[RD] The Gender Empathy Gap

[Bamspeedy]

Is there anything that is _not_ a consequence of the damn patriarchy?

If women were controlling military operations then perhaps you could make the argument it is serving women's interests.

 

[civver_764]

Is there anything that is _not_ a consequence of the damn patriarchy?

It's just a way for them to say what they really want to say, which is men. Feminism (aka women) is the force for good against the evil oppressive patriarchy (aka men).

 

[Ryika]

If women were controlling military operations then perhaps you could make the argument it is serving women's interests.

I was very close to saying something very ignorant, but then I thought about it some more, and now I see the errors of my way. I thought:

"Women are the slight majority of people who have the right to vote, so one would think they'd make sure that the military is serving women's interests."

Thankfully I then saw the light and understood what you were trying to say.

Women are part of the patriarchy. So of course they'd undermine women's interests.

 

[Gori the Grey]

Is there anything that is _not_ a consequence of the damn patriarchy?

There is nothing in social relations that escapes totalizing ideological systems such as (the damn) patriarchy, no.

 

[Ryika]

There is nothing in social relations that escapes totalizing ideological systems such as (the damn) patriarchy, no.

I understand more and more why people are so fascinated by the patriarchy. It's omnipresent and, in a sense, omnipotent. It's like a god that men created to oppress women. But that god then went rogue and now it oppresses both genders. Women a bit more than men, finely tuned so that men are harmed just as much as is possible while still keeping them willing to keep it alive so they can dominate women.

The patriarchy is truly the greatest thing ever created by man. It's so perfect that it's no wonder that to the uninitiated, to the blind, to those who have not dismantled society and seen it for what it is, feminist theory looks like a religion, and patriarchy looks like it's evil god.

But it's not a religion. It's all true, is it not?

 

[metalhead]

Well this got ridiculous in a hurry.

Why is it that the anti-feminist viewpoint always hastens to a reducto ad absurdum in these threads? Is it really just that people knee-jerk hate feminism despite not really understanding anything about it, so just want to try to discredit it as much as possible?

 

[Ryika]

Well this got ridiculous in a hurry.

Why is it that the anti-feminist viewpoint always hastens to a reducto ad absurdum in these threads? Is it really just that people knee-jerk hate feminism despite not really understanding anything about it, so just want to try to discredit it as much as possible?

Are you talking about me? I'm not an anti-feminist. I'm a feminist.

 

[Gori the Grey]

It's omnipresent, I don't think omnipotent, but deeply, deeply interwoven into our social relations. Men didn't create it to oppress women, though that is one of its primary operations. It does oppress both genders, women a good bit more than men. It is only partially kept alive by conscious will; a good ninety percent of its operations are unconscious. It is not the greatest thing ever created by man. Feminism is not a religion, though perhaps it does look like one. Patriarchy bears some resemblance to an evil god. It's all true.

 

[Bamspeedy]

I was very close to saying something very ignorant, but then I thought about it some more, and now I see the errors of my way. I thought:

"Women are the slight majority of people who have the right to vote, so one would think they'd make sure that the military is serving women's interests."

Thankfully I then saw the light and understood what you were trying to say.

Women are part of the patriarchy. So of course they'd undermine women's interests.

There is a difference between having a slight majority and having a very dominant majority. Has there every been any military that is not very dominantly male? (except Qadaffi bodyguards, and limited 'all female' units where those female units are but a tiny portion of the total armed forces of that country).
No doubt the men of Boko haram are deciding what that group does.

In my parent's relationship after 50 years I'm sure I wouldn't be too far off from assuming her political views are based on whatever his opinions are. It's not so much that he tells her what to think (as it may be in some relationships), it's more to 'keep the peace' and to keep his blood pressure down.

 

[Ryika]

It's omnipresent, I don't think omnipotent, but deeply, deeply interwoven into our social relations. Men didn't create it to oppress women, though that is one of its primary operations. It does oppress both genders, women a good bit more than men. It is only partially kept alive by conscious will; a good ninety percent of its operations are unconscious. It is not the greatest thing ever created by man. Feminism is not a religion, though perhaps it does look like one. Patriarchy bears some resemblance to an evil god. It's all true.

Thank you, brother. Frighening, but at the same time, very enlightening.

There is a difference between having a slight majority and having a very dominant majority. Has there every been any military that is not very dominantly male? (except Qadaffi bodyguards, and limited 'all female' units where those female units are but a tiny portion of the total armed forces of that country).
No doubt the men of Boko haram are deciding what that group does.

