Problematic Stuff

[laklak]

I hate the fucking Mets. Not as much as those damn Yankees, though.

[pErvinalia]

Huh? I'm a feminist. Do I need to be a particular type? I don't know what type I am. I didn't even realise there were types, other than broadly mainstream and batshit insane.

And the concept of patriarchy has been explained many times on this forum (and across social media in general). If you don't know what it means then Google it.

[Cunt]

Huh? I'm a feminist. Do I need to be a particular type? I don't know what type I am. I didn't even realise there were types, other than broadly mainstream and batshit insane.

And the concept of patriarchy has been explained many times on this forum (and across social media in general). If you don't know what it means then Google it.

I have.

Usually, when the batshit insane types can't explain some term or concept they are using, they fall back on 'educate yourself'. It has become the clarion call of the idiot.

I don't think you are one, but you are using their tools.

If you don't have a better description of the patriarchy than you have offered, I humbly submit that your definition is as lacking as any I have heard.

Maybe it would be better to use a more clear bit of language to express your idea of 'patriarchy'.

Try this - every time you hear the word 'patriarchy', substitute it for 'matriarchy', or 'bogeyman', and enjoy the ambiguity which becomes apparent.

[JimC]

The word "patriarchy" is often used in a very unthinking way, and as a gross generalisation. However, that does not mean that there are not aspects of the current way that society is organised that put obstacles in women's way, and that could not be organised better.

[pErvinalia]

@Cunt...Bullshit. 5th hit in Google gives a detailed description of patriarchy. Including the following:

But critically, the same pressure exists for men to conform to particular roles. One classic example (though not universal by any stretch) is that men must be tough and strong, must not cry, must not back down, must be willing to get into physical altercations to solve problems. Because of the need to have such rigid roles, patriarchies are largely intolerant of anyone who lives outside of the norm. This of course includes homosexual and transgender individuals, but also men who prefer intelligence or gentle persuasion to physical violence, men who wish to be involved fathers, or men who want to be primary caregivers. (Think "nurse" vs. "doctor.") In a patriarchal society individuals who do not conform to certain standards risk being marginalized.

.
http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Patriarchy

Ironically, it's people like you and Coito and Dave Dodo who bleat on about patriarchy being all about women hating men, who are engaging in simplistic "boogeyman" rhetoric.

[Cunt]

@Cunt...Bullshit. 5th hit in Google gives a detailed description of patriarchy. Including the following:

But critically, the same pressure exists for men to conform to particular roles. One classic example (though not universal by any stretch) is that men must be tough and strong, must not cry, must not back down, must be willing to get into physical altercations to solve problems. Because of the need to have such rigid roles, patriarchies are largely intolerant of anyone who lives outside of the norm. This of course includes homosexual and transgender individuals, but also men who prefer intelligence or gentle persuasion to physical violence, men who wish to be involved fathers, or men who want to be primary caregivers. (Think "nurse" vs. "doctor.") In a patriarchal society individuals who do not conform to certain standards risk being marginalized.

.
http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Patriarchy

Ironically, it's people like you and Coito and Dave Dodo who bleat on about patriarchy being all about women hating men, who are engaging in simplistic "boogeyman" rhetoric.

Still no decent description there though...as I said, replace patriarchy with matriarchy or bogeyman and it works equally well.

To think I don't know is pretty funny. What is it you think I am missing? The quote you have here stalls on the first example, explaining that it is not universal...of course it isn't.

Saying that 'patriarchies are largely intolerant of anyone who lives outside the norm' is fucking hilarious. Have you ever seen how a group of old women treat a hot young slut?

Fucking brilliant that you pulled a vague quote from wiki to support your vagueness...

[Cunt]

In a patriarchal society individuals who do not conform to certain standards risk being marginalized.

Does anyone other than men marginalize people who don't conform to certain standards?

PATRIARCHY!!! (even if it is old feminists doing it)

[pErvinalia]

@Cunt...Bullshit. 5th hit in Google gives a detailed description of patriarchy. Including the following:

But critically, the same pressure exists for men to conform to particular roles. One classic example (though not universal by any stretch) is that men must be tough and strong, must not cry, must not back down, must be willing to get into physical altercations to solve problems. Because of the need to have such rigid roles, patriarchies are largely intolerant of anyone who lives outside of the norm. This of course includes homosexual and transgender individuals, but also men who prefer intelligence or gentle persuasion to physical violence, men who wish to be involved fathers, or men who want to be primary caregivers. (Think "nurse" vs. "doctor.") In a patriarchal society individuals who do not conform to certain standards risk being marginalized.

