8 ms·

I love that way of summing it up: "oh it's totally possible for you to walk home at night. You might just endure much more pain and suffering for it." Another

by andkon 11y ago

I love that way of summing it up: "oh it's totally possible for you to walk home at night. You might just endure much more pain and suffering for it." Another thing worth pointing out: women are socialized to believe that conflict is unladylike. For them to avoid positions that they have an expectation of generating conflict is to fit with what the patriarchy teaches.

exstudent2 11y ago
Traditional gender roles aren't synonymous with "the patriarchy". In the west women are allowed to vote, hold property... There is no such thing as the patriarchy here. People have free will and many will exercise it to choose to act in a traditional manner. There is no mysterious male cabal forcing that to happen. On a personal note, I would find it incredibly boring if men and women acted exactly the same. I recognize others may have different opinions, but I don't think anyone can say either side is "right" or "wrong".
- danharaj 11y ago
  No one thinks the patriarchy is a merely legal system enforced by a cabal of men. Patriarchy refers to interwoven social structures that promulgate certain ideologies, doctrines, and social customs. The nuclear family is part of patriarchy, for example. Also, actually, there is still a cabal of men in America forcing women to behave in certain ways: The systematic, coordinated campaign against women's reproductive rights.
  - exstudent2 11y ago
    I'm not sure who you mean by "no one" but I certainly don't agree with anything you've stated. It's a pretty extreme view I think few would share.
    - icebraining 11y ago
      What's extreme about it? It's just a different definition.
      - exstudent2 11y ago
        I don't think most people would view traditional society as being "the patriarchy". I've only ever heard that term even used in this context by fairly hardcore feminists. I also think this statement is very extreme: > Also, actually, there is still a cabal of men in America forcing women to behave in certain ways: The systematic, coordinated campaign against women's reproductive rights. I don't think that's a mainstream view.
        comrh 11y ago
        The view that the GOP engages in "the systematic, coordinated campaign against women's reproductive rights" is a pretty mainstream view in the Democratic party, which is pretty mainstream.
        exstudent2 11y ago
        Is it? I'm neither democrat nor republican but that seems like a non-nuanced way to look at things. I doubt the majority of democrats hold such a simplistic view. Regardless the GOP is not a "cabal of men in America forcing women to behave in certain ways". Even if they believed that (I don't think all republicans do) they in no way have the authority to "force" women to do anything. Abortion is legal in the US. Also GOP != patriarchy.
        comrh 11y ago
        They want to make abortion illegal, a major point of most GOP platforms. So I guess they do believe they have the authority to have a certain amount of control of women's bodies. Certainly it is also a simple view to assume just because something is legal, there is no aspect of control. Funding, access, privacy, there are tons things to consider outside of just if it is legal. I never said GOP = patriarchy. Just that there is a "systematic, coordinated campaign against women's reproductive rights" and that certainly isn't a fringe statement. This campaign is indicative of one of the OP's definitions: "interwoven social structures that promulgate certain ideologies, doctrines, and social customs."
  - Vaskivo 11y ago
    Besides the obvious abortion debate, what is still missing concerning american women's reproductive rights?
    - comrh 11y ago
      Denying birth control based on your employer's religious beliefs, defunding women's health initiatives, ect.
      - hiram112 11y ago
        You meant subsidizing women's health issues, I think.
    - waqf 11y ago
      [A]part from the sanitation, the medicine, education, wine, public order, irrigation, roads, a fresh water system, and public health, what have the Romans ever done for us?
  - Moshe_Silnorin 11y ago
    >The nuclear family is part of patriarchy, for example. You are presuming that traditional behaviour is pathological. Why? Why exactly is the nuclear family pathological? Two people in a partnership raising the children they love together using division of labour? This seems pretty rational. My mother did this. Was she a victim for doing so? It is good to offer people the freedom to choose, but when they choose something other than what you would do not blame it on brainwashing.
    - xixi77 11y ago
      There is nothing wrong or pathological about people who want nuclear family having nuclear family; the question is, should people who aren't necessarily as interested in it be socially pressured to having one as well?
      - fleitz 11y ago
