Author Topic: Why do so few men "follow/fanboy/support" women, when the reverse is not true?  (Read 17990 times)

steveo

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1744
Literally no one on this thread has ever believed this was the case.

That is awesome. I assume therefore that you can accept that maybe your idea of the patriarchy isn't the reason behind any of your complaints about society.

holy non sequitur Batman


It'd be good if you could detail how you are discriminated against within society and we can maybe provide you with some help in relation to how to live your life.

You might think that you can't be a doctor and we could try and convince you that you could assuming you want to work that hard and have the intelligence to get into that field.

If there are issues where it's obvious that there is discrimination against you based on being female we may try and change that situation.

I'd love to help you out with any issue that you specifically are suffering from if I view it as a reasonable issue. Let's be honest but people sometimes blame everyone but themselves for how well they have lived their life.

Maybe just maybe the patriarchy isn't such a big issue in your life. Maybe just maybe you make it into a big issue when it doesn't have to be.

I'm reporting you for violating rule #1.

That is hilarious and it shows where you are coming from. Any alternative viewpoint to your own is not acceptable. I was trying to help out.

Cressida

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2508
  • Location: Sunset Zone 5
  • gender is a hierarchy
That is hilarious and it shows where you are coming from. Any alternative viewpoint to your own is not acceptable. I was trying to help out.

You were not trying to help and that was clear from your rhetoric.

simonsez

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 715
  • Age: 32
At what point are these not an issue or at least aren't a dumpster fire at the forefront of societal inequity?  In a nutshell, I have a finite amount of empathy and I want to dole it out on high priority issues and not waste it on things largely solved or things that have had the rules changed for the good and many aren't even aware of how unfair it used to be (due to the fairness being taken for granted today with respect to that issue).  Birth control is a big one, I'll grant you that.  I definitely think it is worthwhile for me to continue to empathize with women over birth control and vote on policies that give women control over their bodies.  No qualms with that one at all, let's keep fighting the good fight.  But some of these...

In my circle I have several women married to men that did not change their last name at all, a few hyphenated couples, many couples who have hyphenated children, a man who changed his last name to his wife's.  Little thought to my knowledge has been given to these "revolutionary" actions.  Like, I realize the overall norm may still be to follow the patrilineal naming system but it's definitely becoming more and more common, even outside of professionals who are/were more likely to keep/hyphenate, to do whatever you want with a name.  With my wife, we discussed this prior to marriage and she said she liked the ring of my last name more than hers so she wanted to change her name to match mine.  Did the patriarchy influence her into this way of thinking and distaste for her own last name?  /shrug  She doesn't really care.  I was open to changing my last name if she really wanted me to but I was more apathetic than anything, meaning default option is to keep as is (for both of us) was just fine.  The last name issue just didn't move the needle that much.  Would I have been absurd for taking my wife's last name?  Cool, slap whatever label you want on that potential action.  I would love to hear about a couple that broke up because a man demanded his future spouse take his last name and that request was refused.  THAT I would call absurd.

The fact that some churches are sexist when it comes to the institution of marriage is something that will probably never be eradicated - even though more and more wedding ceremonies have nothing to do with religion or even take place in a church.  Does it have to be 100% for this subcomponent of the patriarchy to be considered under control?  I have never heard it stated that way as like a piece of property for only one person but it sounds plausible it happens somewhere.  Usually I hear it asked to both people getting married and the terminology is not as property but more along the lines of supporting the newly established household.  IMO, it's just a way to get parents/guardians/other important members involved in the ceremony.  If a couple doesn't want sexist language in the ceremony, they should talk it over with their officiant about what they want.

I thank this thread for educating me about the older banking laws that existed that I had no idea about.  But again, at what point can you move on?  My wife wasn't aware either and there was never an innate desire on my end to wish there were some rules in place to give me more leverage over my wife or a prospective daughter for financial accounts.  So, these older laws did exist but they didn't really leave much in the way of evidence to impact our little bubble.  Now, surely remnants of the older rules might still affect others in certain ways but it continues to be diminished.

I addressed the concern you are raising in my comment #448. Anyone could have said "haven't we come far enough" at any moment between 5000 B.C. and today. And they would have been wrong then, and they are wrong now.
When did I say enough progress has been made about patriarchy?  All I'm saying is there seems to hand-wringing for sub-categories of a larger topic where that amount of attention might be better focused.  To use your example in comment #448, women voting - women can vote in the US.  Does this mean that patriarchy doesn't exist in the US or that somehow an issue becoming legally equal washes away the systemic inequality with regard to that specific issue overnight?  Of course not, but nothing wrong celebrating/accepting that freedom, normalizing it, and moving on to problems that still exist.

