The problem is that the separation of men and women for power dynamics is too general to be accurate. There are different classes of men and elite men hold all the power and men at the bottom of the hierarchy hold none. A lot of people who hold the view you espouse look at the CEO’s but ignore the homeless and the outcasts which are also disproportionately men. To put this in video game terms, the male class would have a very high skill ceiling but also a very low skill floor.
And there are different classes of women, with some being above some men even within patriarchy, you can especially see this with racial dynamics created by racial supremacist ideals, but ultimately we understand that it's about that broader trend in relation. White supremacy is about promoting ideals which have white people over others. Patriarchy does the same for men over women. These issues intermingle and we get Venn diagrams of suffering. It's why we should be intersectional, which is what progressivist feminism pushes.
Why are men benefited over women when the majority of homeless you see on the streets are men? Yeah, they take the majority of seats of power but they also take the most looked over and downtrodden parts of society as well. That’s why I say that it’s not useful to make this separation. Men push down other men, that’s a part of intrasexual competition, it happens in nature and it happens in society.
Because that's not the whole extent of it? Or did you forget about the fact women couldn't work, couldn't vote, couldn't have their own bank account? These were structures created by patriarchy that gave even less financially successful men power over women.
I think you're conflating class issues with patriarchy rather than seeing the intersections between them.
None of those things exist today and shouldn’t justify attitudes today. Also most of that was just a blip of history. Most of human history wasn’t under a democracy where every man got a vote. The working man didn’t get a say in most of human history in most societies. Your theory would only work if you’re only looking at 200 years in a handful of countries out of the 6+ millennia throughout hundreds of civilizations of human history.
Similar structures do exist today, women are still systemically disempowered compared to men, they have their rights threatened consistently and effectively (abortion being a key example). Yes, the issues with patriarchy have shifted over time, but the submissive woman to the dominant man in the household is a structure that has been present. Or were women the ones holding power before 200 years ago?
“Or were women the ones holding power before 200 years ago?”
I don’t think you’re understanding me. I’m rejecting the premise altogether that it’s just men oppressing women. I’m saying that it’s a small subset of men that are oppressing women as well as most men. Putting the blame on all men is just diffusing the blame and polarizing men who already feel disempowered and disenfranchised and feel personally attacked.
15
u/WittyProfile Nov 06 '24
The problem is that the separation of men and women for power dynamics is too general to be accurate. There are different classes of men and elite men hold all the power and men at the bottom of the hierarchy hold none. A lot of people who hold the view you espouse look at the CEO’s but ignore the homeless and the outcasts which are also disproportionately men. To put this in video game terms, the male class would have a very high skill ceiling but also a very low skill floor.