Oh Noez! What about Teh Menz? -Patriarchy isn't a dude's friend EITHER!

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

I second Alty regarding wife number two; gender roles are set by men (and the "woman stays at home" is relatively recent and, random historical fact of the day, courtesy of the Dutch).

The patriarchy is what stereotypes men as, basically, cavemen incapable of controlling themselves, who think exclusively with their dicks (which, coincidely links into rape culture, since women/females are supposed to know this and take care if ourselves accordingly).
Feminism holds you to be capable of being more than that.

Seriously?  In an example that gives two women, one who bucked the gender stereotype and was successful, the other who chose to embrace the stereotype, you're still going to absolve Wife#2 of any blame for the harm she was doing her family, and continue to blame the patriarchy?  OMG, what does a woman have to do to get credit for her own fuckups?

Dude, chill. No one is attacking you. *Her* expectation that househusband get a job and shit is the result of patriarchal expectations and gender roles. Is it her fault for not putting the well-being of the first househusband above her expectation? Yes. She should see that it works better for them like this. Was it her fault for preventing her own husband from nuturing his kids? Yes. And it's grossly unfair for her to do so. But, again, those expectations of hers resulted from traditional, patriarchal gender roles.

But she should be able to rise above the expectations of that patriarchy.  At some point, she has to stop sitting on her ass waiting to be given responsbility over her own life, and take it, instead. 
I'm a strong woman who thinks for herself.  The patriarchy might be to blame for how hard I have to struggle to be me, but it's not to blame if I give up.  And it's not to blame if I choose to embrace it instead.
And if one woman can rise above the patriarchy, it's not the patriarchy's fault if other women believe the lies they're told.

Wow.

This really makes me just go... wow.



Good job rising above patriarchy... it must be nice to not have to live in a society where you have to deal with the bullshit other women have to deal with. Can I move to your planet?

[The Good Reverend Roger]

Prediction:  Having disagreed with CW, Nigel will now be told that her posting style and content is not up to standard, and that she's doin' it wrong.

Prediction:  There will be gore splattered all over the inside surface of my plasma screen.

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

I think that any system which damages or oppresses a part of the population damages and oppresses the whole population on some level.

If a  man benefits unquestioningly from the oppression, he is not fully human and is damaged in the sense that he's not fully bipedal.

Oh, I agree completely.  But stacked up against the effects on women, as LMNO points out, that's pretty small beans, when looked at from a "getting through the pay period" perspective.

If a man fights against the system, he is expending energy combating oppression that should, ideally, not exist in the first place, and working constantly to divest himself of the programming to unquestioningly accept his privilege.

I'm trying to think of a more worthwhile way to spend my time and energy, than on fighting adversity or inequality.  I am reasonably certain that, given a perfect world, I'd turn into a couch potato and just wheeze my way to the grave.

It doesn't "burden" men in the same way that it burdens women, but it's also not mentally, spiritually, or intellectually healthy for men. Man thrive economically and politically under patriarchal systems, but I am not sure they are thriving as human beings.

I think we're in agreement.

All of these are reasons why I think that conversations about feminism and patriarchy are incomplete without discussion of the ways in which patriarchy fails men. We're all in this together.

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

Yes, BUT

The positive things you are describing are progress made due to feminism the breaking down of patriarchy.

Or pioneering.  My dad was doin' it before it was "acceptable".  Of course, he's also the kind of person that doesn't give a shit about society's opinion, and doesn't bother responding to any sort of criticism concerning things he doesn't view as important...Like who does the cooking.

Which again, I realize, is feminism of a sort.

Yes, it is. Some people were doing it before it had a name and became a movement.

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

<cough>

Having just spent nine years working from home, I am going to goddamn unequivocally say that "working from home" DOES NOT equal "being a homemaker". If my primary job had been taking care of the house and children, and my husband was paying the bills, then sure, yes.

It does with Chris.  The man is a ball of energy.  Manages a 6 year old son, one-year-old twin girls, his job, AND the house. 

It's unfair, really.  I could use some of that energy.

Youth is wasted on the young.

I'm still gonna disagree. He's not going to receive social disapproval for being a homemaker if he's also holding a job. Instead he gets accolades for being "superdad".

A homemaker or househusband/housewife is someone who is financially supported by their spouse while their job is taking care of the house and kids. Not somebody who "does it all".

[The Good Reverend Roger]

All of these are reasons why I think that conversations about feminism and patriarchy are incomplete without discussion of the ways in which patriarchy fails men. We're all in this together.

I'm gonna ask at this point if it's the patriarchy doing most of the failing, or just society in general.  While it IS true that worker bee Joe Doakes is conditioned by the system every bit as much as his wife is, the male apes at the top of the heap seem to do very nicely indeed.

In fact, I'm going to put forth the possibility that the "patriarchy" has been effectively dead for 20 years, and that we are conditioned to fight gender vs gender in the same way that we fight left vs right and race vs race, to the benefit of the top tier monkeys.

Not saying that's a fact, but it did occur to me.

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

All of these are reasons why I think that conversations about feminism and patriarchy are incomplete without discussion of the ways in which patriarchy fails men. We're all in this together.

