What Patriarchy?

a reply to: LesMisanthrope

I am stating the obvious: women are physically weaker and slower than men, and men have exploited that fact throughout all of history (and possibly much of prehistory) to keep women down.

Your position — that feminism is a conspiracy to do men down — is a sorry attempt to legitimize and empower male chauvinists. Or did you not post this?

So what do feminists really want? What implicit ideology lies beneath the lie “we want equality”, and “death to patriarchy”? What rights do men have left to give them, or rather, build for them? They want what every ideology wants: to assert itself in the public square, to seize power—if not in the political arena, at least in parasitic form within the minds who come across it. To a privileged entitled soul such as my self at least, it sounds like a lust for power, position, money and security.

All fascists have risen to power on the popular resentment of losers who want somebody to blame for their own uselessness. You are providing precisely that aid and comfort to every creep of a misogynistic loser out there, so here's a Godwin for you: your tactics are fascist.

I am a man. And I am a feminist.

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
a reply to: Astyanax

Since that 50% can beat the living daylights out of the other 50% any time it pleases, it isn't strange at all.

I can't believe that you, LesMisanthrope, are actually advocating this revolting chauvinist position.

This thread makes me want to spew.

So you are advocating that women are the weaker sex? I don't think you know what chauvinism means.

Some women were physically smaller and, therefore, would naturally have less strength than some men, but women and children were beaten without a second thought back then - and it happens now - more than you would care to admit. The only difference now is that the police don't need a woman's complaint to arrest the assailant and remember women had nowhere to go back then, as there were no women's shelters in place at that time.

What was the programming, what was the mindset, how has that been carried forth (unconsciously) in today's society, in today's relationships?

On the night of November 15, 1917, the superintendent of the Occoquan Workhouse, W.H. Whittaker, ordered the nearly forty guards to brutalize the suffragists. They beat Lucy Burns, chained her hands to the cell bars above her head, then left her there for the night. They threw Dora Lewis into a dark cell and smashed her head against an iron bed, which knocked her out. Her cellmate, Alice Cosu, who believed Lewis to be dead, suffered a heart attack. According to affidavits, guards grabbed, dragged, beat, choked, pinched, and kicked other women.

en.wikipedia.org...

...and neither the superintendent nor any of the forty guards were charged.

Some of the ways women were oppressed in the 1900s:

1. Could not vote
2. Could not own property in their own name.
3. Had no legal right to the money she earned when she worked.
4. Could not divorce their husbands without severe cause, and even with that, they could not keep her children.
5. Could not bear witness in court.
6. Could not serve on a jury.
7. If tried, they were tried by an all male jury.
8. Could not attend the major universities. They were all male schools. Yes. All of the big universities.
9. Could not use birth control and had to have baby after baby until her body was worn out and she died.
10. It was legal for a husband to beat his wife black and blue as long as the cane or rod he used was no larger in circumference than his thumb.
11. It was legal for a husband to brutally rape his wife.

womenshistory.about.com...

a reply to: InTheLight

Some women were physically smaller and, therefore, would naturally have less strength than some men, but women and children were beaten without a second thought back then - and it happens now - more than you would care to admit. The only difference now is that the police don't need a woman's complaint to arrest the assailant and remember women had nowhere to go back then, as there were no women's shelters in place at that time.

What was the programming, what was the mindset, how has that been carried forth (unconsciously) in today's society, in today's relationships?

I do not wish to downplay the severity of violence that any person has survived. It is obvious that women have been abused countlessly by men, and this is likely due to the differences in physical strength as you specified. However, according to statistics, maltreatment of children is perpetrated by mothers acting alone for 36.6% of the cases—perhaps more than you would admit—whereas it’s only 18.7% for fathers acting alone. (19.4% by both parents acting together). In the case of child fatalities, “more than one-half (53.5%) of perpetrators were women
and 45.3 percent of perpetrators were men; 1.1 percent were of unknown sex. (See table 5–3 and
related notes.)”

www.childwelfare.gov...

Here we have instances of women beating, battering, abusing and killing beings of lower physical strength. To use feminist logic, I might have to start a child’s rights campaign to protect them from being beaten by women. So let’s leave the kids out of this for the time being.

