FYI “patriarchy” is a gendered term which comes from the Latin, originally meaning “church government by patriarchs” (1560s) and later evolved to mean “society or government by elder males” (1630s). Historically, it referred to autocratic rule by men. More recently it has been expanded in feminist theory which broadly ascribes a set of toxic behaviours to men as a group. The problem with this word is that men don’t have a patent on toxic behaviour. It’s often not men telling other men not to cry and to man up, for example. It’s often the women in our lives, and especially our romantic partners. Raising “patriarchy” in this discussion is tantamount to blaming men for the issues they experience, and this is not helpful to anyone. No more than suggesting rape victims are also victims of the “matriarchy.” If you understand how offensive that might seem to you, you might understand how offensive your comment can be to men.
Patriarchy is a social system in which positions of authority are primarily held by men.
[…] Historically, patriarchy has manifested itself in the social, legal, political, religious, and economic organization of a range of different cultures. Most contemporary societies are, in practice, patriarchal, unless the criteria of complete exclusion of women in authority is applied.
Partiarchy is not a description of masculinity, toxic or otherwise. Patriarchy is a description of a social heirarchy.
Patriarchy is in large part to blame for toxic masculinity because historically and currently, men with power enforced social rule by men, and therefore enforced social elevation by their own subjective idea of what masculinity should be.
Patriarchy is not much different from (and intrinsically linked to) the idea of a King’s divine right to rule - if you were in power, you deserved to be in power, and the qualities of the people in power were therefore the qualities of the people who deserved to be in power. Thus, their ideas of masculinity became long-lasting cultural norms.
Pointing out that the history of patriarchy enforced toxic masculinity is not accusing men themselves of enforcing it on an individual level, or dismissing rhe role that women played in enforcing these gender divisions.
The same can be said for pointing out that the history of Feudalism enforced horrrible class stratification that still impacts Western culture today. Modern day Knights like the late Sir Terry Pratchett and Sir Elton John would agree with that, because individuals can be distanced from and even directly challenge a system that they benefit from, much like men have a moral right and responsibility to challenge the role that the Patriarchy has played in enforcing these outdated gender divisions.
Pointing out that the history of patriarchy enforced toxic masculinity is not accusing men themselves of enforcing it on an individual level, or dismissing rhe role that women played in enforcing these gender divisions.
Well it is, and you’ve laid out the case. If the system in which we currently live is designed for and by men, then a) they have less of a right to complain about their treatment, b) they have some hand in its creation, and c) have a burden to undo it. In fact, most men have no hand in its creation, have every right to complain, and have no burden to undo it. Raising patriarchy in a discussion about issues men face makes no sense unless you are d) allocating blame in some way, e) suggesting that men have a responsibility to fix their own issues, and/or f) ascribing a certain set of toxic behaviour specifically to men. None of those are helpful. None of those are supportive.
The issue is treating men like a homogenous group instead of specifically addressing those in power, who are both men and women.
A) They have every right to complain about their treatment. In fact, that is what we are doing by complaining about the Patriarchy. You should complain too.
Again, the patriarchy hurts men. They are victims of the lasting damage caused by outdated gender norms that originated from men in power and are perpetuated by men who are still in power. Not all men. Not even all men in power. Specifically, men in power who perpetuate the problem.
B) Individual women can play just as big a role as individual men in perpetuating the gender norms that favor patriarchal heirarchy. By pointing out that men are victims of patriarchy, we are specifically pointing out that most of them do not have an individual hand in its creation. If you are not in power, you are not the Patriarchy, and thus you are not the origin of the problem, though you can be perpetuating the problem, regardless of your gender.
C) We all have a burden to undo the lasting damage caused by our society’s historical failures. We all have a moral responsibility to improve ourselves as individuals and as a society, regardless of our gender.
Again, the Patriarchy is not a description of men, or a homogenization of a group. It is a description of a social heirarchy. “The Patriarchy” =/= “all men”. I don’t know how much more clear I can make that.