        Who cares, seriously if you can't stand social pressure you're just not cut out to be a leader. The entire point of leaders is to do things that are unpopular that benefit the group. You don't need leaders to do popular things, they just happen. Fundamentally if you want to make omelettes you're going to have to break some eggs, if your friends say breaking eggs is bad you have two choices, tell them off, or don't break eggs. Those that are willing to break eggs are allowed to be chefs.
    - pyre 11y ago
      Yes, people should not be disparaged for their choices, and in general we want to offer the ability to choose. The real problem is are people growing up in a society where they are being subconsciously funnelled towards a particular choice (to the point where they don't see other options as valid choices due to subconscious biases). You just have to look at all of the crazy responses to Target (a US retailer) removing the gender-specific labelling of toys (from "Girl Toys" and "Boy Toys" to just "Toys") to see how as a society we are not at a point where "we" aren't trying to impose a particular ideal (e.g. "Barbies are girl toys") on children as they grow up. > Two people in a partnership raising the children they love together using division of labour? This is more generic than the "nuclear family" traditionally is viewed. If it was just two people dividing up labour, then the "nuclear family" could equally have the father as the homemaker and the mother as the breadwinner. When people typically refer to the "nuclear family" they are referring to some idealized Leave It To Beaver type setup.
  - tomp 11y ago
    > The nuclear family is part of patriarchy, for example. So in your view, basically patriarchy == culture? Why use a new word then? > Also, actually, there is still a cabal of men in America forcing women to behave in certain ways: The systematic, coordinated campaign against women's reproductive rights. You could equivalently claim that there exists a cabal of women that is forcing unborn babies to die. Populist claims are populist.
  - jazzyk 11y ago
    There is also a cabal of (conservative) women campaigning against women's reproductive rights. This example does not prove your point.
    - Lawtonfogle 11y ago
      Last I checked, the majority of both genders support banning some forms of abortion and legalizing some forms of abortion, generally with later abortions being banned more often and earlier abortions and those involving the classical exceptions being legalized more.
- chongli 11y ago
  Of course there is no "mysterious male cabal", that's a very gross (and unfortunately common) misinterpretation of patriarchy. Patriarchy is the cultural structure which preserves and reinforces traditional gender roles. That's not patriarchy being synonymous with them, just as Buddhism isn't synonymous with the cultural practice of meditation.
  - exstudent2 11y ago
    Patriarchy is a gendered term that implies men are in control. Traditional gender roles are reinforced by men AND women. If traditional gender roles included things like women can't vote or own property, then I could see making a case for calling that patriarchy. In the west there is no such thing though.
    - chongli 11y ago
      Patriarchy is a gendered term that implies men are in control It implies that, given its etymology, but that is not how it is defined in the literature. Tons of idiomatic words and phrases operate that way in our culture. If I were to tell you "break a leg" as you were heading out onto a theatre stage, would you imply maliciousness or benign well-wishing on my part?
      - exstudent2 11y ago
        I'm going by the definition in the dictionary. From http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/patriarchy http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/patriarchy Full Definition of PATRIARCHY social organization marked by the supremacy of the father in the clan or family, the legal dependence of wives and children, and the reckoning of descent and inheritance in the male line; broadly : control by men of a disproportionately large share of power
        RodericDay 11y ago
        Don't families in Western societies outside of, like, Quebec, "reckon descent and inheritance in the male line", via the vast majority of children adopting the surname of the father and not the mother?
Moshe_Silnorin 11y ago
We know very little about these things. You are begging the question. Assuming every difference in outcome is the result of discrimination or perverse socialization until proven otherwise is not a rational mindset, though it seems to be the prevailing one.
- gress 11y ago
  Actually we know enough to know that assuming that discrimination and perverse socialization is at least part of the cause is totally rational. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Implicit_Association_Test https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Implicit_Association_Test
jazzyk 11y ago
>women are socialized to believe that conflict is unladylike Correction: _physical_ conflict is unladylike. My female friends often complain about conflicts with fellow _female_ workers. There are a lot of conflicts among high-school girls, etc. They are just not physical conflicts.
randyrand 11y ago
Maybe because conflict is unladylike? Aggression is tied to testosterone. Maybe that's not the best example to illustrate this but, a large portion of social norms are not arbitrary. Many reflect biology.

