Dear Patriarch Kind Sir: I’m terribly sorry to bother you, but mightn’t you remove your jackboot from my throat at your earliest convenience?
Published by punkass marc March 16th, 2007 in Feminism, Lick My Jackboots of Love, What Patriarchy?
Sabotabby at The AntiSocial Socialist has one of the more active livejournal sites I’ve seen. Unfortunately, her traffic includes more than just the friendly feminist types. She also suffers the company of a classic soft troll, one of those “I’m on your side but everything you do and say is wrong” types who cloaks his wingnuttery under a veil of helpful advice.
Hey baby, I’m just here to help you ladies with your cute little uprising.
You know the kind of advice I mean — like when trolls try to help us understand why the word “Patriarchy” is so terribly damaging to the cause of feminism:
For the few times I’ve been able to stomach reading Ann Coulter (know your enemy), I’ve never seen her attack someone who wouldn’t already be opposed to her. On the other hand, compare and contrast with the word “Patriarchy” - which even gets zingarella’s boyfriend (who I assume is pretty progressive) feeling defensive because it directly dichotomises the genders (feminists good, patriarchy bad) when there is absolutely no need for there to be this dichotomy. Instead, if you called yourself egalitarians against oppression (which I believe is akin to what you are trying to express), you could say the exact same thing without making potential allies defensive and potential neutrals threatened.
The emphasis is mine, and not just because I felt like breaking up his long-winded rant.
First off, I missed the memo on our genders being switched from “male” and “female” to “patriarch” and “feminist.” Does this mean we need new bathroom signs? If so, I vote for a burning bra on the feminist sign and a big, fat, fucking crybaby on the patriarchy sign, because that’s clearly the vibe those guys are giving off these days.
Being a part of the Patriarchy is like being the good member of the Bush family. In your own mind, you don’t have to self-identify with the ugly part of your heritage, but publicly, you need to accept 3 things:
1) This thing you’re born into, even if it wasn’t your choice, has on the whole been responsible for awful, awful crimes against humanity.
2) When people say “The Bush Family sucks” you need to admit the truth of that statement even if you’ve been performing Jesus-like works of samaritanship. Your exceptions don’t cancel out the larger evils carried out over a much longer period of time by multiple generations.
3) You are part of the Bush family and have benefitted massively from their oppressive acts. People have given you breaks and cut you slack even when you didn’t ask for it.
This may seem like a contradiction on the surface — how can you both reject and accept your Bush-ness? But it all has to do with the mode of acknowledgement.
You don’t need to internalize being a Bush — you ought to rebel against it inside yourself and try to be as un-Bush you can be. But you must also accept that people who don’t like what your family’s done will impugn your family, and by extension you, even though you haven’t been as evil as others.
You’ve benefitted from your status as part of that family, meaning you’re privileged and part of the oppressor class whether you like it or not. This exempts you from pats on the back for combatting said oppression (because at best you’re working your way back to even). It also exempts you from the right to bitch and moan when people do their impugning via language you don’t like.
Again, being a well-meaning male and being The Good Bush are quite similar. We didn’t choose to be born into Patriarchy, but we have been. And even though some of us are trying to act in opposition to the Patriarchy, we’re still part of it. So when people rip on the Patriarchy, those insults also target us by default, but since well-meaning males shouldn’t be internally self-identifying with the Patriarchy, the insults should roll right off our backs. Heck, we should be hurling just as many, if not more, of them.
And we definitely shouldn’t scrunch up our buttcheeks over the word “Patriarchy.” The oppression of the Patriarchy is an entirely factual element of the status quo, and we needn’t avoid talking about it by name — any name — because some men will be offended. No revolution gets very far by kissing the ass of the oppressors.
69 Responses to “Dear Patriarch Kind Sir: I’m terribly sorry to bother you, but mightn’t you remove your jackboot from my throat at your earliest convenience?”
- 1 Pingback on Mar 22nd, 2007 at 9:01 am
- 2 Pingback on Mar 22nd, 2007 at 4:45 pm
- 3 Pingback on Apr 6th, 2007 at 3:55 pm
- 4 Pingback on Apr 14th, 2007 at 2:21 pm
- 5 Pingback on Jul 9th, 2007 at 8:26 am
Shorter concern trolls: Feminism would be a lot more pleasant if it pushed the idea that men deserve to dominate women.
