Patriarchy

[DaisyRaine90]

Is it really so bad to have a patriarchal household??

I mean, feminism is about equality right so it should be 50:50 in diff households ??

Some interesting points, I'm going out in a moment so will respond a bit later.
Bertrandrussel- your right there are a lot of points and I do see where your coming from. I'm not saying there aren't issues that need addressing but I just don't think the problem is with patriarchy.
Re jellyfish- 50% of parents are male? I am interested to know ppls opinions on- if this is the case, and we don't acknowldge women's preference to spend time with their child and take time out from work, would you say that courts should award men the right to be primary care giver of children 50% of the time? So that women will have to automatically give 50% custody to male counterparts?
I think we need to acknowldge women may have sometimes different priorities if we are to address women's issues.
Someone mentioned single parents and child care as an example i agree that there needs to be more solutions to this- flexible working, part time working, adequate maternity leave etc. i feel that this is lost sight of and sometimes think equality feminism which just aims to put us on equal footing to men as a mere statistic isn't helpful. For example I heard a feminist saying that maternity leave is too long, that it disadvantages us in the workplace... well yes it may do, but I think its regressive to just assume all women want to jump back into work and should be denied looking after our children if we so choose. This is not looking after the interests of women.

missymoo we're not brainwashed. We just all believe in the version of reality we are born into. The fact that you believe women are more innately caring despite the fact that there is very little scientific evidence to support your claim, suggests that you are just subscribing to the dominant beliefs of the society you are in. We all do this, it's how we create culture and meaning.

It is ok to challenge and question though. it's scary to think you might be buying into beliefs that disadvantage you because of your gender, it's even scarier to accept that there may be endemic injustices that you just have to suck up to a certain degree. We all want to be masters (or mistresses) of our own destiny. It's not pleasant to face the idea that we may not be as in control as we'd like to be.

The courts do recognise the father as 50% carer. They award custody to women because they demonstrate that they are primary care-givers. It's a common myth that mothers get an easier ride in the family courts. All research actually suggests that the opposite is true. It's a perfect example of ideology rather than fact shaping people's ideas about reality.

Re jellyfish- 50% of parents are male?

Yes, females can't make babies alone.

Alternaticetentacle- I don't know many women who want these jobs, I don't see the same media focus on it either

Probably because you have been brainwashed into thinking this bullshit, so don't focus on discussing it. You are an instrument of the patriarchy and you have no idea/don't even care.

Why would anyone need a head of household?

"Re jellyfish- 50% of parents are male? I am interested to know ppls opinions on- if this is the case, and we don't acknowldge women's preference to spend time with their child and take time out from work, would you say that courts should award men the right to be primary care giver of children 50% of the time? So that women will have to automatically give 50% custody to male counterparts?"

Isn't the presumption now that it should be 50:50 if possible? The problem is that it's usually not possible for working parents. Oops, patriarchy again....

Missymoo, you speak a so much sense.

Equality is very complex, especially in the workplace.
You are so right in what you say about whether the boardroom is the ultimate success .... and i agree it is not. In every company i have worked in, people get to the boardroom if work is their primary focus in life - available and working every day, evening and weekend. Many people will never want this as they value other things .... such as family time, hobbies etc. And you also recognise many people will not have the skills or mindset to do these boardroom roles. Bear in mind when i say " people" i am including women and men.

A lot of partnerships work as a unit. The division of labour allowing the "unit" to achieve more than the sum of the individuals - so one person may prefer to put more time bringing up the family and the other put more time into earning. The success is on whether both partners agree, get individual fulfillment and feel the partnership is a success. It is not up to anyone ... a feminist or a patriarchist, to say what every partnership should do and to try and define success.

Success and equality and feminism for me is the freedom to be able to make the choices that are right for you and your partnership, that do not negatively impact others.

Alternativetentacle
Don't feel I am brainwashed, I think some gendered differences are there because, dare I say it, perhaps there are differences between the sexes and this is reflected in the choices they make.
I'm not saying that I don't support women who want to pursue a career, fine but don't tell me I'm a brainwashed victim if I want to take a career break to spend time with my family. It's unsupportive to assume all women have same aspirations and goals.
For the poster who mentioned the nuclear family... do feminists feel this needs to go? What is the alternative that's going to improve our lives?
As for the courts women do get a better deal when it comes to custody. The majority of the time they are given primary care giver role, is this something you feel women should give up so that we can be more equal?

"As for the courts women do get a better deal when it comes to custody. The majority of the time they are given primary care giver role, is this something you feel women should give up so that we can be more equal?"

But not because they are women- because they are usually the primary care giver in the first place. Some women actively choose this, but for most it is not a free choice. And it is very rarely a choice a man can make. Back to the patriarchy!

Why would anyone need a head of household?

