WTF is the 'female patriarchy'?

[ArabellaScott]

twitter.com/wornoutmumhack/status/1597625219081871360?cxt=HHwWgICluYLr86ssAAAA

'Rachel Adamson of zero tolerance says their new report discusses the “female patriarchy” - that voices not heard before need to be promoted.'

Is this an actual attempt to kill off women's rights entirely?

The female patriarchy?

This isn't exactly in response to your thread just one of the tweets about a "safe, supportive environment"... the priority when discussing VAWG should NOT be a fucking safe and supportive environment for those DISCUSSING it! FFS! If uncomfortable questions need to be asked and uncomfortable topics broached in order to find good answers to how society deals with this issue then people discussing it are going to have to be fucking uncomfortable.

For the love of all gods.

Female patriarchy?

They can fuck off with that.

Unless they mean "Sturgeon's Dictatorship" in which case they can say that and leave "patriarchy" as a word with a meaning already thanks.

I know they don't mean Sturgeon trying to shut women up though.

They mean the nasty uppity women are talking too much.

I really am not sure what they mean; if they want to talk about intersectional stuff they could use a different word.

Also - If uncomfortable questions need to be asked and uncomfortable topics broached in order to find good answers to how society deals with this issue then people discussing it are going to have to be fucking uncomfortable. - yes.

I thought the safe spaces were supposed to be for the victims of sexual violence and not the people representing the victims of sexual violence.

No idea about the 'female patriarchy', sorry 🤷‍♀️

Does it come from the same stable as the consent being about the difference in power stable?

The word Patriarchy literally means "the rule of the father"

These numbskulls can't even find the correct phrase to describe whatever the fuck it is they think they are saying.

I guess once you've played fast and loose with the meaning of basic words like "woman" you can graduate to fucking around with more advanced words?

Yes, quite.

The female version of a patriarchy is a matriarchy.
I can’t work out what they mean by ‘female patriarchy’ do they mean matriarchy or are they saying female supporters of the patriarchy?

They twist language to get everyone confused and tied up in debates over definitions so that people don’t notice what they’re actually up to, or if people do notice, they find that they no longer have a vocabulary to accurately describe repression/abuse.

It’s very deliberate. You can’t discuss misogynistic hate campaigns against women if the words like women and patriarchy have been deprived of meaning.

At its heart, its all just another old-fashioned crusade against the rights of women and children to speak freely, have privacy and dignity, and have autonomy over their own bodies and lives.

There’s no new report on the zero tolerance website? Is the tweet for real?

I've just found a Tweet about today's Nicola Sturgeon meeting which also mentions female patriarchs:

The room was full of self-declared "female patriarchs." State-funded handmaidens who like to apologise for their privilege and defer to men who identify as trans and BAME women. They were positively fizzing at the interruption to her excellency their Paymaster General.

It's clear what is meant here. Women who are doing the patriarchy's work for men. And yes, lots of pursed lips and pencil tapping when a feminist got up and told NS she should be ashamed of herself. Youngish women, mostly. A new breed of professional head girls who know better than the rest of us and are working with men to bring women to heel.

Yes, this is my concern. Suddenly women are going to be repositioned as 'patriarchs' and 'privileged' if they get uppity, aren't they? Sounds like a really neat way of getting women in line.

A new breed of professional head girls who know better than the rest of us and are working with men to bring women to heel.

Alas, I think this rings true.

So, if you’re intending to discuss actual women’s actual experience of men’s violence against actual women then that’s not ok, because it doesn’t include violence experienced by males who identify as women.

Obviously this is unbelievable in the context of this organisation. It also does no favours to TW. Violence against TW is wrong and need to be addressed. However, the context and motivations of violence against them are completely different. This is a male issue, women cannot solve it for them. It makes no sense to try to lump the two together (as ever!). If they want to set up an equivalent charity & hold an equivalent event, why can’t they just go ahead and do that?

Oh, I forgot… validating (male) identities is so much more important than tackling actual VAWG, or in fact actual violence against TW😡

Oh, I forgot… validating (male) identities is so much more important than tackling actual VAWG, or in fact actual violence against TW😡

But, by leaving the whole definition of a woman and the transwomen issues to one side, we can discuss VAWGs. To insist that the identity of what is a woman must be settled or be a part of a discussion on VAWGs, isn’t that also putting an identity spat ahead of discussing actual violence?

For example, does it really matter whether less than 1% of rape victims are seen as women or men? Do we absolutely need to agree on this before discussing the remaining 99%+ victims of rape? Or murder? Or domestic violence?

I don’t think we do. I think it was right to say, leave the identity question at the door. Let’s just focus on VAWGs.

Yes but all this adds up to male sex offenders in women’s prisons.

Again, how much of all the VAWGs does this account for? There’s what 1-3 assaults on a female prisoner a year tops?

Meanwhile literally MILLIONS of women outside prison are assaulted each year.
So that’s what less than one thousandth of a per cent?

Do we really need to hyper-focus on a few women in prison when the real elephant in the room is what’s happening to the rest of us on trains, in pubs, at work, on the streets, and at home?

And that’s not even looking at violence against girls.

Women and girls not in prison come into contact with far more male sex offenders just going about their daily life than any woman in a prison does. Yet you want to focus on keeping prison 100% male sex offender free? Why do female criminals deserve such privilege to be protected first and fire lost?

The rest of us don’t live in a male sex offender free environment. We have to put up with male sex offenders leering at us while buying nappies in Boots, following us home from a night out, rubbing up against us on the Tube, driving their cars slowly while watching our daughters in their uniform skirts walking to school and openly wanking and so on.

Why are the few female criminals being put to the front of the queue? Prison already is safer from men than life outside for every other woman and girl.

*foremost, not fire lost don’t know what happened there.

Again, how much of all the VAWGs does this account for? There’s what 1-3 assaults on a female prisoner a year tops?

This is a brilliant example of 'female patriarchy', female people working within the boundaries of the patriarchy to try (and fail) to improve the lives of women. Fail as it also puts a hierarchy in place of the women you decide to help and women's suffering you just accept and shrug off. I understand you are looking at the total numbers of victims, but you are (deliberately?) missing the bigger picture here.

Rapes of female prisoners by male prisoners is a low number but significant in it happening because it shows how the patriarchy works: womens suffering are rated lower than male feelings and rapes of women is a small price to pay for making male prisoners lives better, according to the people in charge. It is the way patriarchy works: it centers men, it empowers men. It puts women below men every single time. If you don't fight the system that finds it ok to lock up male rapists in the same prisons as female prisoners, then you will never really improve womens lives, you will just expend all your energy trying to minimise the suffering instead of eradicating it.

This is thick on many levels.

Its "Matriarchy" for a start off.

And we live in a patriarchal society that's just the way it's evolved. Attempts to reverse this have proved largely ineffective funnily enough. Its almost like men don't want this to change.

1-3 assaults on a female prisoner a year tops?

That's cold.

No it’s really not. It’s not making a decision to allow male sex offenders in womens prisons, it’s saying, let’s set this issue to one side for now and priories the other 99.99% of women and 100% of girls.

There’s no “hierarchy” of women by deciding to focus the vast majority of women and girls before focusing on a select subset of women. It is merely a decision to do something that will benefit millions of women and girls ahead of doing something that will benefit only a few women.