Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Who is part of the patriarchy?

401 replies

EatsBrainsAndLeaves · 29/09/2012 15:36

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?

OP posts:
habbibu · 02/10/2012 13:58

But I am genuinely interested in how a scenario would unfold in which sufficient women were convinced that all men were oppressors and decided to change things - how would this work? What practical steps would be taken? Would woman-only communities be the preferred default?

TheDoctrineOfSnatch · 02/10/2012 13:59

Ah, Tiggy, I've got the dentist on Friday. Maybe next week?

ShirtyKnot · 02/10/2012 14:08

I would never have considered myself a radical feminist (I still don't actually) but I do "believe in" the patriarchy.

I think the first way to start a revolution is to make as many people as possible AWARE of the inequality in society and the way that patriarchal societies damage us. So, firstly we need to engage with people who don't think there's anything wrong with the status quo.

Saying stuff like "ALL men reinforce the patriarchy" and "All men benefit from the patriarchy" is one sure fire way to get people who are wavering to switch right off IMO.

OneMoreChap · 02/10/2012 14:18

I suspect many men (I know at least 2) believe the current model of society disadvantages women, and through collateral damage, men.

I do think that the patriarchy is extant and has has discernable impact; I'm less clear as to how the system changes.

I'm all for education of both men and women as to the inequalities of this society and how the current systems sustains them... I'm also all for addressing the ones we can and working with persuasion and legislation to sort them out - as far as that is possible within this system.

Most revolutions against systems I recall have involved violence of one sort or another. Who has the best weapons?

BigStickBIWI · 02/10/2012 14:23

By the way, here is the link to MmeLindor's book

MiniTheMinx · 02/10/2012 14:28

I'm free on Monday, would 11 am be ok?

Yes Eats in the past women have gained less than men but if you take one example, the Russian revolution, within weeks women were appointed to government positions including welfare and social services, women were allowed equal access to education, any form of work, equal wages and childcare, laundry and food was socialised to lessen the domestic burden. Although many ordinary Russians were sexist this is because of the time in which the revolution happened. Russia before the revolution was a deeply patriarchal society with a huge divide between the classes, the city and peasant populations, it was also far less industrialised than the west.

Interesting article here www.marxist.com/emancipation-women-russia.htm

Interesting little snippet of info about feminism and class, Emmeline Pankhurst banned the women workers of the east end from attending her meetings. She was really only concerned with winning the vote for women like her......middle class women.

These are the words of Clara Zetkin as she makes clear, middle class women protect their own rights first, (despite the fact they are also oppressed, they are privileged)

"The right to vote helps the bourgeois women to break down those barriers, in the form of privileges for the male sex, that are an obstacle to their own development and activity. For workingwomen this right becomes a weapon in the battle which they must wage for humanity to overcome exploitation and class rule. It allows them a greater participation in the struggle for the conquest of political power on the part of the proletariat with the aim of going beyond the capitalist order and building the socialist order, the only one that allows for a radical solution to the women's question (?). The workingwomen cannot therefore count on the support of the bourgeois women in the struggle for civil rights. Class contradictions exclude the possibility of workingwomen becoming allies of the bourgeois feminist movement. This does not mean that they reject bourgeois feminists if the latter, in the struggle for universal female suffrage, should stand by them in fighting the common enemy on different fronts. However, the workingwomen must be fully aware of the fact that the right to vote cannot be won through a struggle of the female sex without any class discrimination against the male sex, but only through the class struggle of all the exploited, without any sex discrimination, against all the exploiters, always without any sex discrimination."

Only when all oppressed peoples work together can the work of re-shaping society happen.

Hullygully · 02/10/2012 15:07

I was asking this recently Habb: just how one would go about tearing down the patriarchy.

Moaning is easy.

Action is hard.

summerflower · 02/10/2012 15:28

Mini, I think it would be a mistake to idealise women?s position in Soviet Russia. Certainly, there were valuable moves towards emancipation, but whatever provision made was not made with women?s interests in mind, it was to serve the political ends of the Communist party. Women?s rights were still seen as subordinate to the interests of the (male) working class. What they ended up with was not equality, but the idea of the dual burden (women as worker and women as mother).

MmeLindor · 02/10/2012 16:02

Monday is no good, I'm in Germany.

We could do a dual revolution.

I think every time a feminist says 'we have to destroy the patriarchy', we lose 10 people who would otherwise support the changes.

It sounds scary and anti-man.

MiniTheMinx · 02/10/2012 16:07

Actually I'm yet to go back and read your link SummerFlower. I'm very interested in the Holocaust (fathers family Jewish),so will have read later. Agree the fascists are very misogynistic, just from what I already know.