I replied to FrugalToque because several of the specific issues outlined sounds like an impossible standard must be met in order to equate to progress/success.  It seems a little pessimistic, that's all.

former player

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3877
  • Location: Avalon
At what point are these not an issue or at least aren't a dumpster fire at the forefront of societal inequity?  In a nutshell, I have a finite amount of empathy and I want to dole it out on high priority issues and not waste it on things largely solved or things that have had the rules changed for the good and many aren't even aware of how unfair it used to be (due to the fairness being taken for granted today with respect to that issue).  Birth control is a big one, I'll grant you that.  I definitely think it is worthwhile for me to continue to empathize with women over birth control and vote on policies that give women control over their bodies.  No qualms with that one at all, let's keep fighting the good fight.  But some of these...

In my circle I have several women married to men that did not change their last name at all, a few hyphenated couples, many couples who have hyphenated children, a man who changed his last name to his wife's.  Little thought to my knowledge has been given to these "revolutionary" actions.  Like, I realize the overall norm may still be to follow the patrilineal naming system but it's definitely becoming more and more common, even outside of professionals who are/were more likely to keep/hyphenate, to do whatever you want with a name.  With my wife, we discussed this prior to marriage and she said she liked the ring of my last name more than hers so she wanted to change her name to match mine.  Did the patriarchy influence her into this way of thinking and distaste for her own last name?  /shrug  She doesn't really care.  I was open to changing my last name if she really wanted me to but I was more apathetic than anything, meaning default option is to keep as is (for both of us) was just fine.  The last name issue just didn't move the needle that much.  Would I have been absurd for taking my wife's last name?  Cool, slap whatever label you want on that potential action.  I would love to hear about a couple that broke up because a man demanded his future spouse take his last name and that request was refused.  THAT I would call absurd.

The fact that some churches are sexist when it comes to the institution of marriage is something that will probably never be eradicated - even though more and more wedding ceremonies have nothing to do with religion or even take place in a church.  Does it have to be 100% for this subcomponent of the patriarchy to be considered under control?  I have never heard it stated that way as like a piece of property for only one person but it sounds plausible it happens somewhere.  Usually I hear it asked to both people getting married and the terminology is not as property but more along the lines of supporting the newly established household.  IMO, it's just a way to get parents/guardians/other important members involved in the ceremony.  If a couple doesn't want sexist language in the ceremony, they should talk it over with their officiant about what they want.

I thank this thread for educating me about the older banking laws that existed that I had no idea about.  But again, at what point can you move on?  My wife wasn't aware either and there was never an innate desire on my end to wish there were some rules in place to give me more leverage over my wife or a prospective daughter for financial accounts.  So, these older laws did exist but they didn't really leave much in the way of evidence to impact our little bubble.  Now, surely remnants of the older rules might still affect others in certain ways but it continues to be diminished.

I addressed the concern you are raising in my comment #448. Anyone could have said "haven't we come far enough" at any moment between 5000 B.C. and today. And they would have been wrong then, and they are wrong now.
When did I say enough progress has been made about patriarchy?  All I'm saying is there seems to hand-wringing for sub-categories of a larger topic where that amount of attention might be better focused.  To use your example in comment #448, women voting - women can vote in the US.  Does this mean that patriarchy doesn't exist in the US or that somehow an issue becoming legally equal washes away the systemic inequality with regard to that specific issue overnight?  Of course not, but nothing wrong celebrating/accepting that freedom, normalizing it, and moving on to problems that still exist.

I replied to FrugalToque because several of the specific issues outlined sounds like an impossible standard must be met in order to equate to progress/success.  It seems a little pessimistic, that's all.


Carrying on working for success is pessimistic?  Removing sexism from society is an impossible standard?  Gee, thanks, I suppose we women should be grateful to our male overlords for what they've already let us have, right?  We're just a little bit equal and that's fine by you.

Cressida

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2508
  • Location: Sunset Zone 5
  • gender is a hierarchy
When did I say enough progress has been made about patriarchy?

I bolded those when I responded to you.

former player

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3877
  • Location: Avalon

[absurd straw man reply by steveo redacted]
Women are allowed to choose to stay at home if they can and they want too. They can choose not to go in certain careers. You enable free choice. The post above regarding women taking their husbands names is a valid point. People get to choose how they live their lives.

You can't just state because the outcome is the one that we judge as not being ideal then you get to tell everyone why it has occurred and what needs to be done to fix it especially in such a simplistic way was stating the patriarchy caused it. There could be 1000's of different reasons and gender may be a trivial little issue.

I basically completely agree with your point. There is no patriarchal conglomerate controlling the world and women get to choose how they live their lives. The outcome is the outcome. Accept it and move on.

If you want to argue about specific issues that are creating an unequal society because of men dominating women I will support you 100%. I assume that same-sex marriage is not part of the patriarchy and I just recently voted and supported the rights for people to have same-sex marriages. My wife says our marriage has always consisted of the sex being pretty much the same.

You talk about women having choices.   The point which is being made to you is that women are making those choices within the context of the patriarchy.  Everything is done within the context of the patriarchy.  A woman deciding to stay home with the kids is making that choice within a society which is likely to fire her for being pregnant, pay her less for having kids, give her fewer promotion opportunities, ask her to take on more of the household and childcare responsibilities and say that what she is doing is "the natural order of things".  Her other choice is to spend 20 years fighting all those inequalities while working full time and still taking on most of the household and childcare responsibilities.