Individual men are no more responsible for the Patriarchy than individual citizens are responsible for the oppressive behaviors of their governments, unless they support, perpetuate, or refuse to acknowledge it.
There are many, many more men still in power than women. Your last point is laughable.
Again. As I said. Those individual women in power can be responsible too. I absolutely agree with that. They can be responsible for perpetuating the Patriarchy. God knows plenty of literal Queens have done so throughout history.
But if you seriously believe that women as a group hold as much power as men as a group, then this conversation is a waste of time.
What I’m reading from your writing is that both men and women in power have and continue to contribute to gender norms, which confine and hurt both men and women. If so, why use gendered language at all? There is much research and theory in sociology and specifically feminist studies about the impact of gendered language. I’m sure you broadly agree that “man up” is hurtful gendered language because it implies men should conform to a specific set of subjective behaviour. Why can you not see that a gendered male term for a toxic and harmful system is if not explicitly harmful, certainly implicitly so? Why not use a gender neutral germ like “structural gender roles” or something else which doesn’t imply blame? Surely this is not the first time a man has told you he feels offended by your use of this word. Why do you not listen and accept the hurt you cause by your continued use of it instead of just using something less offensive?
Unless, of course, you do intend to imply blame. That men are more to blame. That more men hold power, therefore we should use a gendered word to ensure we are clear who is more to blame.
Men had a lot more power and influence than women, and men continue to have a lot more power and influence. That isn’t applying blame. That is indisputable fact. Men as a group are more responsible for gender inequality than women, because men hold more power than women. Again, indisputable fact.
Men hold most of the highest offices of the most powerful nations in the world, and most of those nations still have severe gender disparities that they are not addressing, or addressing terribly slowly. Again, indisputable fact.
The only way to help people see that women do not have an equal amount of power and influence in the modern day is to talk about it. Gender-neutral terms are not always helpful towards that end, because it is not a gender-neutral topic.
The patriarchy isn’t harmful gendered language the way “man up” is. Nobody is harmed by the term patriarchy. It is not a weapon used to put men down, it is a term used to describe an unequal power balance between groups of people.
Why, exactly, are you offended by a term that doesn’t describe you?
Martin Luther King Jr. described “white moderates” as a major barrier to civil rights. Was he wrong to refer to them by the color of their skin? Did he harm white progressives by doing so?
Should he have used race-neutral terms? Should he have just said “moderates,” as if that would hold any of the same power or meaning? Should white progressives have been offended by his description of white moderates?
Are women truly wrong to refer to the vast majority of the people who hold power over them as “men”, when it is indisputable fact?
Men had a lot more power and influence than women, and men continue to have a lot more power and influence. That isn’t applying blame. That is indisputable fact. Men as a group are more responsible for gender inequality than women, because men hold more power than women. Again, indisputable fact.
Some men. A minority of men. You’re doing the thing right now. “Men” isn’t a homogenous group, yet you’re clearly placing them into one. Women aren’t a minority group. How would you react if a woman wrote a post here about being raped, and I started discussing matriarchy, and how women, as a group, tend to act. Surely that would be a terrible thing for me to do, yet here you are, doing just that.
You make it clear that this is about attributing blame. You’ve dedicated multiple paragraphs to blaming men as a group. That’s why you won’t give up the gendered language. This isn’t about helping men at all. It’s about blaming them, even though you acknowledge most of them are not responsible. You must see how that foments anger from men, and how you are perpetuating negative stereotypes and animosity by continuing to use such toxic gendered language.
I think it’s fine to claim that the majority of positions of power are held by men. I think it’s wrong to say that “men” are responsible for bad things. If you’re specific about the bad men (or even better, bad people), no problem. If you broadly refer to men when describing toxic behaviour, you’re blaming people who don’t deserve it. Just like one shouldn’t blame “women” or the “matriarchy” for things either. Surely you agree with that?
The patriarchy is “some men.” The term is literally describing what you want. The subset of men who are in power.
You are not the patriarchy. You should be fighting the patriarchy.
How would I react if you described the matriarchy? What matriarchy? What world do you live in that there is a social heirarchy dominated by women in power?
