification for Nazi re-militarization and revanchist aggression.

GothAnneGeddes, that's really interesting, it's pretty much what I think. I have quite a few Indian friends and their attitudes towards black african people and Pakistani people is quite shocking. Whilst women are expected to perform traditional roles of housewife and mother they are now also pushed really hard to aim for top careers and talking to my Indian friends it is really clear that they think "their" women are superior. Of course India has a very complicated caste system as well.

Yes feminists are well known for the immense amount of power they have in society.

Gosh how depressing this thread is.

Feminists denying that we live in a male supremacy and comparing feminism to a faith or believing in the tooth fairy.

Himalaya, I don't think you really understand what feminists mean when they talk about patriarchy. Lots of people don't - which is odd, because it is quite simply another word to say 'male dominated society' or 'society in which men have higher status than women'.

Do you all have the same problem accepting terms like 'capitalist society' or 'feudal society' or 'tribal society'? Do you not believe in society at all?

I already explained in a previous post that 'The Patriarchy' is used as a figure of speech - a rhetorical short-cut. (Must remember feminists Must Not Use Figures of Speech, because for some reason everybody suspends their usual ability to understand this commonly used rhetorical device, and Takes Things Like Totally Literally.)

Himalaya you said; The answers here that the patriarchy is all that is bad in society (or at least in relation to men and women) remind me of that conversation.

Can you quote the post where in answer to 'what is patriarchy?' a feminist has answered 'all that is bad in society'?

You seemed to think that I had clearly stated that I spoke for you, the other day, Himalaya - something that you completely made up. Here again, you appear to be arguing against something that nobody has said.

I think the question in the OP was badly worded. A better question would have been 'do you think women have equal status?' or 'do you think society is male dominated?' or 'do you think gendered violence has been eradicated' or 'do you think women have fair and equal political representation' or 'do you think the working world is male dominated and structured for men?' or, well, you get the picture.

Some stats for those who think that society is no longer patriarchal and all in the garden is rosy and glittery (in a feministy way of course).

londonfeministnetwork.org.uk/home/why-women-only

Across the globe women do two thirds of the world?s work, receive one tenth of the world?s income and own less than 1% of the world?s property (Robbins R, 1999). Women account for two thirds of the 1.2 billion people currently living in poverty (DfID).

Nowhere in the world do women earn equal wages to men, across Europe there is a 25% pay gap in like for like work.

Women hold fewer than 13% of the world?s parliamentary seats (DfID).
Here in the UK only 19% of our MP?s are women.

An estimated 70% of those children not in education are female.

Here in the UK 2 women every week are killed by a violent male partner and 1 in 4 women in the UK are affected by domestic violence, including so-called ?honour? crimes and forced marriages.

?Violence against women is perhaps the most shameful human rights violation, and it is perhaps the most pervasive. It knows no boundaries of geography, culture or wealth. As long as it continues, we cannot claim to be making real progress towards equality, development, and peace.? ? UN Secretary General Kofi Annan

A report by New Philanthropy Capital warns that violence against women is costing British society £40bn a year, but charities which help victims are grossly underfunded. NPC?s report concluded that the expense to public services, lost economic output and knock-on effects of violence against women in all its forms costs the country more than the annual defence budget. (Express, 23 Apr 2008, p33; Independent, 23 Apr 2008, p16)

Oh and I just noticed we have Godwin!

Excellent, feminists compared to Nazis. Brilliant analysis. Bit early in the thread for it, non? The Law states that it happens on long threads - still when it comes to feminists, might as well get it in ASAP, eh?!

Great post, Beachcomber.

How can anyone deny the world is male-dominated? I honestly don't get it. Even if individual women find success, that does not negate the collective power and privilege held by men.

I also want a Godwin's Law corrollary for biological determinism arguments

sorry not read every post - himalaya male bodies were stronger because they had to compete to get into the gene pool - they fought off other males to control the females re: be able to ensure that when oestrus occurred they were able to have sex with them. females did not have that need.

oh and i'm guessing having higher body fat levels (as opposed to muscle) etc was conducive to fertility and breastfeeding etc so not only did they not evolutionarily need to become the biggest and 'ardest they also had need to have a lower muscle ratio.

I have been reading this and I am like WTF, life is unfair and that surprises us? All violence needs to stop, to do that we need to breed it out of the human race and it will take time.

One point I will challenge is the wages. Firstly lets not draw in countries in the third world. They have a while different type of suffering to us in the first world, the changes that need to be made their are stop wars, farm food and educate. But that applies to both sexes. Of course there are more women suffering as the number of men is smaller due to violence through wars.

Back in the first world where we all live Catherine Hakam at the LSE has done research that shows it is our desires for families that affect the female earning power. Sorry I wanted to be a SAHM I therefore didn't follow my career path and as such my earning power is less than someone who has worked solidly through their life. Now raising the next generation is an important job but if I went back to work now I would still be behind in terms of new technologies and business practices. If I can see that why can't other?

Sorry some of the arguments here are like my youngest boy (13) who is always complaining that everything is so unfair. Well life can be unfair, it is how we deal with the unfairness that defines us.

SEB, so a single mother, who is attempting to combine the important work of raising children with a job, and finds herself with less money than the average working man even though he does less work than her, do you think that her 13 year old living in poverty is just needlessly moaning that life is unfair?

If you see the work of raising children as important, surely you can see that the heart of a fair society would be about valuing that work rather than it be a contributory factor in economic disadvantage?

Or are we going to continue with a future of using people and loving goods or are we going to start loving people and using goods?

And I'm comforted by the thought of your 13 year old having the awareness to realise that everything is unfair. Hopefully they have a future ahead of them challenging global injustice, because we need more people like that to face the problems ahead.

As for your odd idea about females generally outnumbering males in developing countries, you may want to look at a sex ratio map. The bits coloured pink are the areas where there are more women and the bits coloured blue are the areas where there are more men:

chartsbin.com/view/2338