Thoughts on patriarchy

We know how the average feminist/leftist approaches this topic; "Men are exploiting women and blah blah blah, we're fighting for our rights". Well done for noticing, and thank you for using fancy words to make yourself sound as smart as possible along the way. Now, one would be a fool to say that sexism is not a significant problem in society, and not far behind to deny the fact that it does indeed affect BOTH sexes. Maybe one is oppressed or discriminated "more" than the other, but since when did oppression and exploitation ever matter according to which one is more obvious or spoken about? Why should we focus on the rights of the group who are oppressed "more" or in "worse" ways? As socialists, do we not look to focus on everyone's needs equally? Should the malnourished man living on two slices of bread a day be put to the side for the time being because his fellow citizen only a few blocks away is living on one slice of bread a day? When the issue of discrimination against men is raised, a common response from the self-labelled feminist is to say that all discrimination or exploitation based on sex is a result of, yes, you guessed it, THE PATRIARCHY! But thinking about this, it's a totally irrelevant point from where I stand, and so I shall attempt to explain this idea.

Could we not agree that humans are mostly a result of their environment? And for those who disagree, we could also approach this on the premise that discrimination, be it sexual, racial, or anything else, is largely a part of who we are as a species. While some may indeed choose to argue that sexism is rooted in so-called "human nature", sexism as it is presented to us in its modern day form is merely a pocket watch passed down from one generation to another. People grow as plants, absorbing what they are given from an early stage in life. The men of one generation reinforce sexist ideas in the minds of the youth in the same way that the women of that same generation reinforce sexist ideas in the minds of that very same youth (youth not necessarily referring to the respective sexes of the older generation/s) Why is it then, as "advocates of equality between the sexes", feminists see both sexism against women as well as sexism against men a result of patriarchy? It may have in fact been the very truth at the origins of sexism as we see it today, but how can we, in the 21st century, blame sexism on patriarchy? Are both sexes not responsible for carrying these ideas onto their children? "Dearest daughter of mine, you are doomed to a life in the kitchen whilst your husband works! There is no alternative." Clearly we can all understand that this is in many cases an outdated example of sexism, but it explains my point well. These ideas were put in the woman's mind how? Through their mothers just as much as their fathers in many cases. These words were put into their mothers' mouths by whom? Their mothers! Trace back to the root of this indoctrination, however, and we see that it is the man who is responsible for this. But how did the father of that very same family learn such ignorance? Through his father. Who was it that his father learned this from? His father, and so forth. Hopefully my point is starting to make itself clearer, but if not, I shall explain in simpler terms.

If a man cannot take glory for what his forefathers have provided him with, why should he be allowed to take the blame for the bad things they have given him? The sexism a man expresses is simply horse manure he was taught to believe from the day he was born, and now passes onto the youth of today. The sexism a woman expresses is also a result of what she was taught from birth, and also passes onto the younger generations. If such attitudes and values are not purely, or even largely, a conclusion of one's own individual thoughts and ideas, and these thoughts and ideas are passed on by both sexes, why is it seen purely as a result of male dominance? As said earlier, a more obvious or more popular issue does not simply qualify as a more important issue. If sexism is passed on by both sexes as a learned attitude, why are men purely to blame? The use of the word 'n*gger' is passed on by blacks as well as whites, so should the use of the word be labelled "white dominance" purely because of how it began? Should we claim that racism towards whites by blacks is a result of "white dominance" and therefore ignore it as an equally important problem that needs to be addressed? How can we hope to destroy sexism by focusing purely on patriarchy as opposed to sexism in general (as it stands for now, and has for such a long period of time)?

"Feminism is the idea that we can make both sexes equal by focusing solely on the issues of one of them." To add onto this, I shall say that feminism is, more worryingly, the idea that we can make both sexes equal by blaming the issues of both of them on one of them, when both parties are no more or no less guilty in actual fact.

