Patriarchy Debate

[warpus]

Part of the problem, though, is that society conditions what we want to do

Gender roles, they push people into specific types of lifestyles and career choices. That's why "women make less than men", because on average women end up going into careers that just pay less.

I don't think that we want "half of the countries being presided over by women". We want countries to be presided over by people who have shown themselves to be capable and have been elected to lead, whether they're male or female. What we also want is women to not be dissuaded by taking on certain careers due to gender roles. The sooner we begin dismantling them, the better. (Having said that, some gender roles are just fine. Skirts for women, boxers for men. Generally speaking - you can wear what you want, really)

 

[bhavv]

I've always wanted to wear a pink tutu with a sparking tiara and pretend that Im a beautiful princess.

 

[classical_hero]

Mary Had a Little Lamb

Quite contrary

 

[Pangur Bán]

There are two different premise-realms in this post and the bolded one of them I find quite relevant.

This is an insightful article. Did you write it?

Thing is, the concept of male domination is new as well. 'Patriarchical' societies didn't picture themselves as societies in which males dominated females. Rather, males and females are to be considered fit for different sets of duties, though ultimately equal in worth.

The idea that the male-female relationship is skewered in favour of one sex - a staple of MRA and feminist ideology - is a rather novel concept.

The first point is definitely right. Patriarchal societies and human societies are semantically indistinguishable as far as known human societies are concerned.

However I do think ideology in most societies finds ways of justifying the extra legal and political rights men usually have, in practice. But women are not a political or biological group. Women don't marry each other and have women as their children. If it is the man who nominally accumulates wealth, it is the offspring of women as much as men who benefit. In practice, almost every society treats women as more valuable than men even when its ideology doesn't make that obvious. Men are sent to war, men are killed after military defeat; women stay at home during war, women are only enslaved after defeat. We are the first society to say the women is as cheap as the man, and have created a social code that tells her she is of less worth if she does not spend her life in service to another at the expense of her own genes.

 

[Pangur Bán]

Gender roles, they push people into specific types of lifestyles and career choices. That's why "women make less than men", because on average women end up going into careers that just pay less.

I don't think that we want "half of the countries being presided over by women". We want countries to be presided over by people who have shown themselves to be capable and have been elected to lead, whether they're male or female. What we also want is women to not be dissuaded by taking on certain careers due to gender roles. The sooner we begin dismantling them, the better. (Having said that, some gender roles are just fine. Skirts for women, boxers for men. Generally speaking - you can wear what you want, really)

This is the meritocratic fallacy. Politics is not sport, you don't become a leader in some 'best governing' gameshow, or get the highest score in some policy making computer game. You become leader through nepotism, patronage, machiavellianism, PR management, and so forth. Those skills put you in charge of a country, and they have very little to do with who is 'capable' for the job democratic populations envisage.

 

[warpus]

You missed my point - the removal of gender roles would result in more women being interested in these positions that for now seem to be associated with men, and vice versa. Whether there's further roadblocks after that is another question altogether.

 

[Pangur Bán]

I didn't miss your point, I was taking issue with the meritocratic fallacy. Getting rid of gender roles will no more deliver female leaders who are most 'capable' than currently it provides leaders most 'capable' (male or female).

 

[warpus]

The point is that it would lead to more women being interested in those positions. Like I said there may be roadblocks there that would prevent more male kindergarten teachers and so on, as well. But if there isn't any interest in the first place, you aren't going to have much luck finding candidates for such positions that aren't of the "usual" gender.

 

[classical_hero]

You missed my point - the removal of gender roles would result in more women being interested in these positions that for now seem to be associated with men, and vice versa. Whether there's further roadblocks after that is another question altogether.

But biologically speaking because of the ways men and women are there are simply some jobs that won't be a fit for either sex. I know that women weren't allowed to do what I did at work because their bodies weren't capable of doing it because of th hazards we were working with and the fact that a woman's body processes them differently than a man's does. The main hazard we faced was lead.

 

[Pangur Bán]

There are male guards in female prisons in the US because of 'gender equality' legislation. This is surely a barbaric practice that guarantees the proliferation of sexual abuse.

 

[JollyRoger]

I agree - we should get rid of female prisons.

 

[Snorrius]

I agree - we should get rid of female prisons.

Should we just hang up female criminals?

 

[JollyRoger]

Since men and women are different, so there really are no female criminals. Just misbehaving little ladies that need a bit of paternal correction. No need for incarceration.

 

[Pangur Bán]

I don't know Jolly Roger well enough to tell if he is being sarcastic in #71, but actually abolishing female prisons is taken seriously as a policy option in many places. For moral and economic reasons. You only really need to use prisons for violent women, which at state levels could be dealt with in 'small custodial units' (like you get, for instance, with people with some mental illnesses) rather than prisons.

 

[Snorrius]

Since men and women are different, so there really are no female criminals. Just misbehaving little ladies that need a bit of paternal correction. No need for incarceration.

They say "paternal correction" is a domestic abuse now.

 

[JollyRoger]

Yeah, it used to be considered foreplay.

 

[warpus]

But biologically speaking because of the ways men and women are there are simply some jobs that won't be a fit for either sex. I know that women weren't allowed to do what I did at work because their bodies weren't capable of doing it because of th hazards we were working with and the fact that a woman's body processes them differently than a man's does. The main hazard we faced was lead.

Most jobs that are currently associated with either gender do not have these pitfalls: kindergarten teachers, CEOs, presidents, vice presidents, etc.

 

[classical_hero]

Some of the stresses related to certain jobs do make it harder for the other gender to do as well, but of course there are exceptions to the rule.

 

[Narz]

Part of the problem, though, is that society conditions what we want to do - if you're born male, for example, you're told from a very early age that it's good to want to be a soldier, a fireman or a rocket scientist, and not good to want to be a florist. So we need a way of not tying life choices so rigidly to gender, when that isn't necessary. For example, it may be true that soldiers need to be strong, and that most men are stronger than most women, but it isn't good for anyone if weak men are made to feel inadequate for not being 'good enough' to be soldiers, and strong women are made to feel bad for wanting the 'wrong' career.

Much of gender is innate. Even little baby monkeys play with "sex appropriate toys" (cars/mechanical stuff for males, dolls for girls), they've studied this.

I don't think women are clamoring to be construction workers or football players.

There's some societal element of course to career choice but to say its 100% & that every occupation from plumber to fashion designers should be 50-50 is stupid/out of touch.

 

[Narz]

I can't even do one push up.

Thats really bad dude. That would be bad for a woman too but noone would care as long as she's hot.

That's the real "privledge" of being a man, people aren't afraid to criticize you & as a man, you cannot hide from the reality that your value is equal only to your output (whereas attractive women are often infantilized by the men who want to penetrate them).