.
http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Patriarchy

Ironically, it's people like you and Coito and Dave Dodo who bleat on about patriarchy being all about women hating men, who are engaging in simplistic "boogeyman" rhetoric.

Still no decent description there though

Patent nonsense. There's thousands of words there. I didn't see any reference to a metaphorical boogeyman.

...as I said, replace patriarchy with matriarchy or bogeyman and it works equally well.

Ironic that the new approach to moderation and the gushing "welcome back's" has brought us another poster who posts bigoted nonsense. Well done rationalia.

On the point, no, you can't use matriarchy (or boogeyman), as it's patently nonsensical to claim that women predominantly hold the positions of power in a society and family.

To think I don't know is pretty funny.

You "don't know" what? Patriarchy? You were the one who said you don't know what it means.

What is it you think I am missing? The quote you have here stalls on the first example, explaining that it is not universal...of course it isn't.

Who said it has to be universal? Maybe that's the point you are missing. It's about the predominance of power and gender roles.

Saying that 'patriarchies are largely intolerant of anyone who lives outside the norm' is fucking hilarious. Have you ever seen how a group of old women treat a hot young slut?

Non-sequitur? I don't see how an anecdote about old women relates to, let alone debunks, the concept of patriarchy.

Fucking brilliant that you pulled a vague quote from wiki to support your vagueness...

Fuck off. If you can't read and understand anything past empty rhetoric it's not my problem.

[pErvinalia]

In a patriarchal society individuals who do not conform to certain standards risk being marginalized.

Does anyone other than men marginalize people who don't conform to certain standards?

Where did you get that from? Nowhere does the link say that this relates to only men.

You're applying as much rigour to this as Dave Dodo does, just with less ranting and drunkenness.

PATRIARCHY!!! (even if it is old feminists doing it)

HYPERBOLE!!!

[Cunt]

Saying that 'patriarchies are largely intolerant of anyone who lives outside the norm' is fucking hilarious. Have you ever seen how a group of old women treat a hot young slut?

Non-sequitur? I don't see how an anecdote about old women relates to, let alone debunks, the concept of patriarchy.

Just pointing out that all groups do what you are blaming 'the patriarchy' for.

Women are the example I used because they are particularly recognizeable in that example.

Fucking brilliant that you pulled a vague quote from wiki to support your vagueness...

Fuck off. If you can't read and understand anything past empty rhetoric it's not my problem.

Oh look, insults and everything, just because I reject a label which you yourself admitted that you haven't studied much.

I still reject the label.

Want to try using other words? Or do they get tangled in your brightly dyed hair, hornrimmed glasses and obesity? Do you have a contract to accept use of that word or something?

Why so attached? English has LOTS of other words.

Anyway, I don't see men and women as the seperate groups that this 'patriarchy' implies. It's a bit black and white for fitting reality.

Men have not been 'oppressing' women. Any more than women have been oppressing men, each other, or their neighbours.

Individuals sure have. Men have lots of problems. One of them is accepting black and white descriptions of subtle and complicated issues. At least in my case.

Comb the tangles out of your brightly coloured hair. We have so far only disagreed on a word, and its use. We likely agree on much more than we disagree, and the word isn't that important to me.

Instead of insisting that I accept 'patriarchy theory' or be labelled a bigot, how about ditching the word and seeing if we really disagree on something substantive?

Alternately, you could resort to insulting me, waggling your finger, and gesturing with your horn-rimmed glasses. I'm happy with either.

[Cunt]

Oh, and if you STILL insist on attaching yourself to a bogeyman patriarchy theory, why not point out to me the alternate programs which have worked well. A matriarchy perhaps. With women being just as good as men in so many ways, there should be several in history we can review.

[Svartalf]

In a patriarchal society individuals who do not conform to certain standards risk being marginalized.

Does anyone other than men marginalize people who don't conform to certain standards?

PATRIARCHY!!! (even if it is old feminists doing it)

sure, men AND women of certain religious sects marginalize "delinquent" members
and I'm pretty sure the extreme feminist females similarly practice shunning of fellows they regard not feminist enough

[pErvinalia]

I think the rationalwiki article describes it pretty well. I don't think I could explain it any better. If you don't get it, you'll just have to go on characterizing it with empty rhetoric...

[Cunt]

I guess if you miss the questions I asked, it seems empty.

Since you don't answer questions, I will continue to assume that your hug box have advised you against it.

[pErvinalia]

What questions didn't I answer?