by andkon 11y ago

exstudent2 11y ago

Traditional gender roles aren't synonymous with "the patriarchy". In the west women are allowed to vote, hold property... There is no such thing as the patriarchy here. People have free will and many will exercise it to choose to act in a traditional manner. There is no mysterious male cabal forcing that to happen. On a personal note, I would find it incredibly boring if men and women acted exactly the same. I recognize others may have different opinions, but I don't think anyone can say either side is "right" or "wrong".

danharaj 11y ago
No one thinks the patriarchy is a merely legal system enforced by a cabal of men. Patriarchy refers to interwoven social structures that promulgate certain ideologies, doctrines, and social customs. The nuclear family is part of patriarchy, for example. Also, actually, there is still a cabal of men in America forcing women to behave in certain ways: The systematic, coordinated campaign against women's reproductive rights.
- exstudent2 11y ago
  I'm not sure who you mean by "no one" but I certainly don't agree with anything you've stated. It's a pretty extreme view I think few would share.
  - icebraining 11y ago
    What's extreme about it? It's just a different definition.
    - exstudent2 11y ago
      I don't think most people would view traditional society as being "the patriarchy". I've only ever heard that term even used in this context by fairly hardcore feminists. I also think this statement is very extreme: > Also, actually, there is still a cabal of men in America forcing women to behave in certain ways: The systematic, coordinated campaign against women's reproductive rights. I don't think that's a mainstream view.
      - comrh 11y ago
        The view that the GOP engages in "the systematic, coordinated campaign against women's reproductive rights" is a pretty mainstream view in the Democratic party, which is pretty mainstream.
        exstudent2 11y ago
        Is it? I'm neither democrat nor republican but that seems like a non-nuanced way to look at things. I doubt the majority of democrats hold such a simplistic view. Regardless the GOP is not a "cabal of men in America forcing women to behave in certain ways". Even if they believed that (I don't think all republicans do) they in no way have the authority to "force" women to do anything. Abortion is legal in the US. Also GOP != patriarchy.
        comrh 11y ago
        They want to make abortion illegal, a major point of most GOP platforms. So I guess they do believe they have the authority to have a certain amount of control of women's bodies. Certainly it is also a simple view to assume just because something is legal, there is no aspect of control. Funding, access, privacy, there are tons things to consider outside of just if it is legal. I never said GOP = patriarchy. Just that there is a "systematic, coordinated campaign against women's reproductive rights" and that certainly isn't a fringe statement. This campaign is indicative of one of the OP's definitions: "interwoven social structures that promulgate certain ideologies, doctrines, and social customs."
- Vaskivo 11y ago
  Besides the obvious abortion debate, what is still missing concerning american women's reproductive rights?
  - comrh 11y ago
    Denying birth control based on your employer's religious beliefs, defunding women's health initiatives, ect.
    - hiram112 11y ago
      You meant subsidizing women's health issues, I think.
  - waqf 11y ago
    [A]part from the sanitation, the medicine, education, wine, public order, irrigation, roads, a fresh water system, and public health, what have the Romans ever done for us?
- Moshe_Silnorin 11y ago
  >The nuclear family is part of patriarchy, for example. You are presuming that traditional behaviour is pathological. Why? Why exactly is the nuclear family pathological? Two people in a partnership raising the children they love together using division of labour? This seems pretty rational. My mother did this. Was she a victim for doing so? It is good to offer people the freedom to choose, but when they choose something other than what you would do not blame it on brainwashing.
  - xixi77 11y ago
    There is nothing wrong or pathological about people who want nuclear family having nuclear family; the question is, should people who aren't necessarily as interested in it be socially pressured to having one as well?
    - fleitz 11y ago
      Who cares, seriously if you can't stand social pressure you're just not cut out to be a leader. The entire point of leaders is to do things that are unpopular that benefit the group. You don't need leaders to do popular things, they just happen. Fundamentally if you want to make omelettes you're going to have to break some eggs, if your friends say breaking eggs is bad you have two choices, tell them off, or don't break eggs. Those that are willing to break eggs are allowed to be chefs.
  - pyre 11y ago