Cressida

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2508
  • Location: Sunset Zone 5
  • gender is a hierarchy

[absurd straw man reply by steveo redacted]
Women are allowed to choose to stay at home if they can and they want too. They can choose not to go in certain careers. You enable free choice. The post above regarding women taking their husbands names is a valid point. People get to choose how they live their lives.

You can't just state because the outcome is the one that we judge as not being ideal then you get to tell everyone why it has occurred and what needs to be done to fix it especially in such a simplistic way was stating the patriarchy caused it. There could be 1000's of different reasons and gender may be a trivial little issue.

I basically completely agree with your point. There is no patriarchal conglomerate controlling the world and women get to choose how they live their lives. The outcome is the outcome. Accept it and move on.

If you want to argue about specific issues that are creating an unequal society because of men dominating women I will support you 100%. I assume that same-sex marriage is not part of the patriarchy and I just recently voted and supported the rights for people to have same-sex marriages. My wife says our marriage has always consisted of the sex being pretty much the same.

You talk about women having choices.   The point which is being made to you is that women are making those choices within the context of the patriarchy.  Everything is done within the context of the patriarchy.  A woman deciding to stay home with the kids is making that choice within a society which is likely to fire her for being pregnant, pay her less for having kids, give her fewer promotion opportunities, ask her to take on more of the household and childcare responsibilities and say that what she is doing is "the natural order of things".  Her other choice is to spend 20 years fighting all those inequalities while working full time and still taking on most of the household and childcare responsibilities.

this

steveo

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1744
That is hilarious and it shows where you are coming from. Any alternative viewpoint to your own is not acceptable. I was trying to help out.

You were not trying to help and that was clear from your rhetoric.

I was trying to help. You just can't stand anyone who questions your ideology and you refuse to engage in rational discussion that has any chance of showing flaws in your all encompassing world view.

Emotionally healthy people are willing to listen to reason and can form reasonable rational statements when discussing a topic.
« Last Edit: January 11, 2019, 02:39:03 AM by steveo »

steveo

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1744

[absurd straw man reply by steveo redacted]
Women are allowed to choose to stay at home if they can and they want too. They can choose not to go in certain careers. You enable free choice. The post above regarding women taking their husbands names is a valid point. People get to choose how they live their lives.

You can't just state because the outcome is the one that we judge as not being ideal then you get to tell everyone why it has occurred and what needs to be done to fix it especially in such a simplistic way was stating the patriarchy caused it. There could be 1000's of different reasons and gender may be a trivial little issue.

I basically completely agree with your point. There is no patriarchal conglomerate controlling the world and women get to choose how they live their lives. The outcome is the outcome. Accept it and move on.

If you want to argue about specific issues that are creating an unequal society because of men dominating women I will support you 100%. I assume that same-sex marriage is not part of the patriarchy and I just recently voted and supported the rights for people to have same-sex marriages. My wife says our marriage has always consisted of the sex being pretty much the same.

You talk about women having choices.   The point which is being made to you is that women are making those choices within the context of the patriarchy.  Everything is done within the context of the patriarchy.  A woman deciding to stay home with the kids is making that choice within a society which is likely to fire her for being pregnant, pay her less for having kids, give her fewer promotion opportunities, ask her to take on more of the household and childcare responsibilities and say that what she is doing is "the natural order of things".  Her other choice is to spend 20 years fighting all those inequalities while working full time and still taking on most of the household and childcare responsibilities.

I hope you realise how impossible and unreasonable your world philosophy is. No one can make any choices beacuse of the patriarchy. Everything that women do is to do with the patriarchy. There is no ability to critique anything that you state because of the patriarchy.

That isn't a reasonable philosophy and it doesn't make sense in the context of women being successful and happy with the lives that they have been given.

You need to do a lot better than that. Your theory isn't falsifiable and it needs to be.

You may be offended by this but I'm actually helping you.
« Last Edit: January 11, 2019, 02:39:35 AM by steveo »

former player

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3877
  • Location: Avalon

[absurd straw man reply by steveo redacted]
Women are allowed to choose to stay at home if they can and they want too. They can choose not to go in certain careers. You enable free choice. The post above regarding women taking their husbands names is a valid point. People get to choose how they live their lives.

You can't just state because the outcome is the one that we judge as not being ideal then you get to tell everyone why it has occurred and what needs to be done to fix it especially in such a simplistic way was stating the patriarchy caused it. There could be 1000's of different reasons and gender may be a trivial little issue.

I basically completely agree with your point. There is no patriarchal conglomerate controlling the world and women get to choose how they live their lives. The outcome is the outcome. Accept it and move on.

If you want to argue about specific issues that are creating an unequal society because of men dominating women I will support you 100%. I assume that same-sex marriage is not part of the patriarchy and I just recently voted and supported the rights for people to have same-sex marriages. My wife says our marriage has always consisted of the sex being pretty much the same.

