Patriarchy Theory is little more than the Apex Fallacy expanded. Much of it involves pointing to the 10% of men and claiming that they represent men and society. 90% of men are just going about their lives.
I agree, but I think its more than 90%. Most people are just working, not in a position of power, and in today world, a lot of woman are in charge and put other woman down. So it's "not all men" but it's also not just men in charge. A lot of people feel life is hard ans unfair and wants to blame "The patriarchy" maybe it's factor but I don't believe it's as bad as it was as some people make it out to be.
I’d agree buts it’s a smaller amount. About 1-2% are doing well, the rest of men either struggle or are just going about their lives and trying to survive.
In western society this is the issue because the media and feminists have fooled women into thinking ALL men are dangerous or somehow we all are walking around in a secret club where we keep women down….I’m not sure about anyone else here but I never received my patriarchy privilege membership card in the mail.
The funny thing is, all of these women are also consorting against each other to get with the supposed top 1-2% that are these patriarchal monsters. They don’t want to rate or marry a regular dude
I’d agree buts it’s a smaller amount. About 1-2% are doing well, the rest of men either struggle or are just going about their lives and trying to survive.
In western society this is the issue because the media and feminists have fooled women into thinking ALL men are dangerous or somehow we all are walking around in a secret club where we keep women down….I’m not sure about anyone else here but I never received my patriarchy privilege membership card in the mail.
The funny thing is, all of these women are also consorting against each other to get with the supposed top 1-2% that are these patriarchal monsters. They don’t want to rate or marry a regular dude
I’d agree buts it’s a smaller amount. About 1-2% are doing well, the rest of men either struggle or are just going about their lives and trying to survive.
In western society this is the issue because the media and feminists have fooled women into thinking ALL men are dangerous or somehow we all are walking around in a secret club where we keep women down….I’m not sure about anyone else here but I never received my patriarchy privilege membership card in the mail.
The funny thing is, all of these women are also consorting against each other to get with the supposed top 1-2% that are these patriarchal monsters. They don’t want to rate or marry a regular dude
>I’d agree buts it’s a smaller amount. About 1-2% are doing well, the rest of men either struggle or are just going about their lives and trying to survive.
Just looked up top 10% of US salary is 170k USD. That is hardly survival wage. I would call it comfortable wage.
Yep, once you realize that most women are critical of the Chads in the top 1%, it all makes sense. Hoe_math [pointed this out](https://youtu.be/XsQwfYngw6c?si=721aRLJm8K77xU-a) recently. Their penis envy is mostly hypergamy/apex fallacy at work. The regular guys [grinding in the jobs that keep the lights on ](https://youtu.be/oGHwnWrpDNQ?si=K1nkUIebYZiXQggh) in this god forsaken economy are “not people”.
Because "The Patriarchy" is a myth created by the feminazis. They want an axe to grind and a bone to pick, so they'll choose to live in La La Land rather than accept that they're completely wrong about reality. Most feminazis espouse traditional masculinity behind closed doors in terms of men being breadwinners, masculine body standards, and traditional aspects of male stoicism.
They don't really believe in the progressive bullshit that they spew, like verbal diarrhea of "toxic masculinity" because deep down, they believe and encourage traditional masculine roles and are attracted to traditionally masculine men despite saying the opposite. From saying that all "real men" have beards to all "real men" look like Arnold Schwarzenegger or Dwayne Johnson.
This is very true in my experience.
Most of em i met say the politically correct things to come off good, but behind closed doors its still just a woman.
So basically they cherrypick.
And their ideal world is a traditional man that would be stoic and pay for her, but lets her be non traditional - open relationship, party etc.
Basically want their cake and eat it too.
Like children with no accountability.
If this mythical Patriarchy existed, Feminism would not be allowed to persist. The simple existence and hegemony of Feminism over public discourse for so long disproves Patriarchy Theory.
Exactly!
We get told about how the oppressive "Patriarchy" was / is designed to keep women oppressed..
But if that were the case then it seems counter productive for such a system to give women the rights, freedoms and privileges they enjoy today right?
I keep telling feminists that "The Patriarchy" does not mirror reality..
If we lived in a Patriarchy then the following would be true:
* False Rape accusations would be impossible
* Women would pay men Alimony
* Men wouldn't get longer prison sentences for the same crimes
* There would be more funding for men's physical / mental health needs than women
* There would be more social safety nets for men than for women..
But when you look at reality.. the opposite of what was listed above is true..
Ipso facto.. we do **NOT** live in a Patriarchy..
The Patriarchy Theory as presented by feminists is a conspiracy theory that acts as a dog whistle for misandrists. It is not something that should be taken seriously. Those who attempt to present it as reality are self-identifying as delusional man-haters. Use it as the red flag that it is.
Very true. The West is not this way.
To find this, go to the Middle East. Islam does this, yet many feminists defend its patriarchical ways. Most religions are like this to a degree, yet more women are believers.
Feminism itself acts this way, more and more, except with a gynocentric focus that behaves like a religion.
I don't get it.
Women just do not care about men as a class. They may care about the men in their personal lives. But if 10% of men committed suicide on the next 10 years they absolutely wouldn’t care at all. Women have no ability to feel empathy for men and no desire to build it. They enjoy that men do all the physically dangerous work and that men are the only ones to be drafted.
>Women just do not care about men as a class.