Please answer the question about white moderates. Was it wrong to refer to them as white? Was that “toxic”?
FYI “patriarchy” is a gendered term which comes from the Latin, originally meaning “church government by patriarchs” (1560s) and later evolved to mean “society or government by elder males” (1630s). Historically, it referred to autocratic rule by men. More recently it has been expanded in feminist theory which broadly ascribes a set of toxic behaviours to men as a group. The problem with this word is that men don’t have a patent on toxic behaviour. It’s often not men telling other men not to cry and to man up, for example. It’s often the women in our lives, and especially our romantic partners. Raising “patriarchy” in this discussion is tantamount to blaming men for the issues they experience, and this is not helpful to anyone. No more than suggesting rape victims are also victims of the “matriarchy.” If you understand how offensive that might seem to you, you might understand how offensive your comment can be to men.
FYI,
Partiarchy is not a description of masculinity, toxic or otherwise. Patriarchy is a description of a social heirarchy.
Patriarchy is in large part to blame for toxic masculinity because historically and currently, men with power enforced social rule by men, and therefore enforced social elevation by their own subjective idea of what masculinity should be.
Patriarchy is not much different from (and intrinsically linked to) the idea of a King’s divine right to rule - if you were in power, you deserved to be in power, and the qualities of the people in power were therefore the qualities of the people who deserved to be in power. Thus, their ideas of masculinity became long-lasting cultural norms.
Pointing out that the history of patriarchy enforced toxic masculinity is not accusing men themselves of enforcing it on an individual level, or dismissing rhe role that women played in enforcing these gender divisions.
The same can be said for pointing out that the history of Feudalism enforced horrrible class stratification that still impacts Western culture today. Modern day Knights like the late Sir Terry Pratchett and Sir Elton John would agree with that, because individuals can be distanced from and even directly challenge a system that they benefit from, much like men have a moral right and responsibility to challenge the role that the Patriarchy has played in enforcing these outdated gender divisions.
Well it is, and you’ve laid out the case. If the system in which we currently live is designed for and by men, then a) they have less of a right to complain about their treatment, b) they have some hand in its creation, and c) have a burden to undo it. In fact, most men have no hand in its creation, have every right to complain, and have no burden to undo it. Raising patriarchy in a discussion about issues men face makes no sense unless you are d) allocating blame in some way, e) suggesting that men have a responsibility to fix their own issues, and/or f) ascribing a certain set of toxic behaviour specifically to men. None of those are helpful. None of those are supportive.
The issue is treating men like a homogenous group instead of specifically addressing those in power, who are both men and women.
A) They have every right to complain about their treatment. In fact, that is what we are doing by complaining about the Patriarchy. You should complain too.
Again, the patriarchy hurts men. They are victims of the lasting damage caused by outdated gender norms that originated from men in power and are perpetuated by men who are still in power. Not all men. Not even all men in power. Specifically, men in power who perpetuate the problem.
B) Individual women can play just as big a role as individual men in perpetuating the gender norms that favor patriarchal heirarchy. By pointing out that men are victims of patriarchy, we are specifically pointing out that most of them do not have an individual hand in its creation. If you are not in power, you are not the Patriarchy, and thus you are not the origin of the problem, though you can be perpetuating the problem, regardless of your gender.
C) We all have a burden to undo the lasting damage caused by our society’s historical failures. We all have a moral responsibility to improve ourselves as individuals and as a society, regardless of our gender.
D) refer back to (B)
E) refer back to ©
F) refer back to (A)
Again, the Patriarchy is not a description of men, or a homogenization of a group. It is a description of a social heirarchy. “The Patriarchy” =/= “all men”. I don’t know how much more clear I can make that.
Individual men are no more responsible for the Patriarchy than individual citizens are responsible for the oppressive behaviors of their governments, unless they support, perpetuate, or refuse to acknowledge it.
There are many, many more men still in power than women. Your last point is laughable.
Again. As I said. Those individual women in power can be responsible too. I absolutely agree with that. They can be responsible for perpetuating the Patriarchy. God knows plenty of literal Queens have done so throughout history.