You talk about women having choices.   The point which is being made to you is that women are making those choices within the context of the patriarchy.  Everything is done within the context of the patriarchy.  A woman deciding to stay home with the kids is making that choice within a society which is likely to fire her for being pregnant, pay her less for having kids, give her fewer promotion opportunities, ask her to take on more of the household and childcare responsibilities and say that what she is doing is "the natural order of things".  Her other choice is to spend 20 years fighting all those inequalities while working full time and still taking on most of the household and childcare responsibilities.

I hope you realise how impossible and unreasonable your world philosophy is. No one can make any choices beacuse of the patriarchy. Everything that women do is to do with the patriarchy. There is no ability to critique anything that you state because of the patriarchy.

That isn't a reasonable philosophy and it doesn't make sense in the context of women being successful and happy with the lives that they have been given.

You need to do a lot better than that. Your theory isn't falsifiable and it needs to be.

You may be offended by this but I'm actually helping you.

Given?  Given by whom?  No really, given by whom?

And of course people can make choices, I'm just pointing out that they make those choices within a context.  And of course those choices can be critiqued, but again within the bigger context.

Whatever you think, you are not helping.  Perhaps instead of firing back a response you could do some research and some thinking and work out why that is and why you are persisting with it.

steveo

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1744

[absurd straw man reply by steveo redacted]
Women are allowed to choose to stay at home if they can and they want too. They can choose not to go in certain careers. You enable free choice. The post above regarding women taking their husbands names is a valid point. People get to choose how they live their lives.

You can't just state because the outcome is the one that we judge as not being ideal then you get to tell everyone why it has occurred and what needs to be done to fix it especially in such a simplistic way was stating the patriarchy caused it. There could be 1000's of different reasons and gender may be a trivial little issue.

I basically completely agree with your point. There is no patriarchal conglomerate controlling the world and women get to choose how they live their lives. The outcome is the outcome. Accept it and move on.

If you want to argue about specific issues that are creating an unequal society because of men dominating women I will support you 100%. I assume that same-sex marriage is not part of the patriarchy and I just recently voted and supported the rights for people to have same-sex marriages. My wife says our marriage has always consisted of the sex being pretty much the same.

You talk about women having choices.   The point which is being made to you is that women are making those choices within the context of the patriarchy.  Everything is done within the context of the patriarchy.  A woman deciding to stay home with the kids is making that choice within a society which is likely to fire her for being pregnant, pay her less for having kids, give her fewer promotion opportunities, ask her to take on more of the household and childcare responsibilities and say that what she is doing is "the natural order of things".  Her other choice is to spend 20 years fighting all those inequalities while working full time and still taking on most of the household and childcare responsibilities.

I hope you realise how impossible and unreasonable your world philosophy is. No one can make any choices beacuse of the patriarchy. Everything that women do is to do with the patriarchy. There is no ability to critique anything that you state because of the patriarchy.

That isn't a reasonable philosophy and it doesn't make sense in the context of women being successful and happy with the lives that they have been given.

You need to do a lot better than that. Your theory isn't falsifiable and it needs to be.

You may be offended by this but I'm actually helping you.

Given?  Given by whom?  No really, given by whom?

And of course people can make choices, I'm just pointing out that they make those choices within a context.  And of course those choices can be critiqued, but again within the bigger context.

Whatever you think, you are not helping.  Perhaps instead of firing back a response you could do some research and some thinking and work out why that is and why you are persisting with it.

People have been given life by some quirk of nature. That is how we have all been given life. It's amazing that we are here discussing such an esoteric topic.

People make choices and there is a context within which they make choices but it's quite simply impossible to discuss this with you if you believe that all the context is the patriarchy. That is just a circular nonsensical argument.

Try and detail your issues a little more. Can you provide clear cut examples of the patriarchy in action. Are there any examples of people not abiding by the patriarchy. How can you explain Muslim women who choose to cover their face and wear a hijab ? How can you explain women like Amanda Nunes or women who choose to be doctors and lawyers. Why do women choose to take their husbands surname ? Why aren't they allowed to make that choice ? Who are you to state that women and men have to act in ways that you define as being correct. Do you really expect complete equality ? Should women be made to commit suicide more to make that an even statistic ? Why would more men than women commit suicide if the patriarchy was the all encompassing dominant social system ?

Just try and explain the clear cut holes in this patriarchy or are there other factors at play. If there are other factors at play (which there are) than doesn't that invalidate your whole argument because we will never have equality ?

As I've already said multiple times I am more than willing to fight for women's rights when it's clear to me that women are being discriminated against but the only argument I've heard regarding this on this thread is the right to have an abortion. I live in Australia and women are entitled to have abortions. It's not a big issue like it appears to be in the US. I think the US is a bit of an outlier on this issue compared to most other first world countries. Fair enough - women in the US should be able to have abortions.
« Last Edit: January 11, 2019, 05:29:19 AM by steveo »

former player

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3877
  • Location: Avalon
Why are you asking me to do your research for you?  Do you think I am under some obligation to work as your unpaid research assistant?