I'm gonna ask at this point if it's the patriarchy doing most of the failing, or just society in general.  While it IS true that worker bee Joe Doakes is conditioned by the system every bit as much as his wife is, the male apes at the top of the heap seem to do very nicely indeed.

In fact, I'm going to put forth the possibility that the "patriarchy" has been effectively dead for 20 years, and that we are conditioned to fight gender vs gender in the same way that we fight left vs right and race vs race, to the benefit of the top tier monkeys.

Not saying that's a fact, but it did occur to me.

"Patriarchy" is part of "society in general". I think it would be profoundly premature to argue that patriarchy is dead.

[The Good Reverend Roger]

<cough>

Having just spent nine years working from home, I am going to goddamn unequivocally say that "working from home" DOES NOT equal "being a homemaker". If my primary job had been taking care of the house and children, and my husband was paying the bills, then sure, yes.

It does with Chris.  The man is a ball of energy.  Manages a 6 year old son, one-year-old twin girls, his job, AND the house. 

It's unfair, really.  I could use some of that energy.

Youth is wasted on the young.

I'm still gonna disagree. He's not going to receive social disapproval for being a homemaker if he's also holding a job. Instead he gets accolades for being "superdad".

A homemaker or househusband/housewife is someone who is financially supported by their spouse while their job is taking care of the house and kids. Not somebody who "does it all".

Okay, I can see that.  Sort of the way widowers are/were viewed when they continued to raise kids and continue working.

[The Good Reverend Roger]

All of these are reasons why I think that conversations about feminism and patriarchy are incomplete without discussion of the ways in which patriarchy fails men. We're all in this together.

I'm gonna ask at this point if it's the patriarchy doing most of the failing, or just society in general.  While it IS true that worker bee Joe Doakes is conditioned by the system every bit as much as his wife is, the male apes at the top of the heap seem to do very nicely indeed.

In fact, I'm going to put forth the possibility that the "patriarchy" has been effectively dead for 20 years, and that we are conditioned to fight gender vs gender in the same way that we fight left vs right and race vs race, to the benefit of the top tier monkeys.

Not saying that's a fact, but it did occur to me.

"Patriarchy" is part of "society in general". I think it would be profoundly premature to argue that patriarchy is dead.

That's a point, but one thing worth mentioning is that a patriarchy doesn't mean "male dominated", then.  It means "some males dominate, the rest fill their appointed roles."

[Salty]

I think it's also important to note (though most here understand this, I know) that feminism is not the opposite of patriarchy. That'd be matriarchy. Feminism rises out of patriarchy. If it were the other way around I can't but think that men would form a movement of their own that arises out of matriarchy. And people would still get confused.

A lot people see feminism as a road to matriarchy, if they look that far. That's why it gets such hostility. The idea that it spreads equality gets lost in the lines somewhere.

[CarvedWood]

Prediction:  Having disagreed with CW, Nigel will now be told that her posting style and content is not up to standard, and that she's doin' it wrong.

Prediction:  There will be gore splattered all over the inside surface of my plasma screen.

Don't be silly.  Nigel is actually saying things worth thinking about, so why would I say that to her?  Your prediction is wrong.

[The Good Reverend Roger]

I think it's also important to note (though most here understand this, I know) that feminism is not the opposite of patriarchy. That'd be matriarchy.

I would argue that feminism is the opposite of patriarchy AND matriarchy.

One emphasizes the individual and his/her choices, the other two emphasize the imposition of roles by the system.

[Salty]

I think it's also important to note (though most here understand this, I know) that feminism is not the opposite of patriarchy. That'd be matriarchy.

I would argue that feminism is the opposite of patriarchy AND matriarchy.

One emphasizes the individual and his/her choices, the other two emphasize the imposition of roles by the system.

I was gonna add, stupid phone, that if the latter two are opposite ends of a scale then feminism is an effort to find something like the middle because of the recognition that both are harmful to society as a whole.

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

<cough>

Having just spent nine years working from home, I am going to goddamn unequivocally say that "working from home" DOES NOT equal "being a homemaker". If my primary job had been taking care of the house and children, and my husband was paying the bills, then sure, yes.

It does with Chris.  The man is a ball of energy.  Manages a 6 year old son, one-year-old twin girls, his job, AND the house. 

It's unfair, really.  I could use some of that energy.

Youth is wasted on the young.

I'm still gonna disagree. He's not going to receive social disapproval for being a homemaker if he's also holding a job. Instead he gets accolades for being "superdad".

A homemaker or househusband/housewife is someone who is financially supported by their spouse while their job is taking care of the house and kids. Not somebody who "does it all".

Okay, I can see that.  Sort of the way widowers are/were viewed when they continued to raise kids and continue working.

Yeah, like that. Or like I, as a single mom, am viewed because I am the sole supporter/maintenance man for the household.

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

I think it's also important to note (though most here understand this, I know) that feminism is not the opposite of patriarchy. That'd be matriarchy.

I would argue that feminism is the opposite of patriarchy AND matriarchy.

One emphasizes the individual and his/her choices, the other two emphasize the imposition of roles by the system.

I was gonna add, stupid phone, that if the latter two are opposite ends of a scale then feminism is an effort to find something like the middle because of the recognition that both are harmful to society as a whole.

Yeah, it's an attempt to create an egalitarian society.