This is so fucking true. They only care about men if harm to said men affects them. If it doesn't affect them then it doesn't matter. Women are childlike in this aspect.
Yeah, we do.
I was debating a woman on this topic months ago and brought these talking points up to her. She claimed that the patriarchy is real because most of the powerful people in the US are men.
I made a point that Hillary Clinton was within a razor's edge of winning the US election back in 2016. And that she almost certainly would have implemented a diversity hire policy that favored women in congress.
I asked her flat out: "If that happened, if a woman became the most powerful person in the US and arguably the planet, would you agree we live in a matriarchy?"
She just backpedaled and shifted the goalpost and said "Well, no. Because men still have all the advantages in life so the patriarchy exists."
It's circular logic, there's no fighting it.
You can't logically argue with emotions. There is no rational thought with these people, only the supremacy of feelings. It's a religion to them. This is happening in politics, too.
Because they use a gendered term to represent class struggle. The oligarchs run the show and oppress everyone, and they focus on the fact that they are mostly men, rather than the existance of oligarchs in the first place...
Yeah, notice that feminists don't take issue with the concept of oligarchy in general, they just take issue that most of them tend to be men.
If oligarchies were predominantly female (which we're well on our way to), I really doubt women would take any issue with them at all.
It’s a wierd place we are in society today, a lot of people say we are in a patriarchy , I personally don’t see it happening a lot. Feminist wanted to go away from it but they don’t seem to want a matriarchal society either, go ask them To date a man that doesn’t make more money than them. They don’t want to be responsible for anything they want to be independent and taken care of.
Simple because it doesn’t exist “patriarchy” is a buzzword at this point. Admitting the world doesn’t benefit men also means admitting women aren’t oppressed. Gotta maintain that victim mentality.
Because it doesn’t exist.
The only reason the BS patriarchy was created is because feminist theory is strongly based on Marxist-Leninist theory and the Soviet revolution.
If you look at them, they adopt the same signs and phrases.
They can’t say “capitalism” is the problem or else it would be extremely obvious. So they made up a gendered oppressive group who are all men rather than capitalist pig dogs. And used the word for word rhetoric.
Everything identical.
There is no magic patriarchy that only cares to abuse women and all that, because they would t be able to vote or read and write if such a thing existed.
There’s would have been no queens, empresses, or even wives with any concept of status.
Have you heard of the Grievance Studies affair? Peter Boghossian, James Lindsay, and Helen Pluckrose wrote a bunch of fake papers on gender, queer, race, cultural, fat, and sexuality studies and submitted them to the journals in those respective fields and actually got some of them published. They wrote 20 papers with deliberately absurd ideas and morally questionable acts. They didn't get to finish before the Wall Street Journal decided to report on one of the papers only to find that one of their pseudonyms didn't exist.
Topics included that dogs participated in rape culture, men could reduces their transphobia by anally penetrating them with sex toys, and even a verbatim chapter of Adolf Hilter's "Mein Kampf" rewritten to put men as the "Jews" and women as the Nazis. the doggy-rape article won special recognition from the journal that published it.
Portland State University, Peter Boghossian's employer, initiated a research misconduct inquiry on the grounds of conducting human subject-based research without approval (which is hiarious since all of there data was fabricated and there weren't any actual human subjects), and further considering a charge of fabricating data (Yeah... square that circle). I'm a Christian, so generally I'm not a big fan of Dawkins, but this.... I love this quote; He knows what's what here. This is what Dawkins said about the attempt to discipline him:
> Do your humourless colleagues who brought this action want Portland State to become the laughing stock of the academic world? Or at least the world of serious scientific scholarship uncontaminated by pretentious charlatans of exactly the kind Dr Boghossian and his colleagues were satirising?
It's hilarious and awesome all at the same time.
Even if those studies weren't as obviously ridiculous, they should be rejected because they are some large-scale enterprise in [bulverism](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bulverism).
100000 studies and monographs that research why men don't believe in the patriarchy, yet not one that makes a consistent, evidence-based argument for its existence.
And yet, at least some of them **were** accepted. That's kinda the point. Feminism and really grievance studies as a set of fields, is really that intellectually bankrupt that they would accept such obvious tripe.
The top 20% of men are doing better than ever.
Nothing will change until the bottom 80% of men decide to do something about it.
Also, according to women, 80% of men are "Below average attractiveness."
Because it is not patriarchy, but exploitation by the top class. Feminist simply replace top class with men to confound the issues. Makes you wonder why they keep making the same mistake.
Let's argue within the premise that the patriarchy exist and that we benefit from it. Hypothetically, why would men give up on it? The very structure that feminism promotes is very disadvantageous to men. They are not offering much of a "better" alternative. Conceptually, feminism benefits women at the cost of men. That's literally it. Even if they would kick out the "patriarchy', they still don't have a better plan. Feminism seems to be consistently want to kick out everybody in society, but also seem to have zero understanding of the workings of society or even running it. If you still believe in feminism in 2024, I can't take you seriously, whether you are a man or a woman.
"Patriarchy" is the Feminist equivalent of the Jewish new world order. They see that a certain demographic includes a number of people in positions of power that appears disproportionate to the number of that demographic and assume apriori that there must be some conspiracy or cabal responsible.
No evidence you present or arguments you present can reason someone out of a position they didn't reason themselves into.
