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?

You dont think men benefit from the patriarchy Shirty?

Do you know what the partiarchy is? It is a system whereby men as a class oppress women as a class. Why would it exist if men do not benefit from it?

Exactly shirty, as I said earlier, the op has made the mistake of seeing men as "the enemy". The way she views feminism and society is very blinkered.

No, men are just as damaged. For example, the woman is expected to raise a family, while the man supports financially. If they decide to reverse those roles, society views him as being emasculated. Jokes about being under the thumb. Men are expected to like football and beer, if they don't their sexuality is questioned...

And lowerclass, unemployed men don't benefit from a patriarchal system as much as a middle class woman.

I think most men benefit from the patriarchy and most men want to maintain it.

Not ALL men.

If you look at men at any level in society they are clearly in a better position than a comparable woman. So homeless men and women - women who are homeless are more vulnerable than homeless men to rape and exploitation.

Of course some men benefit more from patriarchy than other men. But all men benefit in some way.

I give up. You clearly don't want a discussion, just a bunfight and victim-validation.

I get that Eats. The point I was challenging really was: "All men are involved in reinforcing the patrirachy"

Could you explain this assertion please?

All men are involved in reinforcing the patriarchy to different degrees. Obviously men with more power can reinforce it through laws, controlling institutions, controlling who gets appointed to important jobs.

But even men who may appear on the surface not to have much power still reinforce the patriarchy. The worst men do this through violence and rape. But other ways include sexist jokes, sexist assumptions, not challenging rape myths, patronising women. All of these actions also reinforce the patriarchy.

And very very few men do not do this at all

I think most men are hurt by the patriarchy in some ways but also benefit from it in others. There are very few who only benefit or are only damaged.

Depending on your situation/class/race/amount of money/desire to play football rather than play with a baby (etc) you may benefit more or be damaged more.

All men are involved in reinforcing the patriarchy to different degrees.

And very very few men do not do this at all

It sounds as if you are confused about the meaning of the word "all" here.

Of course the patriarchy can hurt men in some ways. But if it did not overall benefit men then they would change it.

My husband doesn't do any of those things. And he looks after me while I am stuck in bed with suspected RA, looks after our son and does all the housework. All this means that he cannot work, nor can he claim benefits. In waht way does he contribute to, oir benefit from the patriarchy?

But, many women don't want it changed either. Because they benefit from having a high earning dh, they want to stay at home, they like their lives.

So not ALL men then? Because you have said that "very, very few" men don't make sexist jokes, or challenge rape myths or patronise women.

How should feminist women who are raising males ensure that the next generation of men are not upholders of the patriarchy.

How would you answer to the feminist women who have already raised male children to see the sexes as equal?

He benefits from the patriarchy in a number of ways. He is much less likely to be raped or sexually assaulted than a woman. Men who take on a caring role typically get more praise for it from others than women in similar positions. He wont have the same fear about walking at night outside that many women do.

In terms of reinforcing the patriarchy, that is very hard for me to answer without knowing him. There are some men - but very few - who genuinely do not reinforce the patriarchy. But most men are sexist and do reinforce the patrriarchy through their attitudes, even if in very subtle ways. So would he challenge rape myths or sexist jokes for example if he hears them? Does he take womens opinions as seriously as men? Is he more likely to interrupt a woman than a man?

Even if he does these things, he can still be a nice man and be good to you personally

Shirty I think in reality it is very difficult to raise boys who dont reinforce the patriarchy. Many feminist mothers have tried and failed. We can try, but the wider culture also has a great influence on our children.

Eats, so what is the answer then?

As a feminist raising male children, how can I prevent them from becoming my eventual oppressors? How can I not end up despising the flesh of my flesh?

Nobody is saying you have to despise them. They are your children of course you will love them.

I think it is like all parenting. You do your best to try and make sure they become as least oppressive as possible. But you also accept that you are not the only influence in their life.

I suppose we are all part of the patriarchy if we do/say/believe anything that supports it. When I got married I took my husband's name so I guess it includes me.

I think that's quite a defeatist attitude to take actually Eats, and it really saddens me that you feel this way.

I will accept the "less likely to be raped" argument, but he is more likely to be a victim of violent assault. And yes, he doies challenge rape myths/sexist jokes etc. Sio doi most of my male friends. He certainly doesn't get any praise for looking after me, he is moire likely toi be mocked than if the roles were reversed.

As for your answer wrt raising boys, I'm gobsmacked. Do you have children?

Eats - By some of the views you seem to pout on here you would also come across to some as reinforcing the patriarchy. I refer in particular to your unwelcoming stance on involving men into childcare.

Seems to me that in some ways we are all part of it. What with living in a patriarchal society and all that.

No women are oppressed by the patriarchy. Patriarchy is a system whereby men as a class domiante women as a class. Women are those oppressed by patriarchy.

Do you know what the partiarchy is? It is a system whereby men as a class oppress women as a class. Why would it exist if men do not benefit from it?

So if patriarchy theory can only make sense of the oppression which is specific to women, what theory Eats gives us a framework to understand other forms of oppression?

But even men who may appear on the surface not to have much power still reinforce the patriarchy. The worst men do this through violence and rape

Why do men who lack power in relation to other men, use their position of privilege over women to oppress those women through violence? surely if patriarchy is a hierarchical system where some men lack power and influence and men are in competition with other men, why do they attack women and not the cause of their own oppression?

If you look at men at any level in society they are clearly in a better position than a comparable woman. So homeless men and women - women who are homeless are more vulnerable than homeless men to rape and exploitation

In what way are middle class women privileged when compared to homeless men apart from the most obvious, they have shelter. If a homeless man attacks a middle class women is this violence caused by hatred founded on sex or class. If the homeless man rapes a women of the middle class, he does this to either have sex, well we know that men don't rape because they want sex, it's about power.....therefore it is more likely as a result of his antagonism not just towards the middle class woman but anger at his middle class oppressor. It is a "I can take what is yours mentality" in just the same way as the workers striking for better pay. It's an attack upon the property of the richer man/woman

Patriarchy is a system where men as a class oppress women as a class

Right, so what do you propose to do about this situation?

"to boil all oppression and antagonism down to biology and think you can circumvent the very thing you hold in very high esteem is clearly wrong headed. Unless you perceive a state of constant revolution as both the means and the end point to be your objective. Then you have the whole socialisation question......if the antagonism is caused by basic biology then socialise all you like, reconstruct as you will, all out separatism might be the only answer"

Would you like all out antagonism & separatism?

I'm sorry if I seem abrupt Eats, to keep spouting the radical mantra does not prove that it is right. It is in and of itself little more than a statement, not even a theory. I could keep saying the sky is green, this only reinforces the idea in my own head but lacks the intellectual vigour needed to understand or change society. To say that biological difference is the cause of oppression means we can never escape our oppression.