Quite, this seems a bizarre notion to me. I've never heard of a household having a "head"; I'm sure it would have been alien even to my parents as children given my grandparents certainly don't have one or the other as a "head".

silverviking that's all well and good as long as both parties are happy in the unit and see it through. If one part of the unit earns more while the other part raises the kids and does lesser paid work in addition to this and the high earner leaves after 20 years because they're not that into the unit anymore, the lowered earner is financially screwed while the higher earner has their career and their grown up children and can't really see a problem because they all made their own choices and contributed to the unit.

In this scenario, the vulnerable person is usually female.

Feminism isn't just about choices. That's shopping. Feminism is about context, challenging existing systems and ways of thinking and questioning why we make the choices we make even when they are clearly not in our own best interests.

Sorry if this comes across as a bit angry but I used to think exactly what you think and it's massively over simplistic and encourages women to have a lot of trust...

would you say that courts should award men the right to be primary care giver of children 50% of the time?

When men are the primary carers of the children, they are the ones who are awarded primary custody of the children.

Where both parents work, and then split, quite often (more often than not), men don't want 50/50 care of their children because children are a hindrance to their work as working around children is very difficult, and childcare is expensive. So they leave that burden to their ex wife.

Patriarchy again.

feminists don't all think the same things, were individuals. The nuclear family is problematic for women. It doesn't need to go but it is evolving. A lot of children are being raised in non-nuclear family set ups.

It's unsupportive to assume all women have same aspirations and goals.

But it isn't unsupportive to point out that all of our choices are based on our experience living in a society heavily steeped in patriarchal bullshit, and that even if there are slight steps in the right direction (like shared parental leave) the influence of the historical set up still has a massive impact on our ability to make a 'free' choice.

Don't feel I am brainwashed, I think some gendered differences are there because, dare I say it, perhaps there are differences between the sexes and this is reflected in the choices they make.

the choices they make are more because of societal norms than their vaginas or penises getting in the way. surely even you know this?

incidentally, my vagina and tits never stopped me doing engineering. societal norms and sexism did.

It's also in my opinion not supportive to dismiss the lack of women on boards, in the most senior roles as down to "choices". Plenty of women and girls aspire to huge success in careers and want to reach "the top" (myself included).

Also: the Prime Minister, the First Minister of Scotland, the President of the Supreme Court, the Director General of the CBI, the Director of Public Prosecutions, the Commissioner of the Metropolitan Police, the Commissioner of the London Fire Brigade, the Chief Executive of ITV to name but a few are all women. Hardly women not choosing to aspire to the top. Doubtless some would also use this as evidence women aren't held back but many women still are in the workplace, by lack of childcare, by outdated gender expectations when it comes to children (sometimes by senior colleagues/bosses when a woman returns to work after maternity leave from what I've read), sexism in the form of being patronised, passed over for promotions for less qualified men because of networking events which exclude women etc. Though I've not entered the workplace yet myself so I can only go on what I've read and heard from various sources. There are clearly a number of barriers women still face in the workplace and a huge amount of misogyny women and girls face day to day in society.

There are clearly a number of barriers women still face in the workplace and a huge amount of misogyny women and girls face day to day in society.

hbr.org/2017/10/a-study-used-sensors-to-show-that-men-and-women-are-treated-differently-at-work

Thanks for the interesting link jellyfrizz.

V. welcome NoLove.

Alternative tentacle-
You really are rude and patronising. I did study all the sciences to at least as- level, physics then rest to a level. I have a science degree. No fucker stopped me, not least my "vagina or tits". my male teachers were really supportive, encouraging, no one held me back- patriarchy, no. Your not an engineer probably because you never tried. This victim mentality is stupid and unhelpful. If my daughters want to study stem subjects they will, I won't fill their head with this victim crap that they can't achieve because of their anatomy- it's not an obstacle to succeed.

I did study all the sciences to at least as- level, physics then rest to a level. I have a science degree. No fucker stopped me, not least my "vagina or tits". my male teachers were really supportive, encouraging, no one held me back- patriarchy, no

Good for you Missy, I'm glad you've not experienced it. My male A-level physics teacher made no secret of the fact he didn't want girls in his class and hounded me and another girl out. I went on to do an engineering degree - and had more than one lecturer of a similar opinion (and plenty that didn't - but still). Repeated studies show that the moment you put a woman's name (or a foreign name) on a CV they are less likely to get an interview, their competence is estimated lower, and they are offered less money.

So, is it Ok to have a strong head of household as a man? or would that teach me daughter that it HAS to be that way?

or is the country supposed to become one filled only with families were the dominant influence is Matriarchal?

I'm not talking about sexual harassment or anything like that, this thread has digressed as they often do.

I just think that for some couples it works better for the man to have greater control and in some it works better for women to have more control. very few relationships are completely equal, and I think most people either have dominating or submissive qualities.

Why does a household have to have a "head"?

Why are you asking the question?

I don't understand the notion of having a "head of household". There is no head of my household, neither my mum nor my dad is "the dominant influence". I'm pretty certain this is the same in the households of my friends.

I try to be the head and impose my authority on everyone but seldom succeed with my parents.