Mmm, the smell of “ladies, ladies, ladies, haven’t you ever heard of appeasement?” in the morning. It’s like a baby - so cute, yet so boring.
So let me get this straight. I am a man. I also somehow get advantage from being a man - this is btw, convienently invisible/unevidenced/(imaginary?) benefit.
Therefore I don’t deserve to get any credit for trying to breakdown the pretend social fabric? And I don’t get to complain if I am personally insulted by those brave feminist “revolutionaries”?
Wow. And you wonder why more men don’t flock to your side.
Well, shit, I don’t see where that whole explanation said “Prince Barin is a douchebag”.
The point is, your personal nice happy awesomeness doesn’t negate the actions of the group you belong to.
I could go on, but I’d just be repeating the analogy up there that you didn’t pay attention to, so why bother?
Instead, I’ll note that you’re advocating a very radical re-imagining of the english language; essentially, by your argument, we aren’t allowed to assign qualities to groups… as long as one Nazi saw the light and deserted to fight against germany, we can never again say “Nazis are evil”.
So, something I’ve been interested in for about… the last 30 seconds, is why these complaints are always shrouded in 3rd person language. It’s never “As a man, I often feel alienated by the way you talk about the patriarchy.”, but “Your talk is offensive to men and that’s why men don’t like you.”
What’s that about?
So Oscar Shindler shouldn’t get any credit for saving the lives of a thousand people beccause he was a member of the Nazi Party?
Wow. That’s dumb,
Oskar Schindler & Prince Barin: Separated at birth or members of different species?…
Prince Barin,
You really don’t see any inherent benefits accorded to you by this society simply by being a dude? Are you sure about that?
To be fair, I didn’t really see it either before reading Susan Okin. Or rather, I was aware of it, but didn’t really understand how damaging it is to individuals and to society. It was always just, “sure it’s unfair, but it’s just how things are, you know? It’s the natural state.”
To see something, one must look.
His Highness refuses even to see the point of the analogy Christopher made:
So Oscar Shindler shouldn’t get any credit for saving the lives of a thousand people beccause he was a member of the Nazi Party?
Wow. That’s dumb,
So, since Schindler saw the light and helped people (AFTER getting filthy rich off of their slave labor, naturally) does His Highness think Nazism is ok? That was C’s point, after all.
The reason these guys have a problem with the word “Patriarchy” is that they fail to see that they are as much its victims as its beneficiaries. They just don’t seem to get the concept that a heirarchichal society based on gender is inherently unjust to everybody.
I have nothing really to add to the discussion (at least nothing that wasn’t brought up in the record-setting 143-comment flamewar on my LJ), but I am blushing at this—especially since I’m a big fan of this blog. However, I should mention that the post that sparked said hilarity was not mine—the concern trolling was spillover from zingerella’s attempt to explain the patriarchy to some dudes on her LJ who just weren’t getting it. (And still don’t get it.)
Anyway, credit where credit is due and all that.
thanks, sabotabby! i intend to make a concerted effort to interact more with the folks who are kind enough to link us, and i enjoy reading your site. and while zingerella’s site may have spawned the trolls, you were lucky enough to catch a case of them yourself. don’t sell yourself too short…
AFTER getting filthy rich off of their slave labor, naturally
Be a little more fair: he spent all of that money greasing the wheels necessary to keep those slaves out of the gas chamber, and died poor.
Yes. There is no Patriarchy.
I never said it did.
Conversely, an individual simply born into a group is not responsible for that group’s alleged status or crimes i.e. Jenna Bush is not responsible for the War in Iraq or her family’s wealth.
Futhermore, if Jenna Bush feels upset about her father’s actions and takes measures to correct injustices (i.e. giving her trust fund to Iraqi victims) she is not just “working towards zero” and she should be given many “pats” on the back and excused from criticisms of her father’s misdeeds.
To think otherwise is dumb and you have only yourselves to blame for not attracting more men to your “revolution”.
yeah….. umm i only have one thing to say……. you crazy, p little girls ( being as none of you are women) need to get off your high ass horses and realize that you are what is “keeping women down” you and your ridiculousness will bash all men….. even when they are not part of the asses that are one in 15 billion that still treat woman like shit…… in fact you are causing your own downfall by not noticing that these men…… each and every guy on this post would easily be nice to you if you stopped being a little girl and take care of your man….. bring him a drink and open it….. rub his feet…. and kiss him everyday….. i have the best man in the world because i am not a Nazi and dont follow your crazy guidelines of we cant do anything for men…… sounds to me like you are all afraid of the package. get some and try again!!!