All of the questions you ask have answers which are published and readily available to you with a little bit of effort on your part.  Your statements that you are willing to fight for women's rights ring hollow when you can't even put the effort in to educate yourself about the issues.

mjr

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 245
  • Age: 53
  • Location: Brisbane, Qld
  • Retired at 52

You talk about women having choices.   The point which is being made to you is that women are making those choices within the context of the patriarchy.  Everything is done within the context of the patriarchy.  A woman deciding to stay home with the kids is making that choice within a society which is likely to fire her for being pregnant, pay her less for having kids, give her fewer promotion opportunities, ask her to take on more of the household and childcare responsibilities and say that what she is doing is "the natural order of things".  Her other choice is to spend 20 years fighting all those inequalities while working full time and still taking on most of the household and childcare responsibilities.

This seems very victim-esque.  Woe is me, I have to live and make choices in a patriarchy.

I really can't imagine what kind of rigid, totalitarian structure of society would make such a person satisfied.  Equality of outcome across every characteristic you can think of  ?  Gender, age, sexual persuasion. race, height, BMI, hair colour ?  Where do you stop ?  It's just not possible.

Statements like this belong with people suffering genuine discrimination in cultures in Asia and Africa.  Western society has been adapting since birth control became available (and yes, you need to see a doctor for your continued health, not because of the patriarchy) and will no doubt continue to evolve and adapt.  Talk about first-world problems.

FrugalToque

  • Global Moderator
  • Pencil Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 502
  • Location: Canada
People make choices and there is a context within which they make choices but it's quite simply impossible to discuss this with you if you believe that all the context is the patriarchy. That is just a circular nonsensical argument.
You've already been warned.  That's enough of gaslighting "you're being irrational" nonsense.  I have given you a well annotated list of exactly how the sexism/the patriarchy affects women.  Knock it off.

Quote
Try and detail your issues a little more. Can you provide clear cut examples of the patriarchy in action.
I already did, and you ignored the well annotated, mathematical statistical facts and chased down another thread.

Quote
Are there any examples of people not abiding by the patriarchy. How can you explain Muslim women who choose to cover their face and wear a hijab ? How can you explain women like Amanda Nunes or women who choose to be doctors and lawyers. Why do women choose to take their husbands surname ? Why aren't they allowed to make that choice ? Who are you to state that women and men have to act in ways that you define as being correct. Do you really expect complete equality ? Should women be made to commit suicide more to make that an even statistic ? Why would more men than women commit suicide if the patriarchy was the all encompassing dominant social system ?
The fact that some women defy the traditional order is beside the point.  On average, women get screwed by this system.  So what if some women choose this way or that.  Choosing to go against the general sexism present in our society is harder and it bends women towards lower pay, more traditional roles, taking their husbands' names and wearing hijabs.

Quote
As I've already said multiple times I am more than willing to fight for women's rights when it's clear to me that women are being discriminated against but the only argument I've heard regarding this on this thread is the right to have an abortion.
This is bullshit.  I gave you a long list of well supported examples other than abortion.
You are dodging the question and trolling.
You will stop.

Toque.

GuitarStv

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 12348
  • Age: 37
  • Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Every group of people in existence has come together to form social constructs.  They're one of the most natural things I can imagine.  Given their prevalence through history, I'd say that patriarchal societies are also quite natural.  I think we can do better than base impulses.

That's why it's important to recognize and minimize the negative effects of patriarchy.

Ok, let's say patriarchy is natural. In that case, I believe the burden of proof falls on those indicating it is wrong to show that it is immoral or unjust (or at least the current remnants of it). On top of that, they need to come up with a better solution (plenty of input on that here in this thread, though I and others disagree that some of these measures are helpful). Finally, and here's the important part that seems to be missing, they need to convince a significant majority of people that the status quo is wrong: http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2015/10/01/women-more-than-men-adjust-their-careers-for-family-life/. I really have a hard time believing that it is right to want an equal distribution in the workforce when a vast majority of both males and females do not.

In my entire career, though I have seen veiled sexism among the employees where I work, at the management level and higher there were huge incentives to recruit, promote, and retain women. Management regularly attended SWE events, hired female engineers, actively promoted them over male engineers, and gave higher ratings (that I am aware of). These were all very productive women, so I don't have a gripe. But you know what? There was still a paucity of them, and those that were around tended to leave quicker than the guys. Patriarchy? Maybe, but I guarantee none of them left because of discrimination.

Dude, you do realize that your argument is exactly the same as the one used to justify slavery (and later, Jim Crow laws).  "It's the natural order"; "They just aren't as smart/committed/hard working"; "But most people don't see a problem".  Etc...

GuitarStv was the one who said it was the natural order, I just went along that line of thought. That being said, my argument is very different from slavery. The slaves did not want to remain slaves, but the majority of women do not want to work fulltime after having kids (according to the article posted earlier). I even said most of the women I have worked with were extremely competent and it was a pleasure working with them.