I wouldn't idealise Russia after the revolution either but I was making the point that change can happen, women are central to this, not just another group with competing interests. As women I believe we should allign ourselves with causes that will further our goals and ensure those goals high on the agenda. You can only change society if you are part of it and this can & historically it has been shown that class is where the real struggle is, in fact it has shaped all human history Smile

The dual burden is something that really concerns me, state sponsored childcare is a must, in fact I don't know why we don't demand it now or down tools Grin

TiggyD · 02/10/2012 19:06

How about next Friday for everybody?

Will the Revolution be catered?

Or should I bring a sandwich?

TheDoctrineOfSnatch · 02/10/2012 19:12

What do we want? THE REVOLUTION!
When do we want it? UM, WHEN IT'S CONVENIENT PLEASE...

LRDtheFeministDragon · 02/10/2012 19:17

Grin Grin

Portofino · 02/10/2012 19:34

Grin I see life very differently here in Belgium where family is seen as more important than work, and the financial structure is set up to SUPPORT families - tax deductible childcare/cleaning etc/ free school from 2.5/tax allowances for children and non-working spouses/child benefit that increases the more children you have/equal parental leave etc

Fucking scary taxes though.

I SEE men going home early to collect their children from school, I see men working from home when their kids are sick. My office is deserted by 5pm. For all this, a much larger % of women don't work. I wonder why this is. Presumably the tax system means they don't have to, though the govt puts positive measures in place to ensure they can.

TheDoctrineOfSnatch · 02/10/2012 19:45

Ah Porto that is interesting.

A major factor in why DH and I both work is that it's more tax efficient to do so. I think we would even with transferable tax allowances as we both like our jobs, but the balance would be not quite so heavy on the 2x WOHP side.

MiniTheMinx · 02/10/2012 20:00

So it's not a revolution we need, we just need to move to Belgium
Porto do you have room to put us all up? Grin

kim147 · 02/10/2012 20:10

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Portofino · 02/10/2012 20:55

i notice the difference in the adverts on UK and Belgian tv....Here they all yoghurt, cereal and face cream. In the UK they all seem to be PPI. sofa loans and in the run up to Xmas,let's buy our relatives expensive stuff as that is what they are expecting, kind of thing. I have a standard credit card - limit 1250 euros. My last UK one was£ 10,000!!!

Trills · 02/10/2012 21:02

There are loads of ads for yoghurt (stops bloating), cereal (helps you get thin and wear red dresses), and face cream (photoshops away wrinkles) here too!

Portofino · 02/10/2012 21:10

Oh I know Trills. But here there are NO adverts for interest free credit/loan consolidation sort of thing. It doesn't exist....

MmeLindor · 02/10/2012 22:45

Interesting, Porto. Sounds similar to Germany.

I stopped working a year before I had DD (after 2 miscarriages, and due in part to a particularly insensitive colleague) and started working part-time. Went from 5 day week to 1 day a week, and only dropped ?250 cause DH got taxed less.

So for most women it is an incentive to stay home when they have kids, plus the generous maternity leave, and 3 yr holding of job. Paternity leave is becoming more popular too, with sharing of maternity/paternity leave rising.

It is great at the moment cause DH is officially a married man with kids, so stays in that tax bracket, and I can earn as much as I like here (in theory) and it doesn't affect his taxes.

?154 a month per child family allowance, very cheap preschool (from 3 to 6yo) and subsidised under 3yo care.

Having the job security is the big one, I think. Women feel comfortable taking longer maternity leave because their job is kept for them for 3yrs. And another 3 yrs for each subsequent child.

kim147 · 02/10/2012 22:46

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Himalaya · 03/10/2012 07:45

Belgium wins again!

Porto - It does sound lovely, but I do still wonder about the difference between mothers and fathers at work. From your description a good work-life balance for dads means leaving early, working a little flexibly etc... Whereas for women it means taking 3 years off per child and then going back.

It is obviously better than being pushed out of the workplace altogether, but it still seems lopsided. Do people in Belgium who take 6 years or so out of their career (men or women..) still have the same chance to get to the top of their career, or is there still a "mommy track"'?

I can't

Porto

Trills · 03/10/2012 08:06

Germany/Belgium sound lovely if you are in a traditional family setup but I wonder if the lower taxes for married couples (or married couples with children) mean that single people or unmarried couples or those without children end up worse off.

(maybe it's fine, but it sounds a bit like politicians promising to do well by "families" when what they mean is "families that we approve of")

Portofino · 03/10/2012 08:07

The 3 year thing is Germany I believe. Actually ML is only 3 months here, and you can add your 3 months parental leave to that. So ML is one thing that the UK is better at. I work for an ICT company where the workforce is predominantly male - 70% - but women make up a relatively larger % of management roles. They do have active Diversity and WorkLife Balance programmes here too. My DH works for a US company. They are not quite so flexible.