Yes. There is no Patriarchy.
If you say so. I hope you enjoy not getting raped.
Your gross generalization of all men is so stupid it makes my head hurt.
Okay… let’s apply your logical construct to other situations. Here’s what you say:
All men are evil because some of them created a system where men are treated better, even if they are for your brand of radical feminism.
This translates into the logic.
All members of a certain group of people (even if they are born into it) are part of a problem, even if they fight the very problem they are supposedly a part of.
This is the same sort of logic the KKK uses against the blacks. Perhaps you can get pink hoods instead of white ones.
Not only is this sort of logic discriminatory, it’s illogical. Let me use the same logic to paint other situations. This is what you support if you consider this bullshit logic to be true.
1. Abraham Lincoln is evil because he’s white when some white people owned slaves.
2. All black people are evil because many of them commit crimes. Even people like Martian Luther King and Bill Cosby.
3. All arabs are evil because a few of them blew up one of our buildings.
As you can see, your logic of “all men are evil, even the ones on our side”, is bullshit.
Let me introduce you to a new form of logic, one that actually makes sense.
- All people are individuals, and while you can group them, those groupings are illogical when talking about any individual person. -
I’m just tired of seeing you fucking feminists STEREOTYPE all men as oppressors when at the same time you claim to combat stereotyping. Get off you’re high horse and quit your SEXIST STEROTYPING.
All men are evil
If I didn’t know you were congenitally stupid, I’d point out that you seem to have missed the point entirely.
I think you have missed the point Junk.
I will use another analogy.
Americans consume more resources per capita than any other people on this planet. We are by far the leading contributors of global warming pollutants. We invade other countries. We created American Idol.
Americans are assholes - (for arguments sake).
If you are American are you responsible for the war in Iraq, global warming, American Idol, etc? Are you personally morally culpable of these dastardly things?
According to Kyso you are.
If you forswore your Americaness, gave up your wealth and moved to some suitably impoverished nation and dedicated your life to charity in an orphanage for blind children would you be worthy of admiration?
According to Kyso you wouldn’t. She would just claim you were “working towards zero” - or some other such nonsense.
Would you feel exempt from criticisms directed to you of Americans by foreigners?
Sorry - Kyso says you won’t have the “right to bitch and moan”.
That’s why what she said was dumb.
What? All I said was that Oskar Schindler was, in the end, a pretty good guy.
But yeah, as an American I do feel some responsibility for the bad things that we’re doing to the rest of the world. It’s the flip side of feeling proud about the good things. And when karma comes to bite us in the ass, I’ll pay along with the other 300 million of you.
But this is thread drift, so we’ll just end that I’m so pleased you think I write this blog all by myself, but I don’t. This is Marc’s post.
Junk,
Do you ever contribute anything? (Answer to rhetorical question - not really)
At least you could try to be funny or something.
Kyso,
It’s honorable that you want to rectify actions made by members of our group, but at the same time it’s not right for you to be guilty because our lovely president decides to bomb some country just because he can’t pronounce it’s name. I think a big problem with modern feminism is that it generalizes all men as oppressors and all women as victims. This mentality serves no one, especially women. I think you should fight for the rights of women without dividing society and labeling an entire class of people as oppressors. You’re never going to advance the rights of women if all you do is paint them as victims. You need see things at the individual level, and quit generalizing.
Actually, junk science hit the nail on the head. As men, we have almost no fear of getting raped.
Meanwhile, as I posted yesterday, a 2006 UN study shows violence against women is the most common but least punished crime in the world. And the statistics here are overwhelming.
The Patriarchy means men can live almost entirely withour fear of rape. The Patriarchy means you are allowed to be bombastic and confident as a man and people won’t call you means like “bitch” just because you have the nerve to be proud of yourself. The Patriarchy means you are part of the good old boys network without even having to apply. I am a man, and I plainly see all the breaks I get — you can, too, whether you admit it or not.