Edit to add: I think a large part of what is being attributed to patriarchy is probably a byproduct of the self-selection by women when raising a family and awareness of that self-selection by society at large. Needless to say, self-selection was not an attribute of slavery.

Rape is common through human history, as is murder - both are completely natural.  It is natural to be clannish, to hate other people, and to hurt others in an attempt to benefit your offspring.  It is quite natural to invent a God and then harm others based on what you think that God wants you to do.  It is natural for humans to choose a short term gain over a sustainable, long term benefit (thinking of climate change, but there have been many other examples through history).  Please don't confuse "natural" with good.  Plenty (the majority?) of natural inclinations that humans have are very bad.  We need to do better than our base, natural instincts.

Obviously, I don't want to force anyone to do anything that they are uncomfortable with.  I am interested in the root cause of behaviour we're seeing though.  Our society has created an environment where women are legally allowed to do what men do, but socially obligated/expected to behave in a subordinate role . . . which is an area of concern.  You're asking for proof that the patriarchy is bad.  OK.  You can look at it from a profit motive/capitalist perspective - if all people truly have equal opportunity, then the best and the brightest will rise to the top in a capitalist society (ignoring for the moment the problems of inheritance and wealth concentration in the hands of the few).  If you have a societal construct that acts as a barrier for half of your population, you will not achieve results that are as successful as they could be.

Cromacster

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1627
  • Location: Minnesnowta
People make choices and there is a context within which they make choices but it's quite simply impossible to discuss this with you if you believe that all the context is the patriarchy. That is just a circular nonsensical argument.
You've already been warned.  That's enough of gaslighting "you're being irrational" nonsense.  I have given you a well annotated list of exactly how the sexism/the patriarchy affects women.  Knock it off.

Quote
Try and detail your issues a little more. Can you provide clear cut examples of the patriarchy in action.
I already did, and you ignored the well annotated, mathematical statistical facts and chased down another thread.

Quote
Are there any examples of people not abiding by the patriarchy. How can you explain Muslim women who choose to cover their face and wear a hijab ? How can you explain women like Amanda Nunes or women who choose to be doctors and lawyers. Why do women choose to take their husbands surname ? Why aren't they allowed to make that choice ? Who are you to state that women and men have to act in ways that you define as being correct. Do you really expect complete equality ? Should women be made to commit suicide more to make that an even statistic ? Why would more men than women commit suicide if the patriarchy was the all encompassing dominant social system ?
The fact that some women defy the traditional order is beside the point.  On average, women get screwed by this system.  So what if some women choose this way or that.  Choosing to go against the general sexism present in our society is harder and it bends women towards lower pay, more traditional roles, taking their husbands' names and wearing hijabs.

Quote
As I've already said multiple times I am more than willing to fight for women's rights when it's clear to me that women are being discriminated against but the only argument I've heard regarding this on this thread is the right to have an abortion.
This is bullshit.  I gave you a long list of well supported examples other than abortion.
You are dodging the question and trolling.
You will stop.

Toque.

I guess I don't see Stevo as gaslighting or trolling.  He seems to be asking provacative questions and working out some of his own ideas.  Maybe he could try to be more open to what you have presented, but the same could be said about you.  You seem pretty steadfast that the patriarchy is real and steveo either doesn't or isn't convinced.  I don't think that's an issue, the issue comes when you say "you will stop".  I feel this is poor form as a mod on a site that is usually very good about letting open discussion occur.  None of the rules have been broken.

Trying to shutdown constructive conservation is part of the problem that has blown many of these issues up.  And I have found a majority of this thread constructive and interesting. 

 

Dabnasty

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1287
People make choices and there is a context within which they make choices but it's quite simply impossible to discuss this with you if you believe that all the context is the patriarchy. That is just a circular nonsensical argument.
You've already been warned.  That's enough of gaslighting "you're being irrational" nonsense.  I have given you a well annotated list of exactly how the sexism/the patriarchy affects women.  Knock it off.

Quote
Try and detail your issues a little more. Can you provide clear cut examples of the patriarchy in action.
I already did, and you ignored the well annotated, mathematical statistical facts and chased down another thread.

Quote
Are there any examples of people not abiding by the patriarchy. How can you explain Muslim women who choose to cover their face and wear a hijab ? How can you explain women like Amanda Nunes or women who choose to be doctors and lawyers. Why do women choose to take their husbands surname ? Why aren't they allowed to make that choice ? Who are you to state that women and men have to act in ways that you define as being correct. Do you really expect complete equality ? Should women be made to commit suicide more to make that an even statistic ? Why would more men than women commit suicide if the patriarchy was the all encompassing dominant social system ?
The fact that some women defy the traditional order is beside the point.  On average, women get screwed by this system.  So what if some women choose this way or that.  Choosing to go against the general sexism present in our society is harder and it bends women towards lower pay, more traditional roles, taking their husbands' names and wearing hijabs.