--------------------------------

I'm not looking to say how amazingly smart I am and how stupid every feminist is, but more to express a point that digs in my mind about feminism. To focus solely on the issues of one of them is bad enough, but to justify this by claiming that sexism towards both sexes is a result of men oppressing women (good ol' patriarchy) is even more ridiculous. Please, disagree with me as much as you like, as I have yet to understand feminism and how it actually helps both sexes by blaming one half of the problem. And just as a side note, I avoided posting this on any other leftist forums because most seem to live in a world of fairies and rainbows where sexism against men and racism against whites apparently doesn't exist or isn't as important as their mirrored situations.

Given your definition of feminism I completely agree with what you said. Your definition though is a caricature of feminism in the same way that what people think of "new atheism" as in regards to atheism in general. My understanding of feminism is simply the elimination of sexual discrimination in society, which has historically been more heavily placed upon women in the sense of political and economic activity and what not. I think that all reasonable feminists would consider themselves egalitarians, which is what you are advocating it seems. I am an egalitarian, I am also a feminist and I do not see any conflict in that.

Red Aegis wrote:Given your definition of feminism I completely agree with what you said. Your definition though is a caricature of feminism in the same way that what people think of "new atheism" as in regards to atheism in general. My understanding of feminism is simply the elimination of sexual discrimination in society, which has historically been more heavily placed upon women in the sense of political and economic activity and what not. I think that all reasonable feminists would consider themselves egalitarians, which is what you are advocating it seems. I am an egalitarian, I am also a feminist and I do not see any conflict in that.

That's the problem though, as I quoted from The Amazing Atheist. Men suffer discrimination as well, so why are feminists focused purely on their own interests? TJ sums up the idea pretty well:

He is also singling out a smaller group of feminists. Like myself, I think that most women would consider themselves egalitarians in addition to being feminists. Matriarchy is just as wrong philosophically as patriarchy.

Is it only me, or is TheAmazingAtheist simply an annoying liberal twit?

Rev Scare wrote:Is it only me, or is TheAmazingAtheist simply an annoying liberal twit?

I certainly have always thought so.

Red Aegis wrote:He is also singling out a smaller group of feminists. Like myself, I think that most women would consider themselves egalitarians in addition to being feminists. Matriarchy is just as wrong philosophically as patriarchy.

But this is exactly what I and many others fail to understand. He's addressing the fundamental idea that all feminists agree on, which is the idea that we can somehow eliminate sexism by focusing only on women's issues and blaming them on men and/patriarchy (wherever you draw the line between the two). And I should hope that most women would also consider themselves masculinists if they say they are feminists, but I've never heard of a self-labelled "masculinist-feminist", probably because the term is so ridiculous in relation to its meaning. It depends what sort of feminist we're talking about; if they believe men do not suffer sexual discrimination and only women are worth focusing on, the case would be to provide them with examples of sexism towards men. However, if they accept that men are also victims of sexism in various ways, I don't see why labelling oneself as "an advocate of women's rights" without also calling yourself "an advocate of men's rights" is accepted as making any sense. I won't fight for black rights while other races are also suffering racial discrimination, I'll fight for racial equality instead. I think that feminism was a great thing back when women couldn't even own property or vote (not that voting changes anything), for the same reason that the homeless man cannot take another homeless man off the streets, but that is not the case anymore.

Rev Scare wrote:Is it only me, or is TheAmazingAtheist simply an annoying liberal twit?

A.k.a. Banana boy....

This conflict could become escalatory in nature, as some radical feminists are calling for the abortion of males, and forced eugenics to eliminate certain masculine qualities. Technology is in a position to exacerbate this situation, as well as politics (population control, economic tendencies, i.e., women comprise a majority of the workforce now).

http://establishmentexposed.blogspot.com/2011/12/radical-feminists-man-hating-lesbians.html?m=1

http://www.avoiceformen.com/feminism/radfem-hub-the-underbelly-of-a-hate-movement/

This image in the second link you posted is absolutely shocking:



It just terrifies me to know that people like this exist and are "caring" for innocent children. I'm honestly convinced that these radical feminists are emotionally scarred from some sort of terrible childhood experience.

That is some of the most disgusting extremist shit I have ever seen.

I hope the pictures are not too graphic. I seen that snapshots were posted, but didn't see the pictures within -too small/distorted on my phone. I was paying attention to the according excerpts.