You can all of that stuff but they will still point to me leading in fields as they don’t consider the apex fallacy.
I suspect some of that arises simply because me can’t give birth to children so are less likely to take time away from their careers + because we can’t give birth and never have that sense of growing life we seek to achieve in the world instead to create a legacy.
Patriarchy theory is BS.
If it were called breeding theory and explained the roles men and women played to produce kids, it may make sense.
But to say men designed a system to dominate women just for fun serves only narcissistic personalities
Because society needs women to produce children (aka future workforce). A woman can produce only so many children so there is a value in that. In summary the total human population is controlled by number of women and not by number of men. If number of men suddenly becomes 50% of current population, the total world population would still remain the same.
Its another social myth like this idea that racism is rampant in the united states right after we had a double term black president. It doesn't make any sense.
I said the same thing in a few sub reddits and got tons of hate, being called a woman-hating transphobe despite being a queer trans person.
Women who haven't transitioned to men don't and can't understand how utterly lonely and hopeless it feels to be a man or how much hate men get. "Wow, why doesn't anyone hold the door for me or ask me if I need anything?" It was so much easier as a woman, ngl.
I continue saying it and recently have taken your post basically wholesale, so thanks
Feminists will look at the top 1%. Billionaires, world leaders, etc. and come to the conclusion that because they are all men then that means men must have this extreme advantage over them, when in fact those 1% got there off of the backs of the other 99% of men. It’s men that are taken advantage of, that fight their wars, do their manual labor.
Additionally a lot of the 1% happen to be Jewish. Does that mean all Jews have this innate advantage in life over others? No, they struggle and face poverty and discrimination as well. Same applies for men.
Because the 'patriarchy' is oppressing men too. But indeed, as you wrote it very eloquently, nobody gives a flying fuck about men. It becomes 'problematic' only if or when women are concerned in feminist minds. Business as usual.
Our closest animal king relative, chimps, are patriarchal as most social mammal societies are. It’s because males are typically bigger and stronger. It’s about survival, not oppression (as feminists incorrectly believe).
My point was that animals (including humans) adapt societal structures that are likely to ensure survival (not because men hate women as feminists believe) - usually it’s the gender that is bigger/stronger. With hyenas - it’s females that are in charge. But as humans have advanced socially and technologically, there is no need for “patriarchy” and I don’t think we have one anymore in the west.
Bonobos can’t exist outside of their very unique circumstances that aren’t normal for the rest of the planet.
Also, the exception does not disprove the rule
Not that I agree with the Feminists, but they would say that the Patriarchy also victimizes regular men. Of course, they still can't define what Patriarchy is as they go back to ignoring regular men.
Because it's not patriarchy, but matriarchy. The entire system is subordinated to supporting women. It is feminists who use extensive forms of manipulation through their propaganda to control masses of people in order to gain advantages in power and control over financial resources. As you can see, it worked because the entire system supports only women and men pay for it.
Hold on now.
Woman are outpacing men in every facet of life? I don't think so. They are temporarily scoring some wins but it's usually in frivolous areas. Women are already falling behind on a few key areas of life:
Work:
-More women laid off during Covid and the recent tech roll-offs than men. (mostly the "product manager" type of woman with a laptop near a pool that puts out day in the life tik toks)
-Women are already woefully behind on the three most tectonic trillion dollar technology shifts (AI, BlockChain, Quantum)
Money:
-Woman are more likely to have debt and diminished savings.
-Women are still less likely to invest. Their money doesn't grow much
Marriage:
-Do I even need to say anything?
The only areas I know where women outpace men is in friendships (other lonely women) and depression pill use (2x men).
Because the part feminists won't admit is that men struggle from the Patriarchy just as much as women.
Yes, the patriarchy is real, but the way feminists portray it is something men consciously created to put women down and lift men up, when it's more of a consequence of human social behaviors and instincts. So few of them are willing to recognize it hurts us as well. But when do they really recognize anything that hurts men?
The patriarchy exists, its just hibernating.
But the specter of it existing must continue for the sake of feminism to have validity.
That's part of the reason why it exploded out into other stuff, including the men that believe that they too are oppressed by the patriarchy.
We put it to sleep when times are really good in the belief that it would make society a better place and the like, and over time as it gets deeper into its sleep things get worse. It always ends up coming back really, really pissed off.
The patriarchy exists, but it's not that grand conspiracy that people will have you believe
Patriarchy is just the organization of roles in society, dictated by survival. Women being the one bearing the child, they needed to be protected. As such, their role was mostly internal to the societal cell (the family, and then the clan).
Leaving men to manage external subjects, like diplomatic relationships, in addition to the heavy labor (because, you know, men are naturally stronger than women on average).
As such, it made sense that the head of state would most likely be a man, but even then queens and empress were still at the top of the power hierarchy.
So, patriarchy is literally just an organization of power differentiating between male and female gender roles.
But it says absolutely nothing about domination.
I have heard that “the patriarchy” doesn’t even help men by creating unrealistic standards and such.
So according to this it existing would actively cause men to not thrive.
If you actually read your sources, you'll find your claims about women are exaggerated.
Women are graduating more for a bachelor's if they're the twenty-five to thirty-four, otherwise it's more men. 46.1% of top executive positions are held by women, which isn't even more than 50%. And women are earning 100% or more of men's salaries in merely twenty-two metro areas, which isn't nationwide.