I don't know about this. A small minority is enough in a democracy to force change. But it seems to me that the real issue that I had missed before is indeed that women too are tools of and controlled by the patriarchy. They're making choices that go against their own interests, because patriarchy makes them feel connected to their men. I think that's why the traditional family structures are so important for patriarchy - no husband, no way to keep women indoctrinated).

In my parent's relationship after 50 years I'm sure I wouldn't be too far off from assuming her political views are based on whatever his opinions are. It's not so much that he tells her what to think (as it may be in some relationships), it's more to 'keep the peace' and to keep his blood pressure down.

Hm. Don't take this the wrong way, but if that's true, then your mother is a coward, and a deserter in the fight against the patriarchy. She's choosing a peaceful life by reaffirming his believes instead of standing up against the patriarchy. A part of me thinks that's pretty pathetic, but at the same time... I also see how in the end she's just another victim of the patriarchy. That really angers me, but I guess I shouldn't be angry at your mom. She's a victim, but I just can't steer my head around the fact that those who are victims of the patriarchy are also the ones who keep it alive - what an evil system.

 

[metatron]

But it's not a religion. It's all true, is it not?

Once more: Welcome to the show.

Of course it's largely religious.

You are only noticing that now? I was under the impression you had realised that, like, a year or two ago.

Are you talking about me? I'm not an anti-feminist. I'm a feminist.

No, no, no.
You may be a feminist here.
In the Anglosphere you're an MRA. You better get used to it.

 

[sophie]

Is there anything that is _not_ a consequence of the damn patriarchy?

That's how ideology works, dude.

 

[Hygro]

Is there anything that is _not_ a consequence of the damn patriarchy?

Is there anything that is not a consequence of history and society?

 

[Ryika]

Is there anything that is not a consequence of history and society?

The event that created the universe!

If there was one.

 

[Hygro]

Moderator Action: RD threads require more than one-word answers or, in this instance, emoticons. One point infraction. - Vincour
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889

 

[caketastydelish]

I'm not in disagreement with what you're saying as I do agree that the boy aspect being trickier doesn't mean it should be avoided.

There is, however, a difference because the foreign liberator is an unknown variable when compared to the local militant. In most instances, the local militant will be someone they know or someone a person close to them knows. A foreign liberator is not only a stranger but they also put what's familiar to the boy at risk. When frightened, we do stupid things. This is especially true for a child. A child soldier, even if they haven't been indoctrinated, will still likely fire on those who resist or a foreign liberator even if isolated from those that may exact punishment.

A child soldier is liberated when they believe they can realistically agree to walking away from the militia without consequence. That's tricky to accomplish, especially if you are trying to liberate them en masse. Who wants to be liberated? Who will shoot the liberator in the back? Who is going to shoot because they think they have to shoot in order to avoid what would happen to them if they didn't and the liberators are driven off or unsuccessful?

That's a lot less tricky when you're liberating a shipment of girls. They won't shoot you in the back. They're not being indoctrinated into the militia's mindset since many of them are sold to other regions or become the child-wives of local warlords and commanders. Their time frame for indoctrination is far lengthier than that of a boy's. A boy "conscripted" a month ago will shoot at you alongside a boy that's committed to the cause and alongside the commander that first took them. To the liberator they're faced with three armed men trying to kill them.

A girl kidnapped a month ago will go with you the second their captors are eliminated. They are not armed. They are not mingling within the militia (in the context that they're involved in an armed conflict). They are held as hostages, not combatants.

If you get captured by the pirates and gangsters, I'll make sure not to save you since you're male.

 

[Synobun]

If you get captured by the pirates and gangsters, I'll make sure not to save you since you're male.

A lovely sentiment but ultimately irrelevant to the contents of the post you're quoting.

 

[Ryika]

If you get captured by the pirates and gangsters, I'll make sure not to save you since you're male.

If the pirate movies that I saw when I was young(er) are a reliable source, then that's exactly the wrong kind of behavior, because women who are captured by pirates will usually, after a short phase of fighting back, fall in love with the captains of those ships. If you take them away by force, then the pirates will come and destroy your cities with their big cannons to get their women back. That's why you should let them live their new lives in Somalia so that everybody has their happy end.

 

[Broken_Erika]

As long as the pirate captain looks like Johnny Depp.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

As long as the pirate captain looks like Johnny Depp.

I was thinking of Errol Flynn.