But if you seriously believe that women as a group hold as much power as men as a group, then this conversation is a waste of time.
And if you seriously believe that men in power throughout history haven’t left a mark on today’s society, or that it’s insulting to men to even talk about that history by giving it a name, then I refer you back to ©. You absolutely have a moral burden to be better than the humans who came before you, and choosing to be offended by that is just burying your head in the sand.
What I’m reading from your writing is that both men and women in power have and continue to contribute to gender norms, which confine and hurt both men and women. If so, why use gendered language at all? There is much research and theory in sociology and specifically feminist studies about the impact of gendered language. I’m sure you broadly agree that “man up” is hurtful gendered language because it implies men should conform to a specific set of subjective behaviour. Why can you not see that a gendered male term for a toxic and harmful system is if not explicitly harmful, certainly implicitly so? Why not use a gender neutral germ like “structural gender roles” or something else which doesn’t imply blame? Surely this is not the first time a man has told you he feels offended by your use of this word. Why do you not listen and accept the hurt you cause by your continued use of it instead of just using something less offensive?
Unless, of course, you do intend to imply blame. That men are more to blame. That more men hold power, therefore we should use a gendered word to ensure we are clear who is more to blame.
Men had a lot more power and influence than women, and men continue to have a lot more power and influence. That isn’t applying blame. That is indisputable fact. Men as a group are more responsible for gender inequality than women, because men hold more power than women. Again, indisputable fact.
Men hold most of the highest offices of the most powerful nations in the world, and most of those nations still have severe gender disparities that they are not addressing, or addressing terribly slowly. Again, indisputable fact.
The only way to help people see that women do not have an equal amount of power and influence in the modern day is to talk about it. Gender-neutral terms are not always helpful towards that end, because it is not a gender-neutral topic.
The patriarchy isn’t harmful gendered language the way “man up” is. Nobody is harmed by the term patriarchy. It is not a weapon used to put men down, it is a term used to describe an unequal power balance between groups of people.
Why, exactly, are you offended by a term that doesn’t describe you?
Martin Luther King Jr. described “white moderates” as a major barrier to civil rights. Was he wrong to refer to them by the color of their skin? Did he harm white progressives by doing so?
Should he have used race-neutral terms? Should he have just said “moderates,” as if that would hold any of the same power or meaning? Should white progressives have been offended by his description of white moderates?
Are women truly wrong to refer to the vast majority of the people who hold power over them as “men”, when it is indisputable fact?
Some men. A minority of men. You’re doing the thing right now. “Men” isn’t a homogenous group, yet you’re clearly placing them into one. Women aren’t a minority group. How would you react if a woman wrote a post here about being raped, and I started discussing matriarchy, and how women, as a group, tend to act. Surely that would be a terrible thing for me to do, yet here you are, doing just that.
You make it clear that this is about attributing blame. You’ve dedicated multiple paragraphs to blaming men as a group. That’s why you won’t give up the gendered language. This isn’t about helping men at all. It’s about blaming them, even though you acknowledge most of them are not responsible. You must see how that foments anger from men, and how you are perpetuating negative stereotypes and animosity by continuing to use such toxic gendered language.
I think it’s fine to claim that the majority of positions of power are held by men. I think it’s wrong to say that “men” are responsible for bad things. If you’re specific about the bad men (or even better, bad people), no problem. If you broadly refer to men when describing toxic behaviour, you’re blaming people who don’t deserve it. Just like one shouldn’t blame “women” or the “matriarchy” for things either. Surely you agree with that?
The patriarchy is “some men.” The term is literally describing what you want. The subset of men who are in power.
You are not the patriarchy. You should be fighting the patriarchy.
How would I react if you described the matriarchy? What matriarchy? What world do you live in that there is a social heirarchy dominated by women in power?
Please answer the question about white moderates. Was it wrong to refer to them as white? Was that “toxic”?
managed to make a comment about the damaging aspects of male dominated society into hating women, congrats.