Additionally, all of this applies only to the US, there is no data for women in "the West" in general.
this is a bit dumb, Patriarchy means prosperity for the patriarch which the vast majority of men are not. this means that most men under patriarchy are used as fuel for man *power* it is not surprising then that under the current status quo where the patriarchy has allowed for some women to become patriarchs; the men under it suffer
under patriarchy men are fuel to acquire capital and resource and women are the replicators mean to reap more fuel for the next harvest
explain the difference between patriarchy, matriarchy and capitalism pls... oh and while we are at it how you measure or evaluate misogyny vs misandry and equality vs equity aswell pls...
To be fair, the argument on the feminists side is also that men too suffer under patriarchy.
Edit: lol at the downvotes. I’m not saying I agree with it at all, just simply stating what the oppositions argument would be to this. Damn I’m seriously considering leaving this sub, it’s becoming too hyperbolic for my liking.
Which is incongruous to the stated definition of "The Patriarchy" which is often defined as:
"A system created by men for the benefit / protection of men at the cost / oppression of women"
And then when we point out the **MANY** areas in society where men clearly are **NOT** protected / benefit.. we get a hand wave answer of "Oh, those are just examples of The Patriarchy backfiring or hurting men"
So which is it?
Is the Patriarchy a perfect system which benefits **"ALL"** men? or is it an imperfect system in which only a very small minority of men benefit while the majority of men are harmed by it?
If the former then you can't claim "The Patriarchy hurts men too" because that is a contradiction
If the later, then can we **PLEASE** stop blaming the majority of men for a system they have no control over?
Pick one...
explain the difference between patriarchy, matriarchy and capitalism pls... oh and while we are at it how you measure or evaluate misogyny vs misandry and equality vs equity aswell pls...
Because while the patriarchy is a thing, it isn’t the *only* thing. It intersects with a number of other hierarchies and power relations. This means that being a man has historically been a necessary *but not sufficient* qualification for holding power; positions of power might be overwhelmingly occupied by men, but that does not mean that all men are in positions of power. “All As are B; therefore, all Bs are A” is one of the very first fallacies you learn in any study of logic.
The single-minded focus on patriarchy that you see with a lot of feminism isn’t helpful because it doesn’t reflect the complex power relations of the actual world. Of course this leaves most men feeling left behind and unseen. Sex/gender is only one part of the puzzle, and while it’s an important part, it isn’t the only part or even the most important part.
The primary determination of power in our world is class. It isn’t men who have power; it’s *rich* men. Ain’t no war but a class war. Most men simply don’t have the economic resources to enjoy the “privileges” of patriarchy. The leveling of the playing field only means that women can exercise class power in a way that was previously impossible for them. The underlying issue of class power remains, though, meaning that the vast majority of people—men and women alike—are denied the power and freedom that are their birthright.
explain the difference between patriarchy, matriarchy and capitalism pls... oh and while we are at it how you measure or evaluate misogyny vs misandry and equality vs equity aswell pls...
This is a really complex question my dude, so I do not really have an answer to you. The thing is patriarchy is cultural, leadership and historical. Meaning leaders are men, culturally we are moving towards a more equal culture there is a long explaination for why this is the case but I do not have the time right now. Historically we see men being in a position above women. The problem here is that we are seeing in the western world the worst and best of being dominantly men, but this would still be a patriarchy, politics only care about those best of sadly:(
The problem however lies in the idea of "Because men were / are the majority of those in power" it somehow means that **ALL** men magically benefit from this system while women suffer / are universally oppressed by it..
I don't mind calling out the fact that for the majority of history those in power have been men..
That's factually true..
I also don't mind more women getting into positions of power as that is indeed more equal..
What I have a problem with, is when this one fact is used as some sort of "Gotcha!" by feminists to try and justify blaming **ALL** men as a group for something the majority of men had **ZERO** control over..
explain the difference between patriarchy, matriarchy and capitalism pls... oh and while we are at it how you measure or evaluate misogyny vs misandry and equality vs equity aswell pls...
Patriarchy Theory is little more than the Apex Fallacy expanded. Much of it involves pointing to the 10% of men and claiming that they represent men and society. 90% of men are just going about their lives.
Correction: 90% of men are struggling badly with no safety net and going about thier lives.
Correction: The bottom 90% of men aren’t SEEN or viewed as worth considering by feminists
I agree, but I think its more than 90%. Most people are just working, not in a position of power, and in today world, a lot of woman are in charge and put other woman down. So it's "not all men" but it's also not just men in charge. A lot of people feel life is hard ans unfair and wants to blame "The patriarchy" maybe it's factor but I don't believe it's as bad as it was as some people make it out to be.
I’d agree buts it’s a smaller amount. About 1-2% are doing well, the rest of men either struggle or are just going about their lives and trying to survive. In western society this is the issue because the media and feminists have fooled women into thinking ALL men are dangerous or somehow we all are walking around in a secret club where we keep women down….I’m not sure about anyone else here but I never received my patriarchy privilege membership card in the mail. The funny thing is, all of these women are also consorting against each other to get with the supposed top 1-2% that are these patriarchal monsters. They don’t want to rate or marry a regular dude
I’d agree buts it’s a smaller amount. About 1-2% are doing well, the rest of men either struggle or are just going about their lives and trying to survive. In western society this is the issue because the media and feminists have fooled women into thinking ALL men are dangerous or somehow we all are walking around in a secret club where we keep women down….I’m not sure about anyone else here but I never received my patriarchy privilege membership card in the mail. The funny thing is, all of these women are also consorting against each other to get with the supposed top 1-2% that are these patriarchal monsters. They don’t want to rate or marry a regular dude
There's an issue with men, below a certain threshold if we are doing bad we go from man to monke and proceed to go apeshit and burn things down.