1. Could not vote
2. Could not own property in their own name.
3. Had no legal right to the money she earned when she worked.
4. Could not divorce their husbands without severe cause, and even with that, they could not keep her children.
5. Could not bear witness in court.
6. Could not serve on a jury.
7. If tried, they were tried by an all male jury.
8. Could not attend the major universities. They were all male schools. Yes. All of the big universities.
9. Could not use birth control and had to have baby after baby until her body was worn out and she died.
10. It was legal for a husband to beat his wife black and blue as long as the cane or rod he used was no larger in circumference than his thumb.
11. It was legal for a husband to brutally rape his wife.

I will not deny any of this. I cannot. But remember, these were the institutions, built and maintained by men in positions of oligarchical power, not all men. Not even every man could vote, not unless he owned land and was white. Men first had to fight and die for their right to vote during the French revolution and American revolutions. Where were the women at that time? Woman's suffrage was paved in the bodies of men.

The rules of marriage were designed to assert theocratic, not male power. Still to this day, that same male-centric, rule of the father, religious institution of marriage is not only supported by, but hoped for by the majority of women.

Here's a shocker: Khod (God) is Female! Yep I said it. SHE gave birth to the universes. Every mans body was originally female before testosterone kicked in. The female body is the perfect form, not the male. Even in nature most if not all growth patterns are feminine in nature. The Fibonacci spiral, water, the sun, all feminine. Men have been covering up this fact for thousands of years. We all know that a man can't give birth. I'm a guy who wised up an realized this deep truth. Monica Sjoo's Artwork "GOD GIVING BIRTH" says it all.

a reply to: Oannes

Here's a shocker: Khod (God) is Female! Yep I said it. SHE gave birth to the universes. Every mans body was originally female before testosterone kicked in. The female body is the perfect form, not the male. Even in nature most if not all growth patterns are feminine in nature. The Fibonacci spiral, water, the sun, all feminine. Men have been covering up this fact for thousands of years. We all know that a man can't give birth. I'm a guy who wised up an realized this deep truth. Monica Sjoo's Artwork "GOD GIVING BIRTH" says it all.

It is true. All men come from women. If men are where the oppression and subjugation of women come from, where do men come from?

originally posted by: InTheLight

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope

a reply to: Astyanax

Since that 50% can beat the living daylights out of the other 50% any time it pleases, it isn't strange at all.



I can't believe that you, LesMisanthrope, are actually advocating this revolting chauvinist position.

On the night of November 15, 1917, the superintendent of the Occoquan Workhouse, W.H. Whittaker, ordered the nearly forty guards to brutalize the suffragists. They beat Lucy Burns, chained her hands to the cell bars above her head, then left her there for the night. They threw Dora Lewis into a dark cell and smashed her head against an iron bed, which knocked her out. Her cellmate, Alice Cosu, who believed Lewis to be dead, suffered a heart attack. According to affidavits, guards grabbed, dragged, beat, choked, pinched, and kicked other women.

Well I must say that although I due agree that the above quoted example of brutality against women is a stark reminder of dysfunctional human interaction. I would like to point out that there are probably even more examples of such and greater brutalities of men against men. Yes... I will acknowledge that physically it is a more even playing field the bottom line is your example shows that brutality was no respecter of gender ( or at least less so ) in those days. But... it also must be acknowledged that the very fact that women are (as a general rule) smaller and weaker than men...puts them in a very advantageous position within the psychological realm of human experience. Yes.... she battled with us shoulder to shoulder throughout history to get here. She could not help but gain her advantage should reason and rationale prevail ( at least higher forms of reason than those that render brutality ).

Now enough of this already and let us arrive at the crux of the matter. The problem is... Mommy wants her cake and to eat it too and Daddy wants to eat Mommies cake and to have it too. The reality is Mommy doesn't mind Daddy ruling over her as long as he does it in a way that turns her on. Now... when our lower nature prevails over reason then things go awry and Mommy is not happy. To facilitate the exposure and extraction of such behaviors Mommy manifests herself in all manner of ways. The Virgin and the Harlot represent two indispensable parts of femininity. We want Mommy to be as faithful and pure to us as a Virgin and yet we want her to be our sexy dirty little whore as well ( but only ours ). I am convinced that the satisfaction of these desires cannot occur through the actions of the flesh we must enter such things through the spirit and the incorruptible power of love. Hence the verse that there is no condemnation to those who walk after the spirit and not after the flesh. Mommy and Daddy will both recieve the fulfilment of their desires as soon as we are done here. And when it gets plugged into the heavenly amplifier ( aka New Jerusalem ) Daddy will be able to please Mommy within 144 different sets of parameters ( 12 manner of fruits x 12 gates ). Just remember Mommy to be a good little girl because Daddy will be pouring unto you double into your cup of firey torment.

