>the patriarchy is the cause of all problems in history
Is there any merit to this statement?
No but does anyone say or believe that?
>>883103
Sadly there is a vocal minority
So I'm a moderate conservative, and even I can recognize that there are issues with patriarchy. It is clear when reading some epidemiologists, say, Lorraine Code, that patriarchy isn't the only problem. At least not men. Patriarchy is first off a really specific problem in continental philosophy. It either isn't an issue in some places, such as India and China, or patriarchal structures didn't manifest the way they did in "the west", such as Jewish versions of patriarchy.
Patriarchy isn't the big bad boogeyman it is made out to be. Is there merit to the issues it has presented? Sure, of course. But the way it has manifested has been adopted by some places, and is quite different in others.
In a historical sense, patriarchy would be an apt term for describing how society functioned (strictly enforced male-only ruling class).
Today, this is not so much the case. There certainly is still a male bias in many regards, but its more of a specter of past inequality rather than existing encoded problems. "Patriarchy" at that point becomes an abstraction used to try and encapsulate a systemic phenomena that is quickly making its way to the dustbin of history. The reality is that the abolition of the patriarchy does little to stem issues of structural inequality: it simply makes an arbitration as to the composition of the ruling class.
So I don't know how popular a reading this is but classically patriarchy has been indistinguishable from capital. As systems of power the two are enmeshed and power begets power. I don't know if patriarchy alone is the cause of all problems but I don't know if it can be usefully discussed in isolation. This is why some left leaning feminists refer instead to a "kyriarchy".
I mean the idea that any one thing can be the cause of "all problems in history" is a bit silly either way.
>>883268
I'd say places like India are one of the only places in modern times with a patriarchal structure holding them back, what with their lack of birth control fucking us all up, and the whole bride burning thing
>>882947
No, since it's a silly extreme, but the idea of it causing SOME problems has merit.
>>883428
Yeah, modern India of course has its issues. But it didn't used to be about acid throwing and ditching your baby if born a woman. I'm also not saying it used to be perfect [it wasn't] but there are parts of the East where there was a clear patriarchal structure. But as >>883282 said it was a function of society. Although that's a bit of an overstatement, too, as large portions of India weren't centralized in the way West Europe was.
Feminists almost always critique patriarchy through a lens that it is automatically negative for everyone, even though they know full well that when men are seen as agents(bearing full responsibility for their actions), and women are seen as victims(Zero responsibility for their actions), this can benefit women to a large extent, more so than they are willing to admit.
Patriarchy insofar as it is a system where males have authority, can have several negative consequences, such as domestic abuse, rape etc.
But you never hear of the positives in women's direction, such as the privilege to get way less prison sentence for the same crime as men, the privilege of not dying while working in a coal mine, or the privilege of being of low social class and marrying a man who is of higher social class, which puts you in his class automatically.
>>883487
I'm not sure you have the balance exactly right. The harms patriarchy does to women far exceed these handful of benefits. Ask most women if they'd trade "less likely to get raped" for "lower prison sentences" and they'd tear your arm off (and then go to jail for the same time as a man).
>>883506
>Ask most women if they'd trade "less likely to get raped" for "lower prison sentences" and they'd tear your arm off (and then go to jail for the same time as a man).
Well that's a pretty bad comparison as well though, because very few people in general go to jail for very serious crimes. I was merely offering descriptive facts that benefit women as a group within a patriarchal system.
>>883532
I'm not sure what point you're making though. Not many people are in denial of the marginal benefits afforded but ultimately they're born of the same issues.
A large reason that women get reduced sentences is motherhood and assumptions of their being a primary caregiver. A patriarchal assumption which is damaging to their lives in many other ways. Getting rid of the assumption would erase the marginal benefit but clear out a load of shit as well. No contest.
>>883540
>Not many people are in denial of the marginal benefits afforded
Yes, they are, because as I said, feminists critique patriarchy as a system that can only be beneficial to men. Which isn't true.
>A large reason that women get reduced sentences is motherhood and assumptions of their being a primary caregiver.
And? Women shouldn't be held to a different standard because of biology; this is literally the argument that early feminists like Simone De Beauvoir used to justify her opposition to patriarchy.
>>883546
A tiny handful of marginal benefits to women just aren't worth mentioning really are they? It doesn't damage the wider critique because there isn't a little footnote saying "p.s. women get more funding for domestic crisis centres so I guess ignore the rest".