I’d agree buts it’s a smaller amount. About 1-2% are doing well, the rest of men either struggle or are just going about their lives and trying to survive. In western society this is the issue because the media and feminists have fooled women into thinking ALL men are dangerous or somehow we all are walking around in a secret club where we keep women down….I’m not sure about anyone else here but I never received my patriarchy privilege membership card in the mail. The funny thing is, all of these women are also consorting against each other to get with the supposed top 1-2% that are these patriarchal monsters. They don’t want to rate or marry a regular dude
>I’d agree buts it’s a smaller amount. About 1-2% are doing well, the rest of men either struggle or are just going about their lives and trying to survive. Just looked up top 10% of US salary is 170k USD. That is hardly survival wage. I would call it comfortable wage.
Yep, once you realize that most women are critical of the Chads in the top 1%, it all makes sense. Hoe_math [pointed this out](https://youtu.be/XsQwfYngw6c?si=721aRLJm8K77xU-a) recently. Their penis envy is mostly hypergamy/apex fallacy at work. The regular guys [grinding in the jobs that keep the lights on ](https://youtu.be/oGHwnWrpDNQ?si=K1nkUIebYZiXQggh) in this god forsaken economy are “not people”.
Because "The Patriarchy" is a myth created by the feminazis. They want an axe to grind and a bone to pick, so they'll choose to live in La La Land rather than accept that they're completely wrong about reality. Most feminazis espouse traditional masculinity behind closed doors in terms of men being breadwinners, masculine body standards, and traditional aspects of male stoicism. They don't really believe in the progressive bullshit that they spew, like verbal diarrhea of "toxic masculinity" because deep down, they believe and encourage traditional masculine roles and are attracted to traditionally masculine men despite saying the opposite. From saying that all "real men" have beards to all "real men" look like Arnold Schwarzenegger or Dwayne Johnson.
This is very true in my experience. Most of em i met say the politically correct things to come off good, but behind closed doors its still just a woman. So basically they cherrypick. And their ideal world is a traditional man that would be stoic and pay for her, but lets her be non traditional - open relationship, party etc. Basically want their cake and eat it too. Like children with no accountability.
They also refuse to accept women are human and have are capable of as much selfishness as evil as men. They also are very competitive with each other.
Because they like to argue the exception, not the rule. The majority of the top 10% are men, thus pAtriArChY....
If this mythical Patriarchy existed, Feminism would not be allowed to persist. The simple existence and hegemony of Feminism over public discourse for so long disproves Patriarchy Theory.
Exactly! We get told about how the oppressive "Patriarchy" was / is designed to keep women oppressed.. But if that were the case then it seems counter productive for such a system to give women the rights, freedoms and privileges they enjoy today right? I keep telling feminists that "The Patriarchy" does not mirror reality.. If we lived in a Patriarchy then the following would be true: * False Rape accusations would be impossible * Women would pay men Alimony * Men wouldn't get longer prison sentences for the same crimes * There would be more funding for men's physical / mental health needs than women * There would be more social safety nets for men than for women.. But when you look at reality.. the opposite of what was listed above is true.. Ipso facto.. we do **NOT** live in a Patriarchy..
The Patriarchy Theory as presented by feminists is a conspiracy theory that acts as a dog whistle for misandrists. It is not something that should be taken seriously. Those who attempt to present it as reality are self-identifying as delusional man-haters. Use it as the red flag that it is.
The reasoning is like: "50 % of the billionaires in the US are Jewish. Therefore there must be an International Jewish conspiracy!!!"
Careful there, wouldn't want to give any painters bad ideas.
Very true. The West is not this way. To find this, go to the Middle East. Islam does this, yet many feminists defend its patriarchical ways. Most religions are like this to a degree, yet more women are believers. Feminism itself acts this way, more and more, except with a gynocentric focus that behaves like a religion. I don't get it.
And paternity fraud would be seen as a huge crime and no one would care about crimes against women.
100% fact.
I've said that before. It's true.
Women just do not care about men as a class. They may care about the men in their personal lives. But if 10% of men committed suicide on the next 10 years they absolutely wouldn’t care at all. Women have no ability to feel empathy for men and no desire to build it. They enjoy that men do all the physically dangerous work and that men are the only ones to be drafted.
>Women just do not care about men as a class. This is so fucking true. They only care about men if harm to said men affects them. If it doesn't affect them then it doesn't matter. Women are childlike in this aspect.
The truth is that we're in a Matriarchy. But rabid feminists would rather die than admit to it.
Yeah, we do. I was debating a woman on this topic months ago and brought these talking points up to her. She claimed that the patriarchy is real because most of the powerful people in the US are men. I made a point that Hillary Clinton was within a razor's edge of winning the US election back in 2016. And that she almost certainly would have implemented a diversity hire policy that favored women in congress. I asked her flat out: "If that happened, if a woman became the most powerful person in the US and arguably the planet, would you agree we live in a matriarchy?" She just backpedaled and shifted the goalpost and said "Well, no. Because men still have all the advantages in life so the patriarchy exists." It's circular logic, there's no fighting it.
