Who is part of the patriarchy?

[EatsBrainsAndLeaves]

When we use the term patriarchy, do you think that the men you know are part of the patriarchy? And if no, then who is part of the patriarchy?

Lindor you do realise the majority are not always right? Thankfully

HTH

Do you have children?

LRD, oh, ds is a little shit. He is bad tempered, cheeky and frustrating. But, he respects women and sees everyoine as equal.

LRD
I don't think any parent has cause to be smug - cause you never know what parts of your teaching will stick. There are parents who have a child who has done terrible things, but their other children are totally 'normal'. How does anyone know how their child will be as an adult?

All we can do is try to instil our values and morals into our children, and hope for the best.

So, everyone's wrong, except you?

Heh!

But it's actual facts that you're disagreeing with Eats. If you believe in the patriarchy (and not everyone does BTW) then by dint you believe that EVERYONE lives within it.

You can't be a part of it or "opt out" of it because it is the social system under which WE ALL live.

Now, if the argument you were putting forward was one of "Why do most men uphold the patriarchy despite the restrictions and damages it does to them and their loved ones, and why do some women also contribute to the reinforcement of the patriarchy" then it's worthy of discussion, but just baldly stating that all men are part of the patriarchy, women aren't and all men reinforce and benefit from the patriarchy is just plain wrong.

Yes, that is true Mme.

I was only half-serious. What I (seriously) mean is, I am certain blame, and other women on here, are already doing all they can to bring up their children to be decent people. I - and eats if she doesn't have children - haven't got started in to that project yet, so we are well behind you!

I think it's HerBeatitude who originally said that bringing up your children to know about feminism/resist misogyny is a form of feminist activism. So, by that scale, you lot are feminist activists, people who're childless are armchair theoriticians (is that even a word?!).

I am very proud iof my son, remember the newspapers ion the bottom shelf, "michelle off corrie with no knickers" etc? Ds marched up to the shop manager. Told her that the papers were rude and girls weren't for sale (my lecture stuck) and that girls don't look like that in real life. He is 7.

Ha.

It is not the MAJORITY though, is it? It is everyone except you.

Blame
DS was most unimpressed by a tshirt sporting the slogan, 'Anything girls can do, boys can do better' and told everyone in earshot what he thought.

He is 8yo.

at cuervo junior.

Btw - it's not about the majority being 'right' or not. The OP asked a question, didn't like the answers, so denied them instead of engaging with them. That's different from participating in a debate where you're not asking other people to help you out by explaining something you need an answer to.

What is X?

It is this.....

No it isn't.

Lesbian women were also sent to concentration camps and raped as part of their punishment <

Sorry to go back five pages, but I have not been on since then. I wasn't meaning to marginalise the experiences of lesbian women, just that homosexual men in the Third Reich was the only example I could think of to show that being a man of the same class did not necessarily mean that you benefitted from a patriarchal system, if you did not conform to the mores of that system.

Anyway, I looked this up on the USHMM website, and it does seem that lesbian women were not persecuted in the same way as homosexual men. If they were raped as part of their punishment for their sexuality, then the USHMM seems to be missing that. Of course minority groups were raped and abused, but the impression from the USHMM website is that lesbians could be relatively undisturbed if they lived discretely, in a way which homosexual men couldn't.

www.ushmm.org/wlc/en/article.php?ModuleId=10005478

I do think this is relevant, because the Third Reich was one of the most misogynistic systems one can imagine, but it was not automatically better to be a man, it depended on a range of factors.

This is because the patriarchy operates by constructing a binary opposition between the favoured group (men, specifically straight, white, upper class, Western men)

That's really interesting!
Would you say the patriarchy only operates in Western nations.

I'm thinking along the lines of the states and proto-states in Africa - of is this a case of Western constructs being abused to oppress women more.

Also, looking at Wahhabist thinking, how would that square with white/upper class Western? Surely there's more than one spin on the patriarchy?