Yes I agree, this assumption about motherhood and caregivers is a bad one. I'm just pointing at the source of the disparity.
>>883559
>A tiny handful of marginal benefits to women just aren't worth mentioning really are they?
But they aren't marginal if you consider all the factors. I just mentioned a few in my original post.
Women on average live longer, they take more money out of the welfare system(partly because men refuse to go to the doctor when something is wrong with them, and women go there abundantly), women are also, at least in my country, handed a bunch of money just for breeding children.
There are several other things that cannot simply be called "marginal benefits".
>>883588
Nah they're all pretty marginal. Living longer is nice I suppose although I rather suspect that gap is shortening and doesn't hold globally, longevity has always been associated with a lack of manual labour and Western deindustrialisation will put paid to much of that. I wonder if women in China live longer?
I'm not sure being in receipt of child benefit (because they're stuck at home looking after the fucking things) makes up for restriction of reproductive rights, sexual assault, domestic violence, lack of adequate political representation, discriminatory workplace environments and recruitment procedures, blah blah blah blah you don't need a lecture you obviously know a bit of what you're on about, the scales are tipped so far the other way.
Patriarchy is superior, get on your knees cunts.
>>882947
>the patriarchy is the cause of all progress in history
the answer is yes on both, can we /thread this now
>>883618
>makes up for restriction of reproductive rights, sexual assault, domestic violence, lack of adequate political representation, discriminatory workplace environments and recruitment procedures
But none of these things happen in to any serious extent in any Western country. Whenever feminists are challenged on any of these topics, they almost always point to shit like being cat-called on a street in New York, or being called a cunt on television as if this is comparable to being the victim of FGM in a septic environment in a shed in Somalia.
>>883647
Sure, you won't catch me saying Western feminists don't occasionally lack a sense of perspective. Who cares? Don't think it affects any of the stuff we're talking about that feminism isn't entirely free from the blinkered.
There's still plenty of conservative countries in the west. Abortion is illegal in Ireland, and rape and sexual assault is everywhere, as is lack of political representation in most cases. The problems of patriarchy are less in the West but far from erased.
>>883675
>Abortion is illegal in Ireland
Which it shouldn't be, I agree.
>and rape and sexual assault is everywhere
Both things are illegal. What more do you suppose can be done?
>as is lack of political representation in most cases.
Not really. Several European countries have had and have female heads of state, including my own, and women, at least in my country, are far more politically motivated than men.
>The problems of patriarchy are less in the West but far from erased.
Sure, but what I'm trying to argue, is that feminists and women in general want to keep the things that are positive for them in a patriarchal system(being a permanent victim for example, and not having responsibility for your actions), and remove the negative parts(male authority).
Which they cannot. You cannot have your cake and eat it too.
>>883698
I'm pretty sure feminists don't want to be a "permanent victim". I feel like your perception of feminist goals has become warped somehow. My advice: try to avoid building a picture of feminism mediated through 4chan.
You'll notice I said "representation" re politics as well, and that means representation in terms of a broadly even split of MPs (or whatever the local alternative is). The odd female head of state is almost irrelevant, and political motivation is extremely nebulous.
Rape is illegal, and yet is still happens disproportionately to women. Because patriarchy. What is to be done is an entirely different matter, I hope you're not asking me for my 3 step plan to deconstructing a global system of power.
>>883722
>and that means representation in terms of a broadly even split of MPs
How do you suppose this would happen, given the fact that women are individuals who choose to do what they want with their life? Are you going to force them to be politicians?
>Rape is illegal, and yet is still happens disproportionately to women. Because patriarchy.
And? Assault and robbery is vastly more likely to happen to me as a man, but nobody is standing in front of the UN with a mandate to stop assault on men, which is why I mention the permanent victim narrative at all.
Violence apparently only matters when it happens to women, because you are still a proponent of the patriarchal notion that women are permanent victims, whereas you think men probably deserve it if they are harmed, this all part and parcel of the patriarchal system; that men are disposable, and women are valuable.
>>882947
Patriarchy is not the cause of all problems in history nor would anyone say that, Patriarchy and it's social implications ARE a major problem in the world and continue strongly till this day (in far less blatant ways than in the past) even in western countries that serve too hold down both men and women.
