The Patriarchy

[BDBoop]

Looks like somebody's been reading along at USMB!

Sociologist Sylvia Walby has composed six overlapping structures that define patriarchy and that take different forms in different cultures and different times:

• The state: women are unlikely to have formal power and representation
• The household: women are more likely to do the housework and raise the children.
• Violence: women are more prone to being abused
• Paid work: women are likely to be paid less
• Sexuality: Women's sexuality is more likely to be treated negatively
• Culture: women are more misrepresented in media and popular culture

Not listed, and what I see so often around here, is men (and some women) who get downright spiteful about those of us who believe that things should be different. That women should have equal power, representation, pay, and not be termed a slut or whore for choosing to be sexually active outside of marriage - you know. How men are without a second thought.

 

[JakeStarkey]

There are two types of this: the old feminism that demonizes men, and the new feminism that works on empowering both sexes.

To which will one belong?

 

[BDBoop]

I should think one could wear that shoe on either foot. In other words, it's much easier to work with someone if they're not trying to demonize me for an accident of birth.

 

[g5000]

I think you gals will love this:
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sk9prKSeFN4]Bill O'Reilly: There Has To Be A Downside To A Woman President - YouTube[/ame]

O’REILLY: There’s got to be some downside to having a woman president, right? Something – something that may not fit with that office, correct?

KRISTEN POWERS: I’m going to say no, Bill.

O’REILLY: So there is no downside to having a woman?

 

[BDBoop]

Poor Bill.

 

[g5000]

Womenfolk just don't belong on bicycles, in the voting booth, or in the Oval Office.

 

[BDBoop]

For some reason nobody wants to discuss the matter honestly and openly.

 

[martybegan]

For some reason nobody wants to discuss the matter honestly and openly.

Whats the point? Any time I hear about "patriarchy" its the same as when I hear about the "plutocracy", its a boogey man (in this case literally) intended to create a target for the 2 minute hate.

In the west there is no enforced patriarchy, in the middle east you have a valid point, but here I see it as a perception, and one taken by people looking for a reason to scream out "help help!! I'm being oppressed!!!"

 

[jillian]

Looks like somebody's been reading along at USMB!

Sociologist Sylvia Walby has composed six overlapping structures that define patriarchy and that take different forms in different cultures and different times:

• The state: women are unlikely to have formal power and representation
• The household: women are more likely to do the housework and raise the children.
• Violence: women are more prone to being abused
• Paid work: women are likely to be paid less
• Sexuality: Women's sexuality is more likely to be treated negatively
• Culture: women are more misrepresented in media and popular culture

Not listed, and what I see so often around here, is men (and some women) who get downright spiteful about those of us who believe that things should be different. That women should have equal power, representation, pay, and not be termed a slut or whore for choosing to be sexually active outside of marriage - you know. How men are without a second thought.

you mean like when the misogynists call us feminazis?

yep.

the reality is, with regard to each of the above criteria, we are evolving... and that evolution has caused reactionaries (largely male) to fight back by way of anti-female legislation, anti-female comments (like you're a "ho" if you think your prescription birth control should be covered by the insurance policy paid to cover it, but covering Viagra is ok).

 

[BDBoop]

Thank you, Jillian.

The whole denigration based on appearance thing really came into sharp relief for me with the Michelle Obama attacks. Nothing like making someone one-dimensional, and then demonizing them with the imaginary results.

I'll go into more specifics when next I wake, but she's not fat, she is not ugly, and how she LOOKS is superficial, anyway.

 

[jillian]

Thank you, Jillian.

The whole denigration based on appearance thing really came into sharp relief for me with the Michelle Obama attacks. Nothing like making someone one-dimensional, and then demonizing them with the imaginary results.

I'll go into more specifics when next I wake, but she's not fat, she is not ugly, and how she LOOKS is superficial, anyway.

it's never done to men.... male politicians can be as fat, unkempt and ugly as anything.

but I was amused when people called michelle obama fat or Hillary a "hag" (one loon did that this morning).

even the female politicians they say they like, they only talk about in terms of do-ability.