Barin, if you can’t grasp the Bush family analogy, then I’m sorry — for you. Saying “the Bush family sucks” is a perfectly valid opinion. That family’s damn near wrecked this country. It doesn’t mean that every single member has played a role, but rather, on the whole, the family has been a terrible influence on America. So if I say “the Bush family sucks,” Jenna shouldn’t act as petulant and whiny as you do when I talk ruefully of the Patriarchy. Instead she should say, “yeah, the family has messed up, and I want to change that image by, first, acknowledging that on the whole the people I am associated with have been bad, and second, by doing things differently myself.”
That’s what guys need to do, too. We need to own up to the fact that sexism is prevalent, and it’s perpetuated constantly, and we should openly acknowledge that we want to change that system.
Vultan, if you don’t know the difference between calling out institutionalized privilege in favor of men and stereotyping against the underprivileged, then I’m sorry for you, too.
Barin, Vultan, you guys know that sexism remains ingrained in our culture. Your lame protests to this obvious truth are boring, repetitive, and disingenuous. You and your whines aren’t welcome at Punkassblog. And if you continue to comment, I warn you that you won’t like what happens to your words.
This blog is reserved for genuine, constructive conversation, and you miscontrue and mischaracterize everything here to try and have your way. Your time here is over.
Horses are pretty.
Has junk ever said anything constructive?
Hardly at all. If I weren’t so pretty, I’d be banned by now.
I like cake.
Wow.
If you read Prince Barin, Vultan the Mighty, or princess Aurora (assuming that she’s not just pulling our virtual legs with her arrows aimed at Ms. Strawfeminist) (Also, what is it with the handles? Prince this, Princess that, and Whatsisface the Mighty? Overcompensate much?)
It’s almost as if I never explained that the Patriarchy isn’t about individual sweet, well-intentioned guys who like women and believe in equal pay for work of equal value and don’t blame rape victims being Big Bad Dudes in funny hats who sit enthroned surrounded by scantily clad concubines and chortle evilly as they oppress women. It’s almost as if nobody else ever did, either. It’s almost as if nobody ever explained the nature of male privilege in a reader-friendly format, or maybe a checklist or something.
It’s almost as if neither I nor anyone smarter than I ever explained that while the system privileges men, we’re all part of the it.
It’s almost as if people either haven’t done their reading, or live in a whole ‘nother civlilzation. (Maybe that explains the Prince and Princess—in their world, they’re royalty.)
What’s funny is the patriarchy-identifying dudes here don’t even get to claim special status for meaning well, since they don’t and are assholes. Full-on identification with the evil powers that be. They were rooting for Sauron that whole time.
Friends are cool.
Also, I apologise for mixing my metaphors, above. I’m not sure how even a princess of cloudcukooland where the Nice Guys live can pull anyone’s leg with arrows.
I find their hypocrisy the most amusing thing about their trollful petulance. By ignoring whole swaths of our posts and comments, taking random sentences out of context, and positing objectively untrue statements as fact, they try to claim we’re somehow fabricating reality.
I figure if you’re interested in preserving the male stranglehold on our society, at least be upfront about it. To lie about its (non)existence is just so cowardly.
But Hans is right: friends are cool.
Is the editing of “Kinder, Küche, Kirche”’s last post a deliberate pun?
I like them a lot better now that their comments are nice and short. Keep it up, guys.
I figure if you’re interested in preserving the male stranglehold on our society, at least be upfront about it. To lie about its (non)existence is just so cowardly.
In my years as a blogging feminist, I have learned there’s no level of cowardice too cowardly for the Real Men out there to reach.
Andrew,
Nah, but I’m betting he really does like cake. Who doesn’t like cake? Also, Cake.
Loving the concise Flash Gordons. They seem less like chronic droolers now.
Are there trolls we miss after they’re gone?…
Not this time.
The stench will be around for a while, anyway.
“The stench will be around for a while, anyway.”
Is that the sulfur smell I’m getting? Or is that from what I had for lunch?…
Grody to the max, dude.
I pooped in my pants a little.
There’s a resort of editing posts? I was looking for a good place to take a vacation.
Dogs go ‘woof!’
Rainbows shine hope.
Okay, those comments were too long by about a hundred times. I don’t want to have to do any more scrolling. Short and sweet, guys.
“After all, it’s a much more impressive act to go against self interest on the basis of moral principle than to act when the two of them combine as in the case of oppressed peoples combating unjust rulers.”