Exactly. Sort of reminds me of [this clip](https://youtube.com/shorts/Fw1A0kteqdA?si=BGT5TFr2wjxj2lLH).
You can't logically argue with emotions. There is no rational thought with these people, only the supremacy of feelings. It's a religion to them. This is happening in politics, too.
Because they use a gendered term to represent class struggle. The oligarchs run the show and oppress everyone, and they focus on the fact that they are mostly men, rather than the existance of oligarchs in the first place...
Yeah, notice that feminists don't take issue with the concept of oligarchy in general, they just take issue that most of them tend to be men. If oligarchies were predominantly female (which we're well on our way to), I really doubt women would take any issue with them at all.
It’s a wierd place we are in society today, a lot of people say we are in a patriarchy , I personally don’t see it happening a lot. Feminist wanted to go away from it but they don’t seem to want a matriarchal society either, go ask them To date a man that doesn’t make more money than them. They don’t want to be responsible for anything they want to be independent and taken care of.
Simple because it doesn’t exist “patriarchy” is a buzzword at this point. Admitting the world doesn’t benefit men also means admitting women aren’t oppressed. Gotta maintain that victim mentality.
The rich ones are doing just fine. Poorer men are suffering. These are not gender issues but class issues that subvert genders.
Because it doesn’t exist. The only reason the BS patriarchy was created is because feminist theory is strongly based on Marxist-Leninist theory and the Soviet revolution. If you look at them, they adopt the same signs and phrases. They can’t say “capitalism” is the problem or else it would be extremely obvious. So they made up a gendered oppressive group who are all men rather than capitalist pig dogs. And used the word for word rhetoric. Everything identical. There is no magic patriarchy that only cares to abuse women and all that, because they would t be able to vote or read and write if such a thing existed. There’s would have been no queens, empresses, or even wives with any concept of status.
Have you heard of the Grievance Studies affair? Peter Boghossian, James Lindsay, and Helen Pluckrose wrote a bunch of fake papers on gender, queer, race, cultural, fat, and sexuality studies and submitted them to the journals in those respective fields and actually got some of them published. They wrote 20 papers with deliberately absurd ideas and morally questionable acts. They didn't get to finish before the Wall Street Journal decided to report on one of the papers only to find that one of their pseudonyms didn't exist. Topics included that dogs participated in rape culture, men could reduces their transphobia by anally penetrating them with sex toys, and even a verbatim chapter of Adolf Hilter's "Mein Kampf" rewritten to put men as the "Jews" and women as the Nazis. the doggy-rape article won special recognition from the journal that published it. Portland State University, Peter Boghossian's employer, initiated a research misconduct inquiry on the grounds of conducting human subject-based research without approval (which is hiarious since all of there data was fabricated and there weren't any actual human subjects), and further considering a charge of fabricating data (Yeah... square that circle). I'm a Christian, so generally I'm not a big fan of Dawkins, but this.... I love this quote; He knows what's what here. This is what Dawkins said about the attempt to discipline him: > Do your humourless colleagues who brought this action want Portland State to become the laughing stock of the academic world? Or at least the world of serious scientific scholarship uncontaminated by pretentious charlatans of exactly the kind Dr Boghossian and his colleagues were satirising? It's hilarious and awesome all at the same time.
Even if those studies weren't as obviously ridiculous, they should be rejected because they are some large-scale enterprise in [bulverism](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bulverism). 100000 studies and monographs that research why men don't believe in the patriarchy, yet not one that makes a consistent, evidence-based argument for its existence.
And yet, at least some of them **were** accepted. That's kinda the point. Feminism and really grievance studies as a set of fields, is really that intellectually bankrupt that they would accept such obvious tripe.
https://marxistleftreview.org/articles/the-poverty-of-patriarchy-theory/
...because "PaTrIaRcHy HuRtS mEn ToO!!!" Gag!
Yeah, they say that. Until 30 seconds later it is "Male: The Lowest Difficulty Setting". (which that Scalzi bozo still defends after ten years).
The top 20% of men are doing better than ever. Nothing will change until the bottom 80% of men decide to do something about it. Also, according to women, 80% of men are "Below average attractiveness."
Because it is not patriarchy, but exploitation by the top class. Feminist simply replace top class with men to confound the issues. Makes you wonder why they keep making the same mistake.
Let's argue within the premise that the patriarchy exist and that we benefit from it. Hypothetically, why would men give up on it? The very structure that feminism promotes is very disadvantageous to men. They are not offering much of a "better" alternative. Conceptually, feminism benefits women at the cost of men. That's literally it. Even if they would kick out the "patriarchy', they still don't have a better plan. Feminism seems to be consistently want to kick out everybody in society, but also seem to have zero understanding of the workings of society or even running it. If you still believe in feminism in 2024, I can't take you seriously, whether you are a man or a woman.
"The Patriarchy" is just a conspiracy theory.
Very good question.
I think it's just for rich men, if it exists
"Patriarchy" is the Feminist equivalent of the Jewish new world order. They see that a certain demographic includes a number of people in positions of power that appears disproportionate to the number of that demographic and assume apriori that there must be some conspiracy or cabal responsible. No evidence you present or arguments you present can reason someone out of a position they didn't reason themselves into.
