Is the patriarchy a good thing?

  • Thread starter Thread starter johnz123
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I think that we need to seperate all of these different elements that have been thrown into the cart of “the patriarchy”.
The sexual harassment or abuse element is simply bad or even sometimes criminal
behavior perpetrated by sorry individuals. When it happens I have no issue with dealing harshly with the offender. Millions of males do not fall into this group but the common blather would like everyone to believe that we all do. The worst sexual harasser I have ever personally had experience with was a female. What should I conclude from that? That all women are potential harrassers?
Equal pay for equal work is a more than reasonable demand.
A lot of the rest is not discrimination but competence. If you hire certain services done for example, the provider is likely to be male. Not that there are no female electricians or plumbers for example, nor are females prevented from entering the trades, but historically most are male. Does anyone truly believe that there is a tradesman mafia?
This is not oppression but choices that people have made.
I would never claim that none of the problems that people experience are not real, just that they are not by default part of a nefarious agreed upon male plot to hold women down.
We all have our own strengths and weaknesses and interests.
Many of the things that are blamed on the evil patriarchy are the result of society developing the ability to overcome mass hardship and poverty. Tour a cemetery from your great grandparents time or from a generation before them for our younger members. Too many of those families lost more children than lived to adulthood.
That was a hard world but they persevered and made the world what we know today.
We all must decide what our place in the world will be. Never in history have both male and female had the freedom to decide that place for themselves.
In spite of that freedom, we should not forget the structure that has made it possible.
 
Nice try. 😉 I told you that you don’t have to wear it if you don’t like it. Leave others alone and keep custody of your own eyes.

Harassment is the fault of the harasser, not a woman with Maybelline lashes.
Lea101 said:
But all of this is irrelevant. He’s just throwing out a really tired Jordan Peterson response to the same subject matter.
Click to expand...
This argument is from Jordan Peterson???
 
Last edited:
Women and men aren’t identical but women are equally human.

Men and women are complementary halves of humanity.

I come from a cultural background where women aren’t considered full human beings and bought and sold even today like cattle.

I don’t think that’s good.
 
I was discussing sexual harassment in the workplace. Why else would you bring up cosmetics? To deflect the discussion?
 
I couldn’t agree more with your whole post and it is very good to hear also.

Last night I watched this show on EWTN and the guest was Father Paul Check and this post just pretty much sums up what they talked about.

http://ewtn.com/series/2003/carpenter_shop.htm
 
Last edited:
You don’t know history, do you? I was there when radical feminists called men male chauvenist pigs. Do you get that that? Go to the website for the National Organization for Women right now and see what they support. Among other things, the deaths of millions since 1973. Is that progress? Or what about ‘women’s studies’ courses introduced in colleges in the 1980s? Yes, women did not need Marxist/Communist reeducation camps. And radical feminism followed the classic Marxist pattern.

Women were the eternal victims class.
Men, the eternal enemies class.
 
A lot of men were male chauvinist pigs. I had the good fortune to have been raised by men who were respectful of their wives, but I knew many men as a child and young adult who behaved reprehensibly towards their wives, daughters and other women, and who, sadly raised both their sons and daughters to believe in the supremacy of the male, even as they demonstrated at every turn that they were lesser men.

And just because, at least by your view, some feminists have gone too far (indeed, just about any movement is always going to push the boundaries) hardly means feminism hasn’t been an important movement. The earliest suffragettes in the United States were closely aligned with the Abolitionist movement, and, to their credit, viewed the abolition of slavery to be of a higher priority than increasing social and political rights for women. But the fact was that women were disadvantaged in every way for centuries; they were in most jurisdictions either dejure or defacto chattel, in many cases having little or no right to own property in their own right. They had no formal voice in decisions that directly affected them, and the inequities of that system were enormous. There were infamous cases in the 19th century of women who were abandoned by their husbands, and left destitute because at any time the husband could reappear, take money or any possessions they wanted, and the women had no recourse whatsoever.

And throwing out “Marxist/Communist” is just absurdity. Obviously there are Communists among feminists, but for the most part they are women who want the same rights and privileges that have historically been accorded to men, and I don’t see that as wrongheaded, but just and proper.
 
Last edited:
The radical feminists in the 1960s - called Second Wave Feminism - did more harm than good. They were a part of Protest Culture inherited from the Beatniks (properly, Beats) of the 1950s. That is the radical feminism most of us know. Third Wave Feminism is totally bankrupt.
 
wow I went to bed last night and woke up and now I see over 100 replies to this topic
 
When evaluating any ideology we look at its body count. In the case of feminism, it’s the millions of aborted babies
 
Last edited:
Which is rarely, if ever, mentioned. Not here or elsewhere. The freedom to choose killing an innocent life is corruption, not freedom.
 
angel12 said:
Funny, the unemployment statistics don’t seem to bear that out. Perhaps you’d share your source.
Click to expand...
How about USA Today?