What many people fail too understand is that Patriarchy is largely a system that holds up a certain type of man, a masculine, strong man with "leadership" qualities (notice I automatically consider leadership a male quality? That is social patriarchy) but what if you are a man and you don't fall into this role? well fuck you, you're weak scum and you fail too be a real man. Are you a lanky skinny piece of shit and you feel like crap when standing next too muscular men? Why? you may be richer or smarter, but you know society considers them more "masculine" and "better" than you because strength and masculinity is a more rewarded trait in society. Been called a bitch/coward for going for negotiation rather than violence? Oh look, it's almost like a certain ultra-masculine trait has higher social capital rather than a feminine one. Welcome too the world of "Toxic masculinity" and "Toxic Patriarchy" where patriarchy actually works against all sorts of males because we don't fall within some sort of "perfect male" trope.
Now think you have it bad because you are a nerdy guy who society looks down upon because you're not a "real man" think about women who don't even really have a chance, women rarely make it into leadership positions despite being overqualified for work, a woman with a college degree only earns around 8% more than a minority male with little too no education on average over her career.
But Patriarchy can also work in womens favour like MRA's love too point out, being treated as a child all the time has it's benefits. Also women have far more choice in clothes like pants because at least woman can "Dress up" too the superior sex.
>>883817
Being a weak male in a patriarchal system, is way worse than being a woman, as any suicide statistic will bear out perfectly.
Also, I take issue with you thinking that so-called "weak" men are being put down by other men; this isn't what happens in practice. In practice weak men are simply ignored by stronger more masculine men, but it's usually the women who call you a bitch and a coward, and try to emasculate you further, because as we all know, women are not attracted to "weak" men.
>>883817
But this doesn't mean Patriarchy doesn't exist nor that women have it better (like MRA's claim) women are still discriminated against massively through statistics, women make up a tiny portion of leadership roles in society despite being the majority in western countries and female traits are seen generally as weak and submissive.
This isn't only a problem for women, it's a problem for men as well who don't fulfill masculine traits. It is quite easy too see the "Nerd/Jock" divide is largely one of patrarchy as well.
>>883828
>Also, I take issue with you thinking that so-called "weak" men are being put down by other men; this isn't what happens in practice
Have you been in the workforce? Bullying of non masculine men, especially in the blue collar trades, is endemic.
>>883833
>Have you been in the workforce? Bullying of non masculine men, especially in the blue collar trades, is endemic.
No. No it's not. Based on my own experience working in a steel factory for 4 years, that's just not true at all.
Before we discuss this:
What is patriarchy? Is there any evidence that it exists?
Supposing it exists. What does it causes? Is there evidence that it causes it?
>>883817
>ARE a major problem in the world and continue strongly till this day (in far less blatant ways than in the past) even in western countries that serve too hold down both men and women.
>Gender inequality is a problem
t. 21st century westerner with more sophistication than civilization before him
>>883833
>women are still discriminated against massively through statistics
What ? How do you use statistics to discriminate against women ? If you mean that there are statistics showing that women are being discriminated against then I'm not sure what you are talking about. You do realize that myths like the idea that wage gap comes from discrimination has been thoroughly debunked for years right ?
Men are competative, which is the cause of most progress and most "evil". Women are communal, which is the cause of most "good" and most stagnation and failure.
The OP is probably true in that patriarchy is the cause of history.
>>883487
>the privilege of not dying while working in a coal mine
kek
>wombyn of old couldn't even work, evil patriarchy !!! kill all men
And then you facepalm internally knowing that women not-working is a typical middle class thing, where they've tried to do what upper classes did(not working, profit from accumulated capital) in their silly cargo cult way(so now my wife/daughter won't work because I want to pretend to be very rich!).
Working class women always worked, there was never single SECOND in an entire history of humanity when it was otherwise.
>>882947
The 18-25 range of males is responsible for the majority of wars and crimes in the world so there is some merit to this statement
>>885454
T. Joan Scott
>>885460
Who?
>>885464
I'm joking. She's a very famous feminist historian who levelled similar criticisms against E. P. Thompson
>>885456
The sheer level of non-understanding in this statement makes me very nervous that you get to interact with people on a daily basis.
>>885471
The sheer level of pointless, condescending aggression in this post makes me nervous that you do.
Why dont you try to educate him rather than... whatever you thought that post was supposed to accomplish, besides being an outlet for your concerningly out of balence mental state.
>>882947
Invent car = invent car problems
