Why creationists can laugh at atheist feminists?

[laklak]

^^^ Exactly. Notwithstanding the few exceptions patriarchy is about women being expected to do the bulk of raising children and doing domestic chores and men doing hazardous jobs to bring in the money and getting killed in wars.

Damn. I live in the matriarchy! Mrs. Lak handles the (grown) daughter drama, I do all the cooking and shopping, she worked in a germ infested hospital while I stayed home, and I dodged the draft back in the day.

[pErvinalia]

You skirt!

[Scott1328]

what I dislike about the term "patriarchy" is that it reifies a complex interaction of biological facts, behaviors, preferences, and historical accidents and contingencies into a single label and seems to imply that the secret to an egalitarian society is merely a matter of eliminating the patriarchy.

But the patriarchy is a simplistic term for a hugely complicated problem. And it's better in my opinion to address the components and causes of patriarchy and leave the taxonomy to others.

[laklak]

You skirt!

That's Mr. Girls Blouse to you, mate.

[Hermit]

what I dislike about the term "patriarchy" is that it reifies a complex interaction of biological facts, behaviors, preferences, and historical accidents and contingencies into a single label and seems to imply that the secret to an egalitarian society is merely a matter of eliminating the patriarchy.

But the patriarchy is a simplistic term for a hugely complicated problem. And it's better in my opinion to address the components and causes of patriarchy and leave the taxonomy to others.

By labelling the complex interaction of biological facts, behaviours, preferences, and historical accidents and contingencies patriarchy you are leaving the taxonomy to others. I'm ok with it if that is what you want to do the same way as I might talk about a motor while taking it as read that it is actually a fairly complicated assemblage consisting of many components that have specialised functions.

[Scott1328]

[JimC]

what I dislike about the term "patriarchy" is that it reifies a complex interaction of biological facts, behaviors, preferences, and historical accidents and contingencies into a single label and seems to imply that the secret to an egalitarian society is merely a matter of eliminating the patriarchy.

But the patriarchy is a simplistic term for a hugely complicated problem. And it's better in my opinion to address the components and causes of patriarchy and leave the taxonomy to others.

[DaveDodo007]

How about... no? You're a waste of space. You don't even understand the basics of what you are "arguing". Not that you argue anything. You just rant and call people names. You still seem to be operating under the misapprehension that you are deserving of respect.

and this is why you are a creationist, we both call people names and rant but at least I will qualify my position when asked to do so. You on the other hand will brook no desent from your choosen position and yet claim you are a rationalist. What ever my disagreements with JimC and Scott are, they have never shown themselves to be closed minded and to refuse to listen to different viewpoints. You might want to reflect on that.

[DaveDodo007]

As I've already said, I think that using the "patriarchy" meme is ideologically rigid and rather absurd. It is not used by pragmatic, mainstream feminists who simply want to address evolutionary improvements in certain social issues, but is used by doctrinaire academic feminists who are, in reality, a small although vocal minority. rEv and Dave both, get over your fixation on this term, it is a meme whose time is past...

I have only scrollled down this far yet I have been proved right, It wouldn't surprise me if Scott is of the same mind. Of course I am terrible for believing that feminist think the Patriarchy is real and yet it is being defended by feminists. I think that feminist can now be put in the tin foil hat of people to ignore.

[DaveDodo007]

I think it's just misunderstood as both you and Dave prove.

We don't have to live in fear of teh feminazis just as we don't have to live in fear of radical (or otherwise) Muslims. Mis-characterising whole segments of society based on prejudice is irrational.

Just showing how delusional you are again, I grew up in Abuk, Turkey and if you can't see that Islam is both a political and religious movement you are a sad appleaser. Hello Neville and trust me you wont be fed to the crocodiles last as that is not how it works in reality. Show me again how my (former) religious are all for equality of the wemynzz. You leftys are so far up your own ass that calling you retarded is an insult to the unfortunate who suffer brain damage.

[DaveDodo007]

I think it's just misunderstood as both you and Dave prove.

We don't have to live in fear of teh feminazis just as we don't have to live in fear of radical (or otherwise) Muslims. Mis-characterising whole segments of society based on prejudice is irrational.

It may have been a reasonable description of one aspect of western society in the past, and is probably still a reasonable one in islamic countries, but it is misleading as a reasonable descriptor of, say, Australian society at the moment. It implies a conscious use of power by one sex to dominate another over the whole of society, and is simply over the top. A particular male, however, could be criticised for patriarchal attitudes to women...

None of which is to suggest that mainstream feminist programs to reduce various inequalities are not worthwhile; it's simply that using the term "the patriarchy" is both inaccurate and counter-productive, and is only seriously used by left-wing academic feminists, who can be legitimately targeted for rigid ideological views, IMO...

But Dave, they are not representative of feminism as a whole, even if they claim they are...

That is quite a claim since I am seeing it here.

[DaveDodo007]

^^^ Exactly. Notwithstanding the few exceptions patriarchy is about women being expected to do the bulk of raising children and doing domestic chores and men doing hazardous jobs to bring in the money and getting killed in wars.

And is that really an accurate description of expectations now?

Check out what percentage of soldiers, miners and construction workers and what percentage of men are the main care givers in a family or nurses or teachers, then ask the question again.

Is biology so confusing to you?

[DaveDodo007]

A funnier title would have been "Why evolutionists can laugh at atheist feminists"

"The bible says that women should be subservient"

"I'm an atheist feminist and don't believe in male patriarchal superstitions"

"Through natural selection, women have evolved to be subservient and gender rolls are linked genetically.

"I'm an atheist feminist and don't believe in male patriarchal superstitions"

Either stick around and defend your points or just fuck off.

[DaveDodo007]

what I dislike about the term "patriarchy" is that it reifies a complex interaction of biological facts, behaviors, preferences, and historical accidents and contingencies into a single label and seems to imply that the secret to an egalitarian society is merely a matter of eliminating the patriarchy.

But the patriarchy is a simplistic term for a hugely complicated problem. And it's better in my opinion to address the components and causes of patriarchy and leave the taxonomy to others.

Well, well, well, what a surprise. I probably disagree with Scott on most issues but I could never justify calling him a creationalist/ideologue and here is the proof. Don't expect a rational response Scott for that is a given. Also I know you wont accept my compliment here but it is given freely so make of it what you may.

[DaveDodo007]

Oh and Hermit I'm not making excuses for my drunkin' rants but seriously learn some biology and history as you are coming across as very ignorant of reality.