Tags
anti-feminism, atheism, Christianity, hierarchies, oppression, patriarchy, power, social stratification, women
In feminist thought, patriarchy is simply the root of all evil, a system dominated by men. But what does that even mean? Take away the hyperbole and hysteria and we’re left with some vague definitions, “a social system in which family members are related to each other through their fathers” or “Patriarchy is an emotional economy as well as an unequal distribution of power” or “Patriarchy is a form of social stratification via a power/dominance hierarchy – an ancient and ongoing social system based on traditions of elitism.”
Quite simply patriarchy is a Very Bad Thing. A Vague Thing with an elusive definition mostly related to perceived power and who allegedly holds such power. Power is also a very bad thing and if somebody has it, it’s only because they obviously stole it from somebody who is now powerless.
In much of feminist thought, men are oppressors because they’re hogging all the power. The only way for women to gain any power is to render men powerless and steal some of theirs. You do this by regulations, laws, public shaming, anything you can to tear men down so they will relinquish their power and release it into the hands of women.
This alleged hierarchy of oppression can get somewhat comical when you introduce race and class into the equation. Also the theory begins to completely fall apart, with everyone shrieking at each other to “check their privilege.” Sooo, if you are a wealthy white woman supported by her father and later her husband, are you a victim of a sexist society or an oppressor? What if you have a Mexican woman you pay under the table to clean your house? Wouldn’t this make you a bit sexist, a bit racist, perhaps even exploitative, even though you are a woman yourself? How about the Asian guy you pay slave wages to clean your pool? Is he really part of the oppressive patriarchy that allegedly enslaves you? Well now it gets really complicated. If you are a wealthy white woman who supports LGBT politics and Obamacare, then you are not really an oppressor, you are a good person who cares deeply for the downtrodden. So who is really oppressing the Mexican maid and the Asian pool boy? Like duh, “the patriarchy.”
In crazy upside down world, last summer I literally hid in the broom closet with the Mexican maid and the Asian pool boy, while we tried to stifle giggles about all this. (They’re lucky we weren’t hiding in the booze closet.) What sparked these fits of hysterical giggling was a deep and profound awareness that feminism, liberalism, atheism, and assorted other social engineering schemes, are so hypocritical and disconnected from the rest of the real world, you just have to laugh. Yes, the Lady of the Manor with her fancy Harvard education, (paid for by her father) who had never worked a day in her life (supported by her wealthy husband) had just lectured the hired help regarding the oppressive nature of men and the evils of patriarchy……before shoving us all into the broom closet so we wouldn’t be in the way of her dinner guests.
In the bottom rungs of society men are not often perceived as the powerful, as oppressors, they are allies, partners in crime, people you are more likely to seek to encourage and lift up, rather than to tear down. Heady intellectual concepts like hierarchies of oppression or feminist ideology or patriarchal theories from academia are not misunderstood by the little people, they are rejected entirely as the nonsense they are.
What triggered this little foray into the “evils of patriarchy” was something Violet commented about on the other thread “I had a quick scan to say if you’ve said anything that could be contrived as oppressive to women, and came up with a couple of your comments that don’t make the accusation seem out of the realms of possibility.” Then she lists some things I’ve said including, “…I’ve found patriarchy under Christianity to be the most women friendly of them all…..I’ve found Christianity to be one of the most respectful and kindest of religions towards women.”
I’m laughing a bit here, but sheesh, oppressing women now includes pointing out that something is woman friendly, respectful, and kind?? Well, obviously I am oppressing women then! My bad.
boteotu said:
Reblogged this on Blogger at the Edge of the Universe. and commented:
Veritas!
LikeLiked by 1 person
JF said:
As you know i am against feminism but I am for matriarchy. It is clear that majority of young women who believe that they are feminists don’t know what they are talking about. I asked one of them yesterday if it is possible to have equality of women in a society when one man have several wives. She said yes. Then I asked her if all wives in a family have equal rights and she was unable to answer. I believe that before discussing feminism in general it must be firmly established what countries people have in mind.
LikeLiked by 2 people
insanitybytes22 said:
LOL, I remember! You like the idea of a matriarchy, but then again, you’ve never been trapped in office politics with the mean girls 😉
LikeLiked by 1 person
JF said:
Believe me, I was! Then I decided to retire at 58 and one of them got my computer system. She was unable to maintain the system, got breakdown and went on disability. I want to stress that I left her a system in a very good shape.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Paul said:
You oppressor you. Ha! Well, maybe a closet oppressor. Bwahahaha!
LikeLike
violetwisp said:
I think you know you’ve been a bit selective in your definition. The first definition in the Merriam Webster dictionary says: “social organization marked by the supremacy of the father in the clan or family, the legal dependence of wives and children”
So the man is supreme, and the adult woman has the same dependent status as a child. Why do you think men should be supreme, in the positions of power and control, while women be dependent and submissive? You can LOL all you like thinking that kind of view isn’t related to the oppression of women. Perhaps you’ve found yourself in a rare heterosexual relationship where that kind of power imbalance isn’t exploited and you personally enjoy it, most other women in that kind of culture aren’t so lucky.