Harry
Bu

edit on 28-7-2014 by HarryJoy because: edit to add

On the night of November 15, 1917, the superintendent of the Occoquan Workhouse, W.H. Whittaker, ordered the nearly forty guards to brutalize the suffragists. They beat Lucy Burns, chained her hands to the cell bars above her head, then left her there for the night. They threw Dora Lewis into a dark cell and smashed her head against an iron bed, which knocked her out. Her cellmate, Alice Cosu, who believed Lewis to be dead, suffered a heart attack. According to affidavits, guards grabbed, dragged, beat, choked, pinched, and kicked other women.




Well I must say that although I due agree that the above quoted example of brutality against women is a stark reminder of dysfunctional human interaction. I would like to point out that there are probably even more examples of such and greater brutalities of men against men. Yes... I will acknowledge that physically it is a more even playing field the bottom line is your example shows that brutality was no respecter of gender ( or at least less so ) in those days. But... it also must be acknowledged that the very fact that women are (as a general rule) smaller and weaker than men...puts them in a very advantageous position within the psychological realm of human experience. Yes.... she battled with us shoulder to shoulder throughout history to get here. She could not help but gain her advantage should reason and rationale prevail ( at least higher forms of reason than those that render brutality ).

Now enough of this already and let us arrive at the crux of the matter. The problem is... Mommy wants her cake and to eat it too and Daddy wants to eat Mommies cake and to have it too. The reality is Mommy doesn't mind Daddy ruling over her as long as he does it in a way that turns her on. Now... when our lower nature prevails over reason then things go awry and Mommy is not happy. To facilitate the exposure and extraction of such behaviors Mommy manifests herself in all manner of ways. The Virgin and the Harlot represent two indispensable parts of femininity. We want Mommy to be as faithful and pure to us as a Virgin and yet we want her to be our sexy dirty little whore as well ( but only ours ). I am convinced that the satisfaction of these desires cannot occur through the actions of the flesh we must enter such things through the spirit and the incorruptible power of love. Hence the verse that there is no condemnation to those who walk after the spirit and not after the flesh. Mommy and Daddy will both recieve the fulfilment of their desires as soon as we are done here. And when it gets plugged into the heavenly amplifier ( aka New Jerusalem ) Daddy will be able to please Mommy within 144 different sets of parameters ( 12 manner of fruits x 12 gates ). Just remember Mommy to be a good little girl because Daddy will be pouring unto you double into your cup of firey torment.

Harry

a reply to: LesMisanthrope

You do realize you are speaking about 50% of the world’s population, of which you are a contributing member of. Are you implying you are just as guilty? Or are you in the habit of demonizing vast amounts of people with your little brush?

Of course I realize it. We are speaking in generalities here. Obviously all men don't oppress all women, but we all belong to societies in which women have historically been oppressed and have yet to achieve equality. We are contributing members of those societies. So yes, as a man, I bear some responsibility for the way women are treated, as do all men.

I don’t advocate one gender over the other. My position is to defend masculinity from the superstitious and superficial witch-burning mentality of your position—the fear of masculinity—feminism.

That is exactly what fascists say. They're always defending their side from the evil of the other. Except that the evil only exists as a creation of their own minds, to be deployed for their own purposes.

Remember Goering at the Nuremberg trials?

The people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the peacemakers for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country.

These are precisely your tactics, and your claim of innocence is spurious.

Your fear of masculinity is perhaps an indication of a lack thereof. We usually attempt to extirpate masculinity in animals through castration. Maybe you’ve already done so mentally.

