Comments | shawnaree: Feminism and Systems of Power.

shawnaree

Feminism and Systems of Power.

Jan 12, 2009 21:07

I've been thinking about feminism using the paradigm set forth by critical race theorists such as Gloria Ladson-Billings. Mostly, I've been clicking around links to various feminist blogs and reading some of the FAQs about why we should be feminists, and what feminism is, and I found this quote:

Mr Shakes): Feminism benefits us all ( Read more... )

gender, equity

Comments 13

peaceofpie January 13 2009, 05:02:20 UTC

Also...since I'm ornery and masochistic, I will point out that it could theoretically be argued that patriarchy also benefits everyone in some way. And just like with feminism, one might argue that the benefits they personally receive from patriarchy are not worth the sacrifices, but that doesn't mean that benefits are not available from that system.

I'm not arguing in favor of patriarchy, though. Just poking at pokeable things.

shawnaree January 13 2009, 05:42:04 UTC

Well, obviously the partriarchy has benefits. I don't think that's a point of contention for me. If the system didn't at least make people think it was good, it wouldn't have existed as long as it has ( ... )

peaceofpie January 13 2009, 09:30:10 UTC

I guess part of the challenge I have with arguing this sort of thing is that I don't have a clear sense of what would be the best system. I don't think I'm qualified to decide that, and if I thought I was, my belief would probably be that the best system would be Oliverarchy. :D

But I think that it is a big problem when any one group runs the show. I guess one of the problems I see with both patriarchy and feminism is that both are systems in which a group believes they are more qualified to run the show, while simultaneously insisting that they aren't really trying to run the show. I tried on the idea of "Maybe it would be better if people could just admit that they really do want to run the show", but I don't actually think that's a better idea. It's a start, maybe, but wouldn't fix much. Honestly, I think what needs to happen is that people need to stop trying to run the show, and instead enjoy the damn show ( ... )

shawnaree January 13 2009, 16:19:24 UTC

The issue for me is that I can't answer the question "what is the opposite of patriarchy?" in a way that's satisfying for me. I don't think that flip-flopping places of power between two groups is really the best idea, and I don't think it would work ( ... )

Thread 7

jaidedboi January 13 2009, 14:02:28 UTC

I find this conversation to be an interesting one. In particular, the discussions of the patriarch. It is by definition, the belief that men hold a higher power and ARE superior. So I don't understand how one can say we should be fighting for equality in one breathe and then state that there is no problem with the patriarchy in another.
Unless it is a misuse of language, unless we break it down to roles that men and women choose mutually. Meaning, that a man and woman are BOTH satisfied with traditional roles within the context of any relationship or any circumstance wherein they are "working" side by side.

I think there is confusion.

A woman being able to stay home with her children is not, as stated, a “perk” of the patriarch. It is rather a “perk” of the feminist movement that made staying home an option rather than an obligation. Traditional roles do work for some, are appreciated by some, but that should not be read as support and acceptance of a patriarch that still oppresses with their superiority complex. I also can’t ( ... )

shawnaree January 13 2009, 16:09:39 UTC

I think I agree that there are disadvantages to being a man in a patriarchal system, but I don't think that's being talked about. I also think that it's possible that men are given positions of power in society without them making that choice. For me, I have difficulty in getting rid of the power that I have gained since transitioning ( ... )

jaidedboi January 13 2009, 17:46:55 UTC

Because I always agree to be controversial, your awareness of your presence in the patriarch power paired with your aversion to relinquish what you gain from it only continues to promote its ideals. When in power, one seldom has the need to question themselves or the cultures they identify themselves with. But. In order for any semblance of equality to exist, the majority HAS TO oblige itself to step off the heads of those it oppresses just as vehemently as the minority is fighting to step up ( ... )

shawnaree January 13 2009, 17:56:52 UTC

Because I always agree to be controversial, your awareness of your presence in the patriarch power paired with your aversion to relinquish what you gain from it only continues to promote its ideals. I wouldn't say that I'm averse to relinquishing what I gain from the patriarchy. I would say that oftentimes I am given privilege that I don't ask for, and I don't know how, as someone who hasn't had a lot of time dealing within the system in this way, to get it to stop happening. Other than controlling my own actions (monitoring how often I speak in a group is a good one for me), and deferring to those who aren't given the opportunity to be heard, I can't help the fact that people make assumptions about what I can and want to do, based on my gender. I feel like all I can control is who I am and what I do. This might get better with time ( ... )

Thread 6