I can only be relieved I’m living in a time and place where human society has developed beyond such base values, and my partner and I can share what life has to offer equally – decision making, childcare and working lives.
LikeLike
insanitybytes22 said:
“I can only be relieved I’m living in a time and place where human society has developed beyond such base values..”
Violet, I regret to inform you, but you’re actually living under the patriarchy. This human society that has allegedly developed beyond such base values, has been a patriarchal society for thousands of years.
LikeLike
violetwisp said:
Granted. But I’m pleased to inform you that individual relationships in what is termed the ‘developed’ part of the world are no longer bound by these base values. Human society evolves and often improves. Nice dodge of my question to you though. 🙂
LikeLiked by 1 person
insanitybytes22 said:
I love questions, Violet. Is this your question, “Why do you think men should be supreme, in the positions of power and control, while women be dependent and submissive?”
LOL, well first of all, “supreme” is actually a rich creme sauce, but you probably weren’t referring to the noun. Supreme simply means “of authority.” There is really nothing more awesome then a man who recognizes his authority and embraces it. It’s not about abuse of power and control at all, it’s about stepping into your responsibility. A bus driver for example, much better if he recognizes his power and the huge responsibility he has, having all this tonnage under his control. Drive supreme, in a position of power and control, for all our sakes. The last thing we want is you driving without any awareness of how you have power and control over the bus.
“Dependent and submissive” goes back to biology. Relationships between men and women simply work better if women submit. Submit simply means to yield. Men respond better to women if they don’t feel like they have to be in battle mode all the time. It’s also hard on women if they feel they have to remain in a constant state of non-yielding. Non yielding can quickly become an unhealthy desire for complete control of all things at all times, something that life will teach you isn’t possible.
Dependence is simply something that comes in a long term relationship. I am heavily emotionally, spiritually, financially. psychologically dependent on hubby and to be without him would be an earth shattering loss. That doesn’t mean I can’t survive on my own, it simply means there is a dependance there, a symbiosis. If I had to spend all my time fearing dependance, then there would be no time for building trust, for recognizing vulnerability, for intimacy, for gratitude, and bonding.
The alternative to dependence and submission, would be to remain in a non yielding state, co-habitating with a stranger who I don’t really need in my life, in a relationship devoid of any spiritual union. At that point hubby would be more like an accessory, a companion perhaps, but not really one flesh in a spiritual union, a union so valuable that yes, it would be pretty devastating to loose.
LikeLiked by 3 people
violetwisp said:
“There is really nothing more awesome then a man who recognizes his authority and embraces it.” From your perspective. I think it could be true for both women and men, depending on their experience, the situation and their personal strengths. But generally, I can’t understand how you could ever object to a relationship built on equality.
“I am heavily emotionally, spiritually, financially. psychologically dependent on hubby”. Em, shudder.
LikeLiked by 1 person
insanitybytes22 said:
“Em, shudder.”
LOL! Oh no, it’s a marvelous thing. That kind of love is what leads some husbands to show up at the nursing home and paint their wives toenails, to spend endless hours reading to them, to feed them, to care for them. People who have been married for a long time are often heavily bonded, attached, dependent. It’s not scary, it’s beautiful.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Colorstorm said:
There was an old Emerson, Lake, and Palmer tune: ‘Oh what a lucky man he was.’
After reading this, seems the hubby of IB (lol) would agree with the lion’s opinion.
LikeLike
Rebecca LuElla Miller said:
Shared this on Facebook. Really adds perspective to the discussion of feminism. I wonder if the rich white woman supported by her daddy and then her husband who espouses the evils of patriarchy while paying low wages to those who clean up for her has a clue how ridiculous her claims sound coming from her. But the real point is, so many women don’t get how truly powerful we are even though we may not walk in the position of responsibility. Who is more powerful, England’s monarch or prime minister? They both have positions of importance and certain responsibilities, and together they lead their nation. Why can’t men and women see our roles in this way–unique to us but of equal importance and both vitally necessary for the well-being of society.
Becky
LikeLiked by 2 people
One Gentleman said:
Another great post. I came across a university debate, as I returned home last night. I will send you the link later today. It was a debate on feminism, and whether it is a sexist belief. The sound is not perfect, so I would recommend headphones/sound system. I only saw the first 25 minutes, but it was an interesting one.
“In much of feminist thought, men are oppressors because they’re hogging all the power. The only way for women to gain any power is to render men powerless and steal some of theirs. You do this by regulations, laws, public shaming, anything you can to tear men down so they will relinquish their power and release it into the hands of women.”
The one thing that grinds my gears, regarding this oppressive system of men, involves the rhetoric of males making up a larger role in politics.
Women make up a larger number of voters, but if women refuse to run for office, please…please…please explain to me why this is the fault of men? If the women who do run, do not receive your support, please…please…please tell me how this is the fault of men, when females make up a larger voting majority?
Elected officials are just that, elected. If X does not run, X will never win an election and if X does not win an election, X will never enter high political office. It’s so patriarchal how that works. Lol.
LikeLiked by 1 person
One Gentleman said:
Here is the university debate I mentioned.
LikeLiked by 1 person
insanitybytes22 said:
Thank you for finding that. Much appreciated. I’ll have a look at it.
LikeLike