[From my own perspective, I'm willing to stipulate we all live in the UK in a patriarchal society; I'm willing to be convinced that all men are part of the patriarchy; I'm unsure whether I'd believe that some women aren't part of the patriarchy].

Otherwise, to take a more up to date example, I had lunch with a good friend on Friday. Successful, wealthy, white middle class Western male. He'd probably fit right in there with being part of 'the patriarchy' by default, if one takes the Op definition.

But unpack it. He works very long hours, his health has suffered and continues to suffer, he has not maintained a long term relationship and for what? Because that is what society expected of him?

So, who does this patriarchy benefit? I could reel of examples of men I know who keeled over before they were 50 amassing status and wealth because that is what men do. Are they really benefitting from patriarchy?

Is that my post? It sounds like me but I can't see it in the last few dozen?

Sorry. Anyway: no, the patriarchy is global, and we are all part of it.

The favoured group in the patriarchy is straight, white, upper class, Western men.

If you think about it, the fact that 'western' is one of the categories already indicates that there must be other categories making up the 'less favoured'/'oppressed' groups ... therefore, you can tell from my statement that the patriarchy isn't just a Western thing.

You'll have to help me out with Wahhabist thinking? Thanks.

There is more than one spin on the patriarchy, of course. But the word is privileged in a particular way in feminist ideology. Within that, even, there are differences of opinion. But, it's rather like comparing colours. All feminists agree the patriarchy is purple. Some think it's lilac and some thing it's indigo, but no-one thinks it is green.

It's like that. (With apologies to Alice Walker)

Portofino Mon 01-Oct-12 13:42:05
Honestly Eats, I really do not know why you persist in starting all these ridiculous threads. Is it because you are trying to derail FWR?

Studiously doesn't comment.

I am pretty sure that your motive is not to strengthen Feminism - as you are starting to appear a bit silly now.

If I was going to try and be disruptive, I'd work hard at trying to put people off and drive them away. Some of the more interesting - albeit acerbic - posters have already gone. Posters of EBAL 's ilk ,will put off more potential converts to feminist ways of thinking.

Sorry LRD my bad - I don't usually forget to put quotes in - but I did this time.

I was specifically thinking of some of the horrendous female oppression in Central/Southern Africa - and the neo-tribal oppression of women specifically under a Wahabi interpretation of Islam, or the even more radical Shariah practiced by the Taliban. These are specifically not white, upper class, Western men.

[I think we agree with the general thrust that we all are part of the patriarchy, even if we disagree about the motives of the OP]

Pregnant again?

onemore - thanks. And yes - it's a hierarchy, absolutely.

In fact, it's the patriarchy that likes to think in binaries. It's a good tool of oppression.

LRD -

Using 'the' and saying 'the patriarchy thinks' (I know it is convenient shorthand etc...) does seem to play into the mental picture of patriarchy is some kind of private members club for all blokes/some blokes/some blokes and women.

Patriarchy is a bit lack capitalism i.e. an emergent system - we wouldn't say 'the capitalism' or 'capitalism thinks'

If we use the word more like this we could also recognise that some people would say they not capitalists (i.e. they don't support the system from a philosophical point of view) where few could say they don't support the system (and benefit from it) by buying, selling, trading and investing.

I am not a patriarchist, but I am, by virtue of being human part of 'the patriarchy' if you see what I mean .

Oh, sure. It's a lazy shortcut.

I like to imagine the patriarchy as sentient but it isn't. That's just an easy way for artsy-fartsy people like me to understand structure. Personification, if you will. I'm visualizing some cartoon monster, really.

I like the distinction between 'patriarchist' (misogynist? patriarch?) and 'part of the patriarchy'. That's useful IMO.

Himalaya Mon 01-Oct-12 16:07:11
I am not a patriarchist, but I am, by virtue of being human part of 'the patriarchy'

Like that a lot...