This argument reminded me in all 5 comments it appeared on this page of one I heard many years ago in regards to “deadbeat dads.” I don’t care to open a debate on that topic, but the gist of the statement that I think has some relevance to this discussion was that fathers who actually pay child support and take fair responsibility for their biological offspring did not deserve special recognition or “props” since that’s what every father should be doing anyway.
In the case of humans of privilege choosing to side with the oppressed humans, the privileged were oppressing (blissfully ignorant) until they consciously stopped* and, appropriately horrified as humans of good conscience would be, fought the very system of tyrannical hierarchy that benefited them in the first place. The system is malevolently flawed, and recognizing that is the first step to smashing it, I think.
But then I’m an ignorant middle-class honky queer female who has benefited from excellent access to information and education**. I could easily be (and am probably) wrong.
*Is ending your own contribution to oppression even possible? Methinks not.
**Thanks, feminism!
All over the world, millions of women are mistreated.
It seems to me that the ultimate act of cowardice here is Marc Faletti editing our posts.
I dunno, I’d have to give the edge to that guy in Titanic who jumped on one of the earliest-filled “women and children only” lifeboats, or maybe any one of those people in the 50’s that sold out thier friends and coworkers so McCarthy would leave them alone.
Maybe whoever turned Anne Frank in to the Nazis? That guy in “The Last Sword Drawn” who faked his participation in battle?
I’d have to say editing boring comments from men he wishes to drive away from his blog hardly counts as an “ultimate” cowardly act. Don’t be such a drama queen.
I would actually say a demonstrable act of cowardice is ubertroll Adam North posting as “Prince Barin.” Seeing as how the email addy for the “Prince” is adamjnorth -at- (a site), I’d say he has some work to do if he wants to cover his identity.
Also, to the notion that editing comments is all mean and or cowardly, do remember that this is an explicit effort to drive away those of you who aren’t participating in genuine, constructive conversation. Disagreement can be offered sincerely, and it’ll be engaged, but plainly stating falsehoods and mischaracterizing or ignoring whole swaths of our positions is disingenuous and not allowed.
“There is no Patriarchy” is just a notch or two below “there was no Holocaust.” The obvious denial of reality is just as infuriating, as is its blatant disregard for the countless lives damaged or lost as a result of it.
Now shoo, trolls, or it’ll get worse for you (and more fun for me!).
Important news:
* In the United States, 1.3 women are raped every minute. That results in 78 rapes each hour, 1872 rapes each day, 56160 rapes ech month and 683,280 rapes each year.
* 1 out of every 3 American women will be sexually assulted in her lifetime.
* The United States has the world’s highest rape rate of the countries that publish such statistics. It’s 4 times higher than Germany, 13 times higher than England, and 20 times higher than Japan.
* 1 in 7 women will be raped by her husband.
* 83% of rape cases are ages 24 or under.
* 1 in 4 college women have either been raped or suffered attempted rape.
* 1 in 12 males students surveyed had commited acts that met the legal definition of rape. Furthermore, 84% of the men who had commited such acts said what they had done was definitely not rape.
* 75% of male students and 55% of female students involved in acquintance rape had been drinking or using drugs.
* Only 16% of rapes are ever reported to the police.
“I would actually say a demonstrable act of cowardice is ubertroll Adam North posting as “Prince Barin.” Seeing as how the email addy for the “Prince” is adamjnorth -at- [edited out], I’d say he has some work to do if he wants to cover his identity.”
Since when is an online handle a secret identity? If I wanted to cover my identity why would I use an email address with my name in it? Oh, and although I don’t honestly care thanks for publishing my email address on your blog. Classy.
Look, I know I offended you: simply stating that the Patriarchy doesn’t exist to feminists is akin to telling a hard-core Marxist that Communism doesn’t work or a fundamental Christian that the bible is mythology. It’s not going to earn one friends. But that wasn’t the argument I was making. And we both know that the Patriarchy is far from an “objective fact”. You defeat your claims of being open-minded when you say that.
Adam/Prince,
i’ll leave that comment up for two reasons:
1) Apologies for publishing your email address. I have altered my comment and your quote of it to protect it.
2) When you post as an antagonist at a site under one name and then start doing it again at the same site under a new name, that’s disingenuous. Just like everything else you post.