Quote
As I've already said multiple times I am more than willing to fight for women's rights when it's clear to me that women are being discriminated against but the only argument I've heard regarding this on this thread is the right to have an abortion.
This is bullshit.  I gave you a long list of well supported examples other than abortion.
You are dodging the question and trolling.
You will stop.

Toque.

I guess I don't see Stevo as gaslighting or trolling.  He seems to be asking provacative questions and working out some of his own ideas.  Maybe he could try to be more open to what you have presented, but the same could be said about you.  You seem pretty steadfast that the patriarchy is real and steveo either doesn't or isn't convinced.  I don't think that's an issue, the issue comes when you say "you will stop".  I feel this is poor form as a mod on a site that is usually very good about letting open discussion occur.  None of the rules have been broken.

Trying to shutdown constructive conservation is part of the problem that has blown many of these issues up.  And I have found a majority of this thread constructive and interesting.

I think the discussion spans multiple threads so maybe there is more to it?

And I don't think Steveo is having an honest conversation. Multiple people have asked him to tell us what definition of patriarchy he is using and yet he refuses. What is there to gain in that? The only reasons I can fathom are a blinding level of stubbornness or the goal is to get people worked up.

GuitarStv

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 12348
  • Age: 37
  • Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
My statements were based on a definition of the term 'patriarchy' as commonly used by experts.  That fully supports the usage that was made.  What definition of the term are you using that contradicts it, and where did you find come across it?

Your opinion regarding 'extreme leftist feminist' domination of society is an interesting one.  What mathematical formula exists that you're using to prove that this is so?  (At least I'm assuming that you have a mathematical formula to prove that it's the case  . . .  otherwise you're being pretty inconsistent.)

Hang on a second here dude. I don't know these experts and honestly I don't care one little bit. I live in this society and I'm not stupid. I'm entitled to my opinion. I don't believe that there is an extreme feminist domination of society. There is clearly and this thread is a classic example a group of people who don't like any criticism of their world view and get upset if people don't agree 100% with their extremist viewpoint.

Please read the links that were provided.  They will let you get to know the experts and their research in the field under discussion.  You should care what the experts have to say and what research they've done if you're interested in learning about the field they work on.  While you are certainly entitled to your opinion . . . if you're ignoring the information you're provided with (while failing to provide any to support your own points), it increasingly appears to be uninformed.


The idea of my comment of extreme leftist feminist domination of society was to show that I can easily pull out proof of a social theory that is completely opposite to the idea of the patriarchy being the dominant controlling theme of societies current state. I have just as good proof as people arguing about the patriarchy but don't think for one second that I believe in the idea of a group of extremist feminists controlling society and causing men to commit suicide. I'm sure that the issue is complex and would require critical thinking to try and get to the bottom of it.

Please provide it then.


Which of the fields that mentioned are not white male dominated?

I thought you mentioned those fields but law is a field where women are definitely available. The last lawyer I saw was a female. There are plenty of female doctors that you can see. Happy to discuss any other instances that you want to engage in and feel that they are white male dominated.


Let's first discuss these instances that you're dismissing out of hand (without showing any data for your reasoning).


You get to choose your lawyer, but not the judge who presides over your case. 

- 66% of district court judges in the US are male - https://www.statista.com/statistics/408478/percentage-of-us-district-court-judges-by-gender/, https://www.fjc.gov/history/exhibits/graphs-and-maps/gender
- More than 75% of the Article III judiciary is white - https://www.fjc.gov/history/exhibits/graphs-and-maps/race-and-ethnicity

There do exist female judges, but the field is unequivocally white male dominated.  Judges obviously have significantly more power than lawyers and thus a much greater chance of influencing your outcome.


Female doctors do exist as well . . . but 66% of doctors in the US are male (https://www.statista.com/chart/14983/female-doctors-by-country/).  The medical field is dominated by men.  (The whole medical field is also pretty blatantly patriarchal, this is not exactly a secret https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/jan/14/why-are-there-still-so-few-female-doctors.)
« Last Edit: January 11, 2019, 07:26:09 AM by GuitarStv »

FrugalToque

  • Global Moderator
  • Pencil Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 502
  • Location: Canada
People make choices and there is a context within which they make choices but it's quite simply impossible to discuss this with you if you believe that all the context is the patriarchy. That is just a circular nonsensical argument.
You've already been warned.  That's enough of gaslighting "you're being irrational" nonsense.  I have given you a well annotated list of exactly how the sexism/the patriarchy affects women.  Knock it off.

Quote
Try and detail your issues a little more. Can you provide clear cut examples of the patriarchy in action.
I already did, and you ignored the well annotated, mathematical statistical facts and chased down another thread.

Quote
Are there any examples of people not abiding by the patriarchy. How can you explain Muslim women who choose to cover their face and wear a hijab ? How can you explain women like Amanda Nunes or women who choose to be doctors and lawyers. Why do women choose to take their husbands surname ? Why aren't they allowed to make that choice ? Who are you to state that women and men have to act in ways that you define as being correct. Do you really expect complete equality ? Should women be made to commit suicide more to make that an even statistic ? Why would more men than women commit suicide if the patriarchy was the all encompassing dominant social system ?
The fact that some women defy the traditional order is beside the point.  On average, women get screwed by this system.  So what if some women choose this way or that.  Choosing to go against the general sexism present in our society is harder and it bends women towards lower pay, more traditional roles, taking their husbands' names and wearing hijabs.