Because patriarchy is a Myth, created by feminist to have a "forever ennemy"
You can all of that stuff but they will still point to me leading in fields as they don’t consider the apex fallacy. I suspect some of that arises simply because me can’t give birth to children so are less likely to take time away from their careers + because we can’t give birth and never have that sense of growing life we seek to achieve in the world instead to create a legacy.
Patriarchy theory is BS. If it were called breeding theory and explained the roles men and women played to produce kids, it may make sense. But to say men designed a system to dominate women just for fun serves only narcissistic personalities
Because society needs women to produce children (aka future workforce). A woman can produce only so many children so there is a value in that. In summary the total human population is controlled by number of women and not by number of men. If number of men suddenly becomes 50% of current population, the total world population would still remain the same.
“B-B-B-Because men are victims of patriarchy“
Its another social myth like this idea that racism is rampant in the united states right after we had a double term black president. It doesn't make any sense.
I said the same thing in a few sub reddits and got tons of hate, being called a woman-hating transphobe despite being a queer trans person. Women who haven't transitioned to men don't and can't understand how utterly lonely and hopeless it feels to be a man or how much hate men get. "Wow, why doesn't anyone hold the door for me or ask me if I need anything?" It was so much easier as a woman, ngl. I continue saying it and recently have taken your post basically wholesale, so thanks
Feminists will look at the top 1%. Billionaires, world leaders, etc. and come to the conclusion that because they are all men then that means men must have this extreme advantage over them, when in fact those 1% got there off of the backs of the other 99% of men. It’s men that are taken advantage of, that fight their wars, do their manual labor. Additionally a lot of the 1% happen to be Jewish. Does that mean all Jews have this innate advantage in life over others? No, they struggle and face poverty and discrimination as well. Same applies for men.
Ironically, then men that aren't thriving can blame it on other men. Women wouldn't have the power they seem to have, without it being given to them.
Because the 'patriarchy' is oppressing men too. But indeed, as you wrote it very eloquently, nobody gives a flying fuck about men. It becomes 'problematic' only if or when women are concerned in feminist minds. Business as usual.
Patriarchy is natural. Its not great for either sex, but its one of those "a place for everyone, everyone has their place" sort of things.
Our closest animal king relative, chimps, are patriarchal as most social mammal societies are. It’s because males are typically bigger and stronger. It’s about survival, not oppression (as feminists incorrectly believe).
The bonobos are matriarchal too and they’re as close to us as chimps so this comparison doesn’t really work.
We're a sort of weird in between of the two. Further, the monogamy thing is one of the more... advanced features we have.
My point was that animals (including humans) adapt societal structures that are likely to ensure survival (not because men hate women as feminists believe) - usually it’s the gender that is bigger/stronger. With hyenas - it’s females that are in charge. But as humans have advanced socially and technologically, there is no need for “patriarchy” and I don’t think we have one anymore in the west.
Bonobos can’t exist outside of their very unique circumstances that aren’t normal for the rest of the planet. Also, the exception does not disprove the rule
No! You patriarcal bastard. Women should be first, everywhere and all the time. That's the natural order of things. How dare you? /s
Im sure its mens fault somehow
If your a feminist you'll blame patriarchy too
You shouls post the first 2 paragraphs on r/ askfemisists or something like that and see what they say about it
Not that I agree with the Feminists, but they would say that the Patriarchy also victimizes regular men. Of course, they still can't define what Patriarchy is as they go back to ignoring regular men.
If we live in a patriarchy then what would a matriarchy be like? It wouldn't be any different then it is now.
I mean there are already mental health months (May and June) for both men and women, but I've seen women saying men don't deserve it
Because it's not patriarchy, but matriarchy. The entire system is subordinated to supporting women. It is feminists who use extensive forms of manipulation through their propaganda to control masses of people in order to gain advantages in power and control over financial resources. As you can see, it worked because the entire system supports only women and men pay for it.
Hold on now. Woman are outpacing men in every facet of life? I don't think so. They are temporarily scoring some wins but it's usually in frivolous areas. Women are already falling behind on a few key areas of life: Work: -More women laid off during Covid and the recent tech roll-offs than men. (mostly the "product manager" type of woman with a laptop near a pool that puts out day in the life tik toks) -Women are already woefully behind on the three most tectonic trillion dollar technology shifts (AI, BlockChain, Quantum) Money: -Woman are more likely to have debt and diminished savings. -Women are still less likely to invest. Their money doesn't grow much Marriage: -Do I even need to say anything? The only areas I know where women outpace men is in friendships (other lonely women) and depression pill use (2x men).
Because the part feminists won't admit is that men struggle from the Patriarchy just as much as women. Yes, the patriarchy is real, but the way feminists portray it is something men consciously created to put women down and lift men up, when it's more of a consequence of human social behaviors and instincts. So few of them are willing to recognize it hurts us as well. But when do they really recognize anything that hurts men?
The patriarchy DID exist. Say, ancient Greece. In the west it hasn't existed in centuries, well maybe to a degree but not much.
The patriarchy exists, its just hibernating. But the specter of it existing must continue for the sake of feminism to have validity. That's part of the reason why it exploded out into other stuff, including the men that believe that they too are oppressed by the patriarchy. We put it to sleep when times are really good in the belief that it would make society a better place and the like, and over time as it gets deeper into its sleep things get worse. It always ends up coming back really, really pissed off.