Experts report increasing reluctance from men in positions of authority to hire or work closely with women, in some cases declining to hold one-on-one meetings with female employees. “It’s not a good thing,’’ said Kellie McElhaney, founding director of the Center for Equity, Gender and Leadership at UC-Berkeley’s Haas School of Business. “It’s further disconnecting women from networks that we’ve already been excluded from. There are solutions, but I think right now men are a bit paralyzed.’’ A poll directed this year by LeanIn.org and SurveyMonkey found nearly half of male managers are uncomfortable participating in common work activities with a woman, and senior-level men are 3½ times more hesitant to have a work dinner with a junior-level woman – and five times more hesitant to travel with one for work – than with a junior-level man.Male managers also have grown significantly more uncomfortable mentoring women than before, the survey said.“We’re literally having executives say, ‘I’m really nervous about hiring a woman, particularly in roles like EAs (executive assistants), that’s such a personal job … I’d just as soon hire a male,’’’ Taylor said. “It has become a risk-management conversation.“We must figure out from an HR perspective how to minimize that, because we don’t want men penalizing women for fear.’’
Click to expand...

www.usatoday.com

Will #MeToo turn into #NotHer? Movement may come with unintended workplace consequences

The #MeToo movement has prompted changes in workplace behavior, but a year after Weinstein some unintended consequences that may hurt women's careers.
www.usatoday.com
 
edwest211 said:
The radical feminists in the 1960s - called Second Wave Feminism - did more harm than good. They were a part of Protest Culture inherited from the Beatniks (properly, Beats) of the 1950s. That is the radical feminism most of us know. Third Wave Feminism is totally bankrupt.
Click to expand...
I look at feminism much the way I look at the union movement, which is this: when those who hold their authority according to the standard set by Our Lord, it doesn’t get traction. Employers who put the interests of their employees on the same footing as their own don’t see their employees clamoring for a union. Instead, the employer and the employees work things out without a union.

In the same way, I don’t think women who feel listened to and treated fairly with regards to wages and so on are particularly interested in feminism. They don’t see a need to push for fair treatment, because they’re treated fairly.

Having said that, when what “feminism” means is the political idea that there aren’t any real differences between men and women, that’s going to be doomed. There are differences, so basing a political movement on the false premise that there are no differences is inevitably going to lead to some dead ends, much as the communist prejudice against the virtue of religion dooms it from the start.
 
Last edited:
niceatheist said:
A lot of men were male chauvinist pigs. I had the good fortune to have been raised by men who were respectful of their wives, but I knew many men as a child and young adult who behaved reprehensibly towards their wives, daughters and other women, and who, sadly raised both their sons and daughters to believe in the supremacy of the male, even as they demonstrated at every turn that they were lesser men.
Click to expand...
These don’t tend to be guys who have a lot of respect for other guys, either, to be frank. Their sons tend to be treated as worthy of respect exactly to the degree that they agree with their all-knowing fathers. (And yes, every kind of thought has that kind, religious thought being no exception, unfortunately.)

Yes, I think this kind of obnoxiousness usually comes from an ego that feels it doesn’t measure up and yet has too much pride to take a contented place somewhere in the humble middle of things.
 
Last edited:
edwest211 said:
I was there when radical feminists called men male chauvenist pigs.
Click to expand...
Yes, I was there also and as a young women in the 70’s was influenced by these feminist women, unfortunately. It is true that there are men who are not godly and treat their wives and children horribly and abuse their authority. Sadly that has always happened but not all men abuse their authority. There are, have been and will be many very good and godly men out there who work hard to be a good father and husband but I remember the 1970’s also when ALL men were accused of being chauvenist pigs and the attacks toward men were anything but good or right.

I can still remember seeing the faces of men, innocent men, being accused of being horrible, chauvenist pigs for doing absolutely nothing wrong. This was so not good.
niceatheist said:
A lot of men were male chauvinist pigs.
Click to expand...
While it is true that throughout history women have been mistreated in many ways, not all men are or were chauvanist pigs and as I said above this phrase was not said to just those men who treated women cruelly, it was something said very often to most all men at that time. It was a horrible phrase you heard alot. Men in general were treated like the enemy (and still are) and the thing is, there is good and bad in everyone and where there are some men that do evil, there are also men who do good and that applies to women also.

Feminism is not the answer. Christ, His Church and His commandments are the answer.

As far as Marxism and feminism, this article from EWTN, 1994 and kind of creepily prophetic, is very good but you can google Marxist Feminism and come up with whole host of feminist sites that talk about Marxism:.

https://www.ewtn.com/library/ISSUES/FEMINISM.TXT
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top