Quote
As I've already said multiple times I am more than willing to fight for women's rights when it's clear to me that women are being discriminated against but the only argument I've heard regarding this on this thread is the right to have an abortion.
This is bullshit.  I gave you a long list of well supported examples other than abortion.
You are dodging the question and trolling.
You will stop.

Toque.

I guess I don't see Stevo as gaslighting or trolling.  He seems to be asking provacative questions and working out some of his own ideas.  Maybe he could try to be more open to what you have presented, but the same could be said about you.  You seem pretty steadfast that the patriarchy is real and steveo either doesn't or isn't convinced.  I don't think that's an issue, the issue comes when you say "you will stop".  I feel this is poor form as a mod on a site that is usually very good about letting open discussion occur.  None of the rules have been broken.

Trying to shutdown constructive conservation is part of the problem that has blown many of these issues up.  And I have found a majority of this thread constructive and interesting.

Sexism exists.  Sexism came out of the patriarchal nature of our society (which goes back only a few decades to when women had credit cards that said Mrs. Husband's first name, husband's last name on them, couldn't get bank accounts on their own, etc. etc.  Its affects are still clearly, statistically identifiable today, as I have demonstrated.  As everyone knows.)

He's pretending sexism doesn't exist, ignoring pointed mathematical evidence to the contrary, and trolling the female writers on this forum.  This behaviour makes the forum less inclusive and less welcoming to female readers and writers.  I have no desire to cut the audience for this philosophy down by half by letting people carry on like this.

Keeping this forum open and tolerant is one of my jobs here.

Toque.

Nick_Miller

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 763
People make choices and there is a context within which they make choices but it's quite simply impossible to discuss this with you if you believe that all the context is the patriarchy. That is just a circular nonsensical argument.
You've already been warned.  That's enough of gaslighting "you're being irrational" nonsense.  I have given you a well annotated list of exactly how the sexism/the patriarchy affects women.  Knock it off.

Quote
Try and detail your issues a little more. Can you provide clear cut examples of the patriarchy in action.
I already did, and you ignored the well annotated, mathematical statistical facts and chased down another thread.

Quote
Are there any examples of people not abiding by the patriarchy. How can you explain Muslim women who choose to cover their face and wear a hijab ? How can you explain women like Amanda Nunes or women who choose to be doctors and lawyers. Why do women choose to take their husbands surname ? Why aren't they allowed to make that choice ? Who are you to state that women and men have to act in ways that you define as being correct. Do you really expect complete equality ? Should women be made to commit suicide more to make that an even statistic ? Why would more men than women commit suicide if the patriarchy was the all encompassing dominant social system ?
The fact that some women defy the traditional order is beside the point.  On average, women get screwed by this system.  So what if some women choose this way or that.  Choosing to go against the general sexism present in our society is harder and it bends women towards lower pay, more traditional roles, taking their husbands' names and wearing hijabs.

Quote
As I've already said multiple times I am more than willing to fight for women's rights when it's clear to me that women are being discriminated against but the only argument I've heard regarding this on this thread is the right to have an abortion.
This is bullshit.  I gave you a long list of well supported examples other than abortion.
You are dodging the question and trolling.
You will stop.

Toque.

I guess I don't see Stevo as gaslighting or trolling.  He seems to be asking provacative questions and working out some of his own ideas.  Maybe he could try to be more open to what you have presented, but the same could be said about you.  You seem pretty steadfast that the patriarchy is real and steveo either doesn't or isn't convinced.  I don't think that's an issue, the issue comes when you say "you will stop".  I feel this is poor form as a mod on a site that is usually very good about letting open discussion occur.  None of the rules have been broken.

Trying to shutdown constructive conservation is part of the problem that has blown many of these issues up.  And I have found a majority of this thread constructive and interesting.

Sexism exists.  Sexism came out of the patriarchal nature of our society (which goes back only a few decades to when women had credit cards that said Mrs. Husband's first name, husband's last name on them, couldn't get bank accounts on their own, etc. etc.  Its affects are still clearly, statistically identifiable today, as I have demonstrated.  As everyone knows.)

He's pretending sexism doesn't exist, ignoring pointed mathematical evidence to the contrary, and trolling the female writers on this forum.  This behaviour makes the forum less inclusive and less welcoming to female readers and writers.  I have no desire to cut the audience for this philosophy down by half by letting people carry on like this.

Keeping this forum open and tolerant is one of my jobs here.

Toque.

If you feel the need to lock the thread, I totally understand. It's been very disheartening reading some of the male responses, and at this point I am bowing out. I started this thread to address a very specific phenomenon that I had noticed, but didn't anticipate the thread spiraling as it has.