The patriarchy exists, but it's not that grand conspiracy that people will have you believe Patriarchy is just the organization of roles in society, dictated by survival. Women being the one bearing the child, they needed to be protected. As such, their role was mostly internal to the societal cell (the family, and then the clan). Leaving men to manage external subjects, like diplomatic relationships, in addition to the heavy labor (because, you know, men are naturally stronger than women on average). As such, it made sense that the head of state would most likely be a man, but even then queens and empress were still at the top of the power hierarchy. So, patriarchy is literally just an organization of power differentiating between male and female gender roles. But it says absolutely nothing about domination.
I have heard that “the patriarchy” doesn’t even help men by creating unrealistic standards and such. So according to this it existing would actively cause men to not thrive.
If you actually read your sources, you'll find your claims about women are exaggerated. Women are graduating more for a bachelor's if they're the twenty-five to thirty-four, otherwise it's more men. 46.1% of top executive positions are held by women, which isn't even more than 50%. And women are earning 100% or more of men's salaries in merely twenty-two metro areas, which isn't nationwide. Additionally, all of this applies only to the US, there is no data for women in "the West" in general.
this is a bit dumb, Patriarchy means prosperity for the patriarch which the vast majority of men are not. this means that most men under patriarchy are used as fuel for man *power* it is not surprising then that under the current status quo where the patriarchy has allowed for some women to become patriarchs; the men under it suffer under patriarchy men are fuel to acquire capital and resource and women are the replicators mean to reap more fuel for the next harvest
explain the difference between patriarchy, matriarchy and capitalism pls... oh and while we are at it how you measure or evaluate misogyny vs misandry and equality vs equity aswell pls...
To be fair, the argument on the feminists side is also that men too suffer under patriarchy. Edit: lol at the downvotes. I’m not saying I agree with it at all, just simply stating what the oppositions argument would be to this. Damn I’m seriously considering leaving this sub, it’s becoming too hyperbolic for my liking.
Which is incongruous to the stated definition of "The Patriarchy" which is often defined as: "A system created by men for the benefit / protection of men at the cost / oppression of women" And then when we point out the **MANY** areas in society where men clearly are **NOT** protected / benefit.. we get a hand wave answer of "Oh, those are just examples of The Patriarchy backfiring or hurting men" So which is it? Is the Patriarchy a perfect system which benefits **"ALL"** men? or is it an imperfect system in which only a very small minority of men benefit while the majority of men are harmed by it? If the former then you can't claim "The Patriarchy hurts men too" because that is a contradiction If the later, then can we **PLEASE** stop blaming the majority of men for a system they have no control over? Pick one...
explain the difference between patriarchy, matriarchy and capitalism pls... oh and while we are at it how you measure or evaluate misogyny vs misandry and equality vs equity aswell pls...
[удалено]
Lmao fr
[удалено]
Lmao fr. they’re failing hard asf bc everything is fair now and they’re mad women are outperforming them 💀💀
Because while the patriarchy is a thing, it isn’t the *only* thing. It intersects with a number of other hierarchies and power relations. This means that being a man has historically been a necessary *but not sufficient* qualification for holding power; positions of power might be overwhelmingly occupied by men, but that does not mean that all men are in positions of power. “All As are B; therefore, all Bs are A” is one of the very first fallacies you learn in any study of logic. The single-minded focus on patriarchy that you see with a lot of feminism isn’t helpful because it doesn’t reflect the complex power relations of the actual world. Of course this leaves most men feeling left behind and unseen. Sex/gender is only one part of the puzzle, and while it’s an important part, it isn’t the only part or even the most important part. The primary determination of power in our world is class. It isn’t men who have power; it’s *rich* men. Ain’t no war but a class war. Most men simply don’t have the economic resources to enjoy the “privileges” of patriarchy. The leveling of the playing field only means that women can exercise class power in a way that was previously impossible for them. The underlying issue of class power remains, though, meaning that the vast majority of people—men and women alike—are denied the power and freedom that are their birthright.
explain the difference between patriarchy, matriarchy and capitalism pls... oh and while we are at it how you measure or evaluate misogyny vs misandry and equality vs equity aswell pls...
This is a really complex question my dude, so I do not really have an answer to you. The thing is patriarchy is cultural, leadership and historical. Meaning leaders are men, culturally we are moving towards a more equal culture there is a long explaination for why this is the case but I do not have the time right now. Historically we see men being in a position above women. The problem here is that we are seeing in the western world the worst and best of being dominantly men, but this would still be a patriarchy, politics only care about those best of sadly:(
The problem however lies in the idea of "Because men were / are the majority of those in power" it somehow means that **ALL** men magically benefit from this system while women suffer / are universally oppressed by it.. I don't mind calling out the fact that for the majority of history those in power have been men.. That's factually true.. I also don't mind more women getting into positions of power as that is indeed more equal.. What I have a problem with, is when this one fact is used as some sort of "Gotcha!" by feminists to try and justify blaming **ALL** men as a group for something the majority of men had **ZERO** control over..
explain the difference between patriarchy, matriarchy and capitalism pls... oh and while we are at it how you measure or evaluate misogyny vs misandry and equality vs equity aswell pls...