The Patriarchy — meaning a culturally-reinforced institutionalization of privilege for men — is as factual as the Holocaust. Your denials spit in the face of every female victim of sexism, rape, spousal abuse, and more. Please leave.
Prince Barin:
Yes, that’s right. When there’s an obvious injustice, you don’t get called a wonderful person for opposing that obvious injustice.
Striving for justice is every person’s duty. If you think you deserve a cookie for fighting for justice, then you have no flipping idea what “justice” means.
You might deserve praise for the quantity or quality of work you do to bring about justice; you don’t deserve praise just for saying “Yeah, well, I can get behind that, if it’s not too much trouble.”
As for insults, what are you talking about?
Are you talking about “Prince Barin, you are an awful person”? Or are you talking about “men routinely exploit women sexually”? The latter is not an insult; it is a valid generalization that does not hold in all cases but still holds as a generalization.
simply stating that the Patriarchy doesn’t exist to feminists…
…would be like telling marxists that poor people don’t exist, like telling a hardcore christian that not only wasn’t jesus crucified, but that he currently owns a small shack in the carribbean where he fishes and spends his days in tax exile down on the nudist beach, playing volley ball and paying poor people to let him shit in their mouthes while he masturbates furiously onto their feet.
If you can’t make an accurate analogy, comparison or metaphor, please do not try.
ffs.
. . .sounds to me like you are all afraid of the package. get some and try again!!!
Wow, I’ve never heard that before. Did you sit up all night thinking that up?
That’s lovely. Now go play with your crayons and let the grownups talk.
Nah, but I’m betting he really does like cake. Who doesn’t like cake? Also, Cake.
Also, CAKE.
Is there a patriarchy?
All signs point to yes.
Thanks folks, this is perhaps the most (unintentionally?) funny thread I’ve read all day (thus far). Prince Barin? Princess Aurora? No patriarchy?
(snicker)
I’m liking this method of dealing with trolls. What else can you make them say?
Another more apt analogy- Telling feminists there is no patriarchy is like telling the NAACP there is no Klan.
Fairly regularly I get into similar discussions. Some well meaning man will go, “But I don’t support oppression and I’m man and I am offended at the term patriarchy.”
At which time I try to tell them that the patriarchy is a system that exists regardless of gender, and the term is based on a social construct of male privilege and violence that has existed for, oh, since history began, really. That it doesn’t necessarily reflect on an individual (tho’, clearly, being a man in a patriarchical system is advantageous to those men), and it’s patriarchy even if a woman (say, Ann Coulter or Margaret Thatcher) is doing it.
I go on to say that it is indisputable that men have privilege in global society, and to say otherwise means a person is obviously deeply stupid, ignorant or insane (tho’ I usually try to say it a trifle nicer).
Then I try to say that if you’re a man against the patriarchy, it’s like being a freedom fighter. You still live under the system of oppression you fight against, but it exists even as you struggle against it. It wasn’t only kings that supported monarchy, and it wasn’t only peasants that opposed it (tho’, yes, generally that was the case). So, if you’re an aristocrat that fights against monarchy, you can’t deny it’s monarchy, just as you can’t deny you’ve lived a life of privilege as an aristocrat.
Sorta like that.
Well, said, Chris!
I agree with the feminist side of this thread (patriachy exists and I am part of it except the assetion that people who support feminism should not get kudos because they should have been doing it the whole time. While I accept the fact that such people don’t deserve such respect the patriachy will be degraded faster if more men join up and more men will join up if you respect them with nice _cheap_ words.
Ugh…. I feel dirty reading the sentence “the patriarchy doesn’t exist.” I feel dirty and partially apologetic to the rest of the world because of the idiots that say things like that. I feel dirty and partially apologetic to the world when I see men saying “I’m on your side! I am a feminist too! Give me a cookie and a pat on the back, praise me, I’m not like them!”
I usually never feel like I have to apologise for my gender. I like being a man. I like the way my brain chemistry is wired. I like the fact that I can pee standing up. I like the additional physical strength.
What I don’t like is the old boys network that I am also unfortunately a part of. I don’t like the position of privilege, because I have done nothing to earn it. I don’t like the fact that I have had to fight against a system that believes that real men don’t cry, that real men don’t open up to other men (that’s not manly apparently) and God knows what else, but it’s a daily thing… When your eyes are open, you realise; Patriarchy doesn’t just harm women. It harms men too. So yeah, on a purely selfish level, I will fight the patriarchy. And on the level of being a HUMAN BEING I will fight the patriarchy because it’s the right thing to do.
