4 ms·

Just to clarify this position, do you believe that insecurity about physical appearance is the result of patriarchy and not a hundred thousand year genetic pred

Just to clarify this position, do you believe that insecurity about physical appearance is the result of patriarchy and not a hundred thousand year genetic predisposition to find desirable mating partners for survival? I'm insecure about my looks because I'm happier when I see attractive people and I know I can't give other people that happiness.

pjc50 7y ago
> result of patriarchy and not a hundred thousand year genetic predisposition to find desirable mating partners for survival? What makes you think these two can be cleanly separated?
- imustbeevil 7y ago
  I believe that's my position. If the social structure of humanity is based on genetic necessity, I wouldn't think to frame it as any one group of individuals making decisions that harm others.
  - pjc50 7y ago
    I think people in these discussions over-assume that patriarchal is consciously intentional. So we're confusedly agreeing? > The social structure that results is emergent, not designed. ... yes, and the undesigned structure that has emerged we are labelling "patriarchy". > the social structure of humanity is based on genetic necessity ... requires a lot more unpacking. Is this asserting that culture doesn't exist and material conditions are irrelevant? All behaviour is only genetic? I don't think that's what you're claiming, but I can't parse it otherwise.
    - imustbeevil 7y ago
      > So we're confusedly agreeing? Definitely. It feels like there's a difference in our interpretation of the context of the word "patriarchy". I have most often heard it used as a condemnation of a group of individuals who are also disadvantaged by the social structure. Similar to the way "idealism" is commonly used to disparage positive future thinking. I would sure rather a society where no one has to feel like they're in a fight for survival where the only way to win is someone else losing.
      - htfu 7y ago
        The same sorta pattern repeats a lot. Even a lot of quite toxic MRA stuff is basically dudes redescovering core feminist concepts but then not seeing the forest for the trees. Patriarchy hurts men too!

pjc50 7y ago

> result of patriarchy and not a hundred thousand year genetic predisposition to find desirable mating partners for survival? What makes you think these two can be cleanly separated?

imustbeevil 7y ago
I believe that's my position. If the social structure of humanity is based on genetic necessity, I wouldn't think to frame it as any one group of individuals making decisions that harm others.
- pjc50 7y ago
  I think people in these discussions over-assume that patriarchal is consciously intentional. So we're confusedly agreeing? > The social structure that results is emergent, not designed. ... yes, and the undesigned structure that has emerged we are labelling "patriarchy". > the social structure of humanity is based on genetic necessity ... requires a lot more unpacking. Is this asserting that culture doesn't exist and material conditions are irrelevant? All behaviour is only genetic? I don't think that's what you're claiming, but I can't parse it otherwise.
  - imustbeevil 7y ago
    > So we're confusedly agreeing? Definitely. It feels like there's a difference in our interpretation of the context of the word "patriarchy". I have most often heard it used as a condemnation of a group of individuals who are also disadvantaged by the social structure. Similar to the way "idealism" is commonly used to disparage positive future thinking. I would sure rather a society where no one has to feel like they're in a fight for survival where the only way to win is someone else losing.
    - htfu 7y ago
      The same sorta pattern repeats a lot. Even a lot of quite toxic MRA stuff is basically dudes redescovering core feminist concepts but then not seeing the forest for the trees. Patriarchy hurts men too!