Yes, and I eat Christian babies, too.

originally posted by: Astyanax
Obviously all men don't oppress all women, but we all belong to societies in which women have historically been oppressed and have yet to achieve equality.

Speak for yourself.

www.whyileftsweden.com...

Women might not have achieved equality worldwide but there are places where the pendulum has swung back to such a degree that women are actually treated better by law. And in these places radical feminism have enough clout to act crazy on a regular basis, hell, they've even invented a pseudoscience that would turn a lot of ufologists red with envy for all the traction and legitimacy that it has gained.

I find it funny that in atheist Sweden, supposedly a land of reason and skepticism, that such a pseudoscience as gender studies(or perhaps Swedish gender studies from a feminist perspective would be more apt) has largely avoided being put in the dustbin or being subject to the customary ridicule. I guess it helps having pc culture on your side.

As for my personal opinion, if it wasn't clear enough I think there's more evidence for some of the outlandish ATS claims than there is for some of the claims of these so called social scientists.
Claiming that the behaviour of men and women and the differences in the physical brains of men and women is nothing but a social construct is not an uncommon notion.
So, going by that logic they have to reverse what nature intended by social engineering, and this is currently underway in kindergartens all around Sweden.
It's funny that they're seemingly exempt from criticism that would have put to stop any other field of science had they even been close to as tenuous as some of this 'science'.

And of course, a lot of it is state funded.. what to do? Laugh or cry?

Whether intentional or not the effect is the same, it's a massive psychological operation and I would wager that it is not in our best interests.

a reply to: Astyanax

Of course I realize it. We are speaking in generalities here. Obviously all men don't oppress all women, but we all belong to societies in which women have historically been oppressed and have yet to achieve equality. We are contributing members of those societies.

When you say “men do this” and “women are that”, realize that you are speaking about entire genders here. Abuse, oppression, rape, are the crimes of individuals and groups, not genders. Your feminist theory is untenable, and speaking in generalities isn’t going to fool anyone with half a brain.

“Since that 50% can beat the living daylights out of the other 50% any time it pleases, it isn't strange at all.”

Except, they don’t. There’s not even an argument here. As you might guess—and as you display with your own gender-specific benevolence—for every man that would hurt a woman, there are countless men who would stand beside her, and even give their lives for her.

So yes, as a man, I bear some responsibility for the way women are treated, as do all men.

Cue the romantic nonsense. “As do all men”… here we go again. And women have no responsibility? Are women not autonomous in your little world? Feminist tactic #1—appeal to shame.

That is exactly what fascists say. They're always defending their side from the evil of the other. Except that the evil only exists as a creation of their own minds, to be deployed for their own purposes.

Remember Goering at the Nuremberg trials?

Throwing me in with the likes of Goering no less. Comparing me to a Nazi. Based on…what? It’s not even conjecture, it’s straight up dishonesty at this point. Feminist tactic #2—straw man, ad hominem and demonizing.

If I’ve said anything misogynistic, or in anyway spoke out against women please tell me, don't imply it; if I’ve advocated any one gender’s rights over another, show me, don't imply it; but until then, you’ve really no argument besides fallacy, have you, Astynax?

a reply to: LesMisanthrope

I believe women were not permitted to join the American military as a warrior/fighter back then, am I wrong? However, women were there in various different roles - which may have saved countless lives and which you seem to have omitted from your post.

Thousands of women served as nurses and in other support roles in the major armies.

During the twentieth century, women in the World Wars became indispensable for the total mobilization of society's resources

"Indispensable"!

en.wikipedia.org...


What patriarchy? This patriarchy!

Patriarchy "skepticism" is common among "men's rights" advocates and other critics of feminism. Their basic argument seems to be "Women have the vote, and make up 50% of the population, so they must already have equal power." (Oh, we're sorry, where's the first female POTUS?) Or even better, some generic, odd idea that women actually control society, as evidenced by the cries of their loss of power.[2] There are some aspects of society in which men do have certain disadvantages, such as in the criminal justice system, or in certain historically female-dominated professions such as nursing; however the MRAs make the mistake of attributing this to the evils of feminism, rather than realizing that it is precisely because of patriarchal ideology that such disadvantages exist.

rationalwiki.org...