    Yes, people should not be disparaged for their choices, and in general we want to offer the ability to choose. The real problem is are people growing up in a society where they are being subconsciously funnelled towards a particular choice (to the point where they don't see other options as valid choices due to subconscious biases). You just have to look at all of the crazy responses to Target (a US retailer) removing the gender-specific labelling of toys (from "Girl Toys" and "Boy Toys" to just "Toys") to see how as a society we are not at a point where "we" aren't trying to impose a particular ideal (e.g. "Barbies are girl toys") on children as they grow up. > Two people in a partnership raising the children they love together using division of labour? This is more generic than the "nuclear family" traditionally is viewed. If it was just two people dividing up labour, then the "nuclear family" could equally have the father as the homemaker and the mother as the breadwinner. When people typically refer to the "nuclear family" they are referring to some idealized Leave It To Beaver type setup.
- tomp 11y ago
  > The nuclear family is part of patriarchy, for example. So in your view, basically patriarchy == culture? Why use a new word then? > Also, actually, there is still a cabal of men in America forcing women to behave in certain ways: The systematic, coordinated campaign against women's reproductive rights. You could equivalently claim that there exists a cabal of women that is forcing unborn babies to die. Populist claims are populist.
- jazzyk 11y ago
  There is also a cabal of (conservative) women campaigning against women's reproductive rights. This example does not prove your point.
  - Lawtonfogle 11y ago
    Last I checked, the majority of both genders support banning some forms of abortion and legalizing some forms of abortion, generally with later abortions being banned more often and earlier abortions and those involving the classical exceptions being legalized more.
chongli 11y ago
Of course there is no "mysterious male cabal", that's a very gross (and unfortunately common) misinterpretation of patriarchy. Patriarchy is the cultural structure which preserves and reinforces traditional gender roles. That's not patriarchy being synonymous with them, just as Buddhism isn't synonymous with the cultural practice of meditation.
- exstudent2 11y ago
  Patriarchy is a gendered term that implies men are in control. Traditional gender roles are reinforced by men AND women. If traditional gender roles included things like women can't vote or own property, then I could see making a case for calling that patriarchy. In the west there is no such thing though.
  - chongli 11y ago
    Patriarchy is a gendered term that implies men are in control It implies that, given its etymology, but that is not how it is defined in the literature. Tons of idiomatic words and phrases operate that way in our culture. If I were to tell you "break a leg" as you were heading out onto a theatre stage, would you imply maliciousness or benign well-wishing on my part?
    - exstudent2 11y ago
      I'm going by the definition in the dictionary. From http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/patriarchy http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/patriarchy Full Definition of PATRIARCHY social organization marked by the supremacy of the father in the clan or family, the legal dependence of wives and children, and the reckoning of descent and inheritance in the male line; broadly : control by men of a disproportionately large share of power
      - RodericDay 11y ago
        Don't families in Western societies outside of, like, Quebec, "reckon descent and inheritance in the male line", via the vast majority of children adopting the surname of the father and not the mother?

Moshe_Silnorin 11y ago

We know very little about these things. You are begging the question. Assuming every difference in outcome is the result of discrimination or perverse socialization until proven otherwise is not a rational mindset, though it seems to be the prevailing one.

gress 11y ago
Actually we know enough to know that assuming that discrimination and perverse socialization is at least part of the cause is totally rational. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Implicit_Association_Test https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Implicit_Association_Test

jazzyk 11y ago

>women are socialized to believe that conflict is unladylike Correction: _physical_ conflict is unladylike. My female friends often complain about conflicts with fellow _female_ workers. There are a lot of conflicts among high-school girls, etc. They are just not physical conflicts.

randyrand 11y ago

Maybe because conflict is unladylike? Aggression is tied to testosterone. Maybe that's not the best example to illustrate this but, a large portion of social norms are not arbitrary. Many reflect biology.