FUCK YOU Prince Barin. No pat on the back or cookie for you. Fighting the Patriarchy as a man deserves no special recognition. Not because we’re resetting to zero or whatever, it’s because that’s what decent human beings do. And being a decent human being is supposed to be the DEFAULT SETTING. I’m certainly not going to praise people for the things they’re supposed to do.
http://kalmartheband.blogspot.com
Those with opinions not based on being a fucking idiot are more than welcome.
Sorry to join this discussion here a bit late- thanks StumbleUpon!
I agree with your assessment up to a certain point, but this is the part I have trouble with..
“3) You are part of the Bush family and have benefited massively from their oppressive acts. People have given you breaks and cut you slack even when you didn’t ask for it.”
Sure, men are placed in a position of power due to oppressive acts, but have you considered how much it must suck to be raised as a part of the Bush family? I didn’t ask for the ‘benefits’ of being a male, sure, but I don’t want them in the first place. I don’t want to be told from a young age that I am somehow superior because of my last name or the fact that I have testicles. I recognize that this has given me advantages in the workplace and in social life, but it comes with a certain amount of disadvantage as well- not from a socioeconomic standpoint, but from the standpoint of a struggling human being who is trying to make sense of a world that is really fucking confusing. And now I find myself backpedaling and reevaluating what it means to be a male in the first place. Being told from a young age that aggressive and egocentric behavior is the best way to get what I want is not a no-strings-attached benefit like you imply, but I didn’t have a whole lot of choice in the matter. And I don’t want that position of power because it is at times just as detrimental to mental health as the lies that are routinely shoved down the throats of women are.
I don’t mean to write myself off as a sob-story victim of an oppressive society here, but being a well-meaning male in the first place is a difficult thing to do.
But, Hugh, what sort of support do you think you are going to gain for any cause if you have to sort of bribe your would-be allies into joining by using nice words instead of calling a spade a spade? If they can’t stomach the truth in all its ugliness, how reliable would they be as allies?
And: If you sweet-talk someone into joining a cause that they don’t clearly understand you risk losing them once they realize what it is all about, especially if they are to lose some dear privilege in the process.
You have to be honest, you can’t disguise what you are after, or you’re bound to fail. Plus you might seriously damage your cause because people will accuse you of cheating, and you and your cause will be discredited in the eyes of many who might have been on your side.
Another thing: It is certainly not the term ‘patriarchy’ that offends, but the reality it refers to. The patriarchy is an ugly thing that is a shame for the human race, and even though nobody chose to be born into it, all men in varying degrees benefit from it (and, yes, are damaged by it as well). Realizing that you are part and beneficiary of a deeply unjust system, albeit unwitting and through no fault of yours, is not nice. Seeing the misery caused by this system and realizing that you have participated, even if only passively by enjoying the unjustified privileges it affords you, is not nice. It is quite normal not to be too happy about all this, and to feel rather defensive.
But shooting the messenger (i. e. the term ‘patriarchy’, or the people using it) for the message doesn’t help. The patriarchy is no less offensive if you say ‘Yeah, well, some people, usually men, used to do kind of unfriendly things to other people, mostly women, but not so much lately, but I think it is like wrong, and anyway, if you’d care to join the effort we’ll end this in no time’ instead.
Any new name would soon acquire all the connotations of the old name.
What are those potential allies feeling threatened by? Pamphlets? This “making potential allies … threatened” needs to be seen in perspective. Or can you imagine this?
Using nicer words would imply that it’s the responsibility of feminists to make men feel less threatened. Part at least of men’s defensiveness is their own problem. Perhaps they identify the entire movement with statements made by its more extreme members. Perhaps they don’t know much about feminism. Perhaps they hear “patriarchy” and have a wrong idea about what this word means. It’s their responsibility to inform themselves.
If I were to say that “all English football supporters are hooligans”, the normal procedure would be: they point out I’m wrong, I go “oh”, perhaps I’ll read a few articles on the internet, the end. I certainly won’t get away with saying “…so you’re peaceful, eh? PROVE IT TO ME.” I mean, what are they going to do? Mow the lawn for me? Send me Christmas cards?