Ingrained and unconscious patriarchy is alive and well.

a reply to: HarryJoy

Your post: Mommy wants her cake and to eat it too and Daddy wants to eat Mommies cake and to have it too

Mommy wants her equal share of cake and eat it too while doing the dishes while Daddy sits and watches TV and expects Mommy to bring him his piece of cake too.

a reply to: InTheLight

I believe women were not permitted to join the American military as a warrior/fighter back then, am I wrong? However, women were there in various different roles - which may have saved countless lives and which you seem to have omitted from your post.

What is this point in reference to?

What patriarchy? This patriarchy!

What is one right I have that you do not?

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
a reply to: InTheLight

I believe women were not permitted to join the American military as a warrior/fighter back then, am I wrong? However, women were there in various different roles - which may have saved countless lives and which you seem to have omitted from your post.

What is this point in reference to?

What patriarchy? This patriarchy!

What is one right I have that you do not?

You are missing the point! Existing patriarchial ingrained and unconscious bias attitudes are manifested in a myriad of ways not only to women (continuing unequal pay for equal work; unequal division of labour both inside and outside the home) but to people choosing alternative lifestyles from the societal programmed, expected conformity of "norm", and this is proven from women not being allowed in high leadership religious and fortune 500 roles to homosexuals still being denied the right to marry and the legal rights that it brings.

a reply to: InTheLight

You are missing the point! Existing patriarchial ingrained and unconscious bias attitudes are manifested in a myriad of ways not only to women (continuing unequal pay for equal work; unequal division of labour both inside and outside the home) but to people choosing alternative lifestyles from the societal programmed, expected conformity of "norm", and this is proven from women not being allowed in high leadership religious and fortune 500 roles to homosexuals still being denied the right to marry and the legal rights that it brings.

Female world leaders in power:

www.jjmccullough.com...

List of women CEOs of Fortune 500 companies:

en.wikipedia.org...

I think the idea that they are “not being allowed” in high leadership roles is ludicrous.

In religion, however, you do have a point. Most myths—patriarchy for instance—belong there.

originally posted by: InTheLight
a reply to: HarryJoy



Your post: Mommy wants her cake and to eat it too and Daddy wants to eat Mommies cake and to have it too



Mommy wants her equal share of cake and eat it too while doing the dishes while Daddy sits and watches TV and expects Mommy to bring him his piece of cake too.

I think Daddy better get off the couch and go do the dishes while Mommy takes a tubby. We'll talk about the rest later. The point being.... Daddy needs a little reorientation. It is true that for the most part men feel that their job ends when they punch out at work and it is also true that a woman's work is never done. Mommies efforts will not be in vain. Her end shall be accomplished as ordained by her oneness.

Harry

originally posted by: HarryJoy

originally posted by: InTheLight
a reply to: HarryJoy



Your post: Mommy wants her cake and to eat it too and Daddy wants to eat Mommies cake and to have it too



Mommy wants her equal share of cake and eat it too while doing the dishes while Daddy sits and watches TV and expects Mommy to bring him his piece of cake too.

I think Daddy better get off the couch and go do the dishes while Mommy takes a tubby. We'll talk about the rest later. The point being.... Daddy needs a little reorientation. It is true that for the most part men feel that their job ends when they punch out at work and it is also true that a woman's work is never done. Mommies efforts will not be in vain. Her end shall be accomplished as ordained by her oneness.

Harry

Perhaps in a future long, long away...as for now, equality and accommodation should be the order for today.

Information worth noting:

www.catalyst.org...

www.foxnews.com...

economix.blogs.nytimes.com...


www.businessweek.com...

a reply to: InTheLight

Perhaps in a future long, long away...as for now, equality and accommodation should be the order for today.

Out of curiosity, what rights do I have as a man that you do not as a woman? A simple naming or listing off of rights would suffice.

I ask because I'd like know truly unequal you and I are.

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
a reply to: InTheLight

Perhaps in a future long, long away...as for now, equality and accommodation should be the order for today.

Out of curiosity, what rights do I have as a man that you do not as a woman? A simple naming or listing off of rights would suffice.

I ask because I'd like know truly unequal you and I are.

Better to ask the question "What rights are not applied equally to women or persons wishing to live alternate lifestyles?" - then read the links I posted.