 

[martybegan]

Thank you, Jillian.

The whole denigration based on appearance thing really came into sharp relief for me with the Michelle Obama attacks. Nothing like making someone one-dimensional, and then demonizing them with the imaginary results.

I'll go into more specifics when next I wake, but she's not fat, she is not ugly, and how she LOOKS is superficial, anyway.

So you never judge anyone based on appearance? Even for a split second?

 

[HelenaHandbag]

I will have to bookmark this thread for the next time conservative, libertarian, and the quite bright ladies of FNC are run into the ground by progressives, as nothing more than eye candy and bimbos.

 

[martybegan]

Thank you, Jillian.

The whole denigration based on appearance thing really came into sharp relief for me with the Michelle Obama attacks. Nothing like making someone one-dimensional, and then demonizing them with the imaginary results.

I'll go into more specifics when next I wake, but she's not fat, she is not ugly, and how she LOOKS is superficial, anyway.

it's never done to men.... male politicians can be as fat, unkempt and ugly as anything.

but I was amused when people called michelle obama fat or Hillary a "hag" (one loon did that this morning).

even the female politicians they say they like, they only talk about in terms of do-ability.

yeah, because NO ONE does a fat joke about Chris Christie.

 

[jillian]

Thank you, Jillian.

The whole denigration based on appearance thing really came into sharp relief for me with the Michelle Obama attacks. Nothing like making someone one-dimensional, and then demonizing them with the imaginary results.

I'll go into more specifics when next I wake, but she's not fat, she is not ugly, and how she LOOKS is superficial, anyway.

it's never done to men.... male politicians can be as fat, unkempt and ugly as anything.

but I was amused when people called michelle obama fat or Hillary a "hag" (one loon did that this morning).

even the female politicians they say they like, they only talk about in terms of do-ability.

yeah, because NO ONE does a fat joke about Chris Christie.

most people don't. at least I wouldn't.

but no doubt you can feel free to justify your bad behavior any way you want...

 

[HelenaHandbag]

Thank you, Jillian.

The whole denigration based on appearance thing really came into sharp relief for me with the Michelle Obama attacks. Nothing like making someone one-dimensional, and then demonizing them with the imaginary results.

I'll go into more specifics when next I wake, but she's not fat, she is not ugly, and how she LOOKS is superficial, anyway.

it's never done to men.... male politicians can be as fat, unkempt and ugly as anything.

but I was amused when people called michelle obama fat or Hillary a "hag" (one loon did that this morning).

even the female politicians they say they like, they only talk about in terms of do-ability.

yeah, because NO ONE does a fat joke about Chris Christie.

NO ONE ever made a snide comment about the way Sarah Palin dressed.

 

[martybegan]

it's never done to men.... male politicians can be as fat, unkempt and ugly as anything.

but I was amused when people called michelle obama fat or Hillary a "hag" (one loon did that this morning).

even the female politicians they say they like, they only talk about in terms of do-ability.

yeah, because NO ONE does a fat joke about Chris Christie.

most people don't. at least I wouldn't.

but no doubt you can feel free to justify your bad behavior any way you want...

So MY side is defined by the outliers, the ones who are jackasses, but YOUR side is defined by what YOU would do, not your OWN jackasses?

Can you see the duality of thinking you are working with?

 

[BDBoop]

You honest to God don't want to discuss this, Marty, you are making that abundantly clear. So I'm sure you will understand when I tell you I won't be responding to your attempts to muddy the waters.

 

[g5000]

Thank you, Jillian.

The whole denigration based on appearance thing really came into sharp relief for me with the Michelle Obama attacks. Nothing like making someone one-dimensional, and then demonizing them with the imaginary results.

I'll go into more specifics when next I wake, but she's not fat, she is not ugly, and how she LOOKS is superficial, anyway.

So you never judge anyone based on appearance? Even for a split second?

Unfortunately, women judge each other on appearance quite a bit. Women are downright vicious toward each other in that respect.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

Womenfolk just don't belong on bicycles, in the voting booth, or in the Oval Office.

Or riding a horse astride because, we all know that it turns them into sexual maniacs.