Will feminist succeed dismantling patriarchy?

[dan020350]

As I say, division itself is the problem. But what is division?

[Derringer]

Some Aboriginal societies in North America (specifically nations such as the Cree) have been matriarchies.

Feminism views traditional truths and assumptions about women in society - things such as beauty, role in the family, social status, ect - as being created by men. The point of feminism is to re-evaluate these truths and assumptions from a feminine view and change the perception of women in society. It has little to do 'man-hating'.

Let's take an example: the dove 'real beauty' advertisements. The ads show many women of different ages, sizes, shapes and colours. They are presented in only their undergarments and the ad declares that they are beautiful as well. Point - you don't have to be a supermodel to be beautiful. I agree. Now, is this feminism? Initially I would say 'no'. Nakedness of the female body is beauty by male standards. But, I think that most females, not from a societal viewpoint, but their own, would claim that the female body is a beautiful thing. So there is a shared truth in society.

Now is shared truths and assumptions a success or failure of feminism or even the goal of feminism?

I think their are aspects of feminism that have been built into society, but on a whole, I think feminism has not succeded, but I don't feel like going in to examples.

[SleepyWitch]

Fortunately, such women are few and far between, and the third wave of feminism is somewhat less radical and anti-man then the second. Women, arguably, could be forgiven for holding the opinion that us menfolk should have to do the dishes for the next few thousand years, but very few of them actually hold it.

hehe, in my opinion, dish washers should do the dishes, if they didn't use so much electricity and water or people (men and women) who get paid for it should do them. more radically put, doing the dishes is so inhumanely boring and no-one should be forced to do them
...er I'll read the other posts now and try to come up with a more sensible contribution

[ELizabeth McC]

It never fails to astound me how quickly any discussion of feminism reverts to women's attitudes and behaviour towards men... quickly diverting attention away from examining and challenging men's attitudes and behaviour towards women. It makes me a little how should I phrase it... typical feminist reaction you might say.

[Bii]

Actually it's a fallacy that we live in a patriarchal society - it appears that way become women will it so. We've simply capitalised on the fact that men can only deal with one thing at a time so 'running the show' is a convenient distraction. Meanwhile women get to sit back and eat chocolate, deal with the important stuff (other people, not power) and make 'suggestions' on how things should be, for the men to go off and do.

[Redzeppelin]

It never fails to astound me how quickly any discussion of feminism reverts to women's attitudes and behaviour towards men... quickly diverting attention away from examining and challenging men's attitudes and behaviour towards women. It makes me a little how should I phrase it... typical feminist reaction you might say.

Not sure why this should bother you - any ideology based on gender identity should expect to be concerned with the attitudes and behavior of both genders (since they have a vested interest in interacting with each other). Feminism ostensibly is concerned with male attitudes and behaviors towards women - but those behaviors do not occur in a vacuum: they are (by and large) interactive and reciprocal in nature. As well, it is possible that feminism - in its redefinition of femininity - would inevitably also alter some of women's attitudes towards men. It makes sense that if male attitudes and behavior are an issue, that female behavior and attitudes will also come into play - since interaction is complimentary and reciprocal in nature.

[ELizabeth McC]

Actually it's a fallacy that we live in a patriarchal society - it appears that way become women will it so. We've simply capitalised on the fact that men can only deal with one thing at a time so 'running the show' is a convenient distraction. Meanwhile women get to sit back and eat chocolate, deal with the important stuff (other people, not power) and make 'suggestions' on how things should be, for the men to go off and do.

Hilarious

Not sure why this should bother you - any ideology based on gender identity should expect to be concerned with the attitudes and behavior of both genders

I never suggested that one set of attitudes be examined over another. My point remains... there is a deflection of attention away from one on to another. There is a difference.

[Redzeppelin]

I never suggested that one set of attitudes be examined over another. My point remains... there is a deflection of attention away from one on to another. There is a difference.

Deflection may or may not be an accurate explanation as to what has occurred in this thread. All ideas/concepts/philosophies submitted for discussion are open for exploration/criticism; feminism is not immune to the kind of contentions that show up in the evolution vs. creationism thread, the theism vs. atheism thread, the euthanasia thread, et al. Feminism offers an implicit (sometimes explