- Joined
- Jul 20, 2017
Maybe they figured out that covering their dangerhair and neck tattoos with a hijab means they're more likely to be taken seriously at job interviews.
Why does the patriarchy exist?
- Thread starter Genderfluid Pirate
- Start date
- Joined
- Mar 3, 2019
Simply put, it's statistically proven there are more men in certain fields, and more women in others.
Men are usually stronger than women, because of a little something called biology. That's why there'll be more men in the army, in the police, or in anything requiring difficult manual labor (i.e. construction workers). Men also tend to be more logical-minded due to how their brains function, although that is not an indicator that they're more intelligent than women - simply, they'll tend to go in fields that are logic-driven, such as mathematics, STEM, etc. Women's minds are more developed in the fields of empathy and emotional intelligence, hence why they tend to go in fields that involve contact with people (medical care, psychology, etc.) or expression (art, literature, linguistics, etc.). Now, fields of study aren't necesarily "gendered", and they shouldn't be either. We had great women scientists just like we had great men artists. Where the problem starts is when a certain field is restricted to a certain sex.
When it comes to sex restrictions, history is a lot more complex than what we are led to believe. A lot of people wring their hands about how Queen consorts' only job was to give heirs, and while it's not necesarily something I'd personally envy for myself, keep in mind they lived in a completely different dynamic than our post-Enlightenment world and their position was vital. Yes, women in the high classes didn't work and some of them truly suffered from being inactive, but it was less about oppression and more about their privilege - they were rich, and therefore, they didn't need to work like a maid. Women in lower classes were, until the 20th century, absolutely allowed to work, and it also wasn't rare to see in cities women who led their own businesses (you can think of the women of the Halles in Paris, who had the historical right to be seated in front of the Queen of France). And there's also the important factor that pre-industrialism, domestic duties were a lot more vital and pressing, and also required a lot more time. Why were women responsible of domestic duties? Again, because said duties often involved kids, and women were in charge of the kids because again, biology, and empathy being a stronger suit (although, again, it wasn't the case with every woman ever).
The reason why women were however barred from certain jobs or certain basic rights (such as the right to vote) had to do notably with the morality of the time. There weren't a lot of women painters because it was considered indecent for a woman to join in classes where the students would study nudes. There's also no denying that for a very long time, women were thought of as less intelligent than men - something that was proved false as early as the 16th century, when Sir Thomas More himself noticed that his daughter Margaret was far more intelligent than her brother, which led him to give his three daughters the same education he gave his son.
Did the patriarchy exist? Sure, but it's something that would come naturally in difficult times, where men who were physically stronger would be driven to protect the women and the children. Except those survival instincts didn't just go away afterwards, until a certain balance came back (one instance I can think of is the classic Middle Ages, which spanned from Eleanor of Aquitaine's time to the beginning of the Hundred Years War, where society was fairly egalitarian). It's not something that's necesarily conscious on men's part, since in most cases, they genuinely believe they're doing the right thing. As for the "nuclear" family, where the father is the head and the mother the heart... it was common simply because it was a system that worked for a lot of people, but I'll be the first person to acknowledge it won't necesarily work for everyone, simply because we all come with different personalities. Nowadays, however, where women have access to everything... I wouldn't say the patriarchy is still a thing (sexism is another thing entirely to me and all I'm going to say about that is that assholes will always exist, so grow a tougher skin already), and people who spend the time complaining about it should fill the gap they think exists instead of sitting on their asses and waiting for it to happen.
Men are usually stronger than women, because of a little something called biology. That's why there'll be more men in the army, in the police, or in anything requiring difficult manual labor (i.e. construction workers). Men also tend to be more logical-minded due to how their brains function, although that is not an indicator that they're more intelligent than women - simply, they'll tend to go in fields that are logic-driven, such as mathematics, STEM, etc. Women's minds are more developed in the fields of empathy and emotional intelligence, hence why they tend to go in fields that involve contact with people (medical care, psychology, etc.) or expression (art, literature, linguistics, etc.). Now, fields of study aren't necesarily "gendered", and they shouldn't be either. We had great women scientists just like we had great men artists. Where the problem starts is when a certain field is restricted to a certain sex.
When it comes to sex restrictions, history is a lot more complex than what we are led to believe. A lot of people wring their hands about how Queen consorts' only job was to give heirs, and while it's not necesarily something I'd personally envy for myself, keep in mind they lived in a completely different dynamic than our post-Enlightenment world and their position was vital. Yes, women in the high classes didn't work and some of them truly suffered from being inactive, but it was less about oppression and more about their privilege - they were rich, and therefore, they didn't need to work like a maid. Women in lower classes were, until the 20th century, absolutely allowed to work, and it also wasn't rare to see in cities women who led their own businesses (you can think of the women of the Halles in Paris, who had the historical right to be seated in front of the Queen of France). And there's also the important factor that pre-industrialism, domestic duties were a lot more vital and pressing, and also required a lot more time. Why were women responsible of domestic duties? Again, because said duties often involved kids, and women were in charge of the kids because again, biology, and empathy being a stronger suit (although, again, it wasn't the case with every woman ever).
The reason why women were however barred from certain jobs or certain basic rights (such as the right to vote) had to do notably with the morality of the time. There weren't a lot of women painters because it was considered indecent for a woman to join in classes where the students would study nudes. There's also no denying that for a very long time, women were thought of as less intelligent than men - something that was proved false as early as the 16th century, when Sir Thomas More himself noticed that his daughter Margaret was far more intelligent than her brother, which led him to give his three daughters the same education he gave his son.
Did the patriarchy exist? Sure, but it's something that would come naturally in difficult times, where men who were physically stronger would be driven to protect the women and the children. Except those survival instincts didn't just go away afterwards, until a certain balance came back (one instance I can think of is the classic Middle Ages, which spanned from Eleanor of Aquitaine's time to the beginning of the Hundred Years War, where society was fairly egalitarian). It's not something that's necesarily conscious on men's part, since in most cases, they genuinely believe they're doing the right thing. As for the "nuclear" family, where the father is the head and the mother the heart... it was common simply because it was a system that worked for a lot of people, but I'll be the first person to acknowledge it won't necesarily work for everyone, simply because we all come with different personalities. Nowadays, however, where women have access to everything... I wouldn't say the patriarchy is still a thing (sexism is another thing entirely to me and all I'm going to say about that is that assholes will always exist, so grow a tougher skin already), and people who spend the time complaining about it should fill the gap they think exists instead of sitting on their asses and waiting for it to happen.
Genderfluid Pirate
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Mar 30, 2020
What with the stereotype that women are manipulative and immature then? From my experience men are by far more empathetic than women.
- Joined
- Mar 3, 2019
I don't see it in the sense that they're manipulative and immature. I see it as them being more people-oriented and therefore analyzing the world in that lense. It's just one perspective, and it's not better or less than another.
Define empathetic.
Genderfluid Pirate
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Mar 30, 2020
Affective empathy, as opposed to cognitive empathy. Unless you meant the latter and not the former.
- Joined
- Mar 3, 2019
I meant cognitive empathy, yes - and that's believed to be the reason why many women choose a career path that requires caregiving, among other things (to give a real life example, my cousin (male) and another guy are the two only guys in a class of 19 in their year for a psychology undergrad).
Genderfluid Pirate
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Mar 30, 2020
Alright. I am not entirely convinced then that's a product of biology anymore that it is a remnant of the "patriarchy" (as in, if women had to be dependent on men and made to take care of people, they had to be highly sensitive to the emotions of those around them. If they couldn't get things for themselves, they had to be attuned to those who could, such as men).
- Joined
- Mar 3, 2019
Again, that system is not necesarily going to work for everyone, but it obviously does for some people. Where the problem lies is when that specific model is imposed on everyone. I guess my overall point is that the patriarchy used to be a very real thing, it was however less actual ill intent and more several biological/historical/moral factors weighing in and seeing it as just evil men oppressing women is really oversimplifying it. Treating the patriarchy as this still-ongoing boogeyman and not simply acknowledging that assholes will be assholes is pretty much the crux of the problem today, however.
- Joined
- Jul 18, 2016
Apparently because most women can actaully do more with Allah on their side and in fact numerous of times, islam worshippers can change their said ruling depending on which mosque. I know a lot of feminists/lesbians who claim to be muslim but I already know that they're not real muslims just like Christians are not real christians. They're simply trying to fulfill some western quota as they finally learned that hey maybe I shouldn't throw a fag off a rooftop when they assimilated to America.
Genderfluid Pirate
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Mar 30, 2020
- Joined
- Jan 5, 2020
The patriarchy doesn't exist. It is simply a construct built up by women to explain away our failures to fully assimilate into working society. (But, to be fair, no one asked my husband if he planned on having a family soon when he applied for his current job.)
- Joined
- Mar 21, 2019
"Patriarchy" is an attribute applicable to a variety of contemporary and historical institutions defined by preferences for excluding women from power or vesting authority primarily in a patriarchal figure.
"The Patriarchy" is a modern day conspiracy theory of an organized and subversive/clandestine social effort to keep women under men. "The Patriarchy" whenever its referenced at all exists as a nameless faceless organization of undefined constitution and reach that is all existent and responsible for every downfall or shortcoming experienced by a woman.
"The Patriarchy" is a modern day conspiracy theory of an organized and subversive/clandestine social effort to keep women under men. "The Patriarchy" whenever its referenced at all exists as a nameless faceless organization of undefined constitution and reach that is all existent and responsible for every downfall or shortcoming experienced by a woman.
- Joined
- Sep 7, 2019
The Patriarchy is basically the bicycle + stick in spokes meme writ large and is a direct result of most women's complete inability to take responsibility for fucking ANYTHING
Oddly I can't remember the last time I heard any woman say the word "responsibility"
- Joined
- Jul 23, 2019
The patriarchy exists because when a woman is knocked out of commission due to pregnancy she needs big strong men to help take care of her. The modern abortion industry came about due to capitalism needing workers to work as much as possible.
Feminism lies again about capitalism.
Feminism lies again about capitalism.
- Joined
- Mar 14, 2014
- Joined
- Feb 10, 2019
The notion that women intentionally train their sons to oppress women, and their daughters to accept being oppressed, has always been, and always will be, exceptional. Alex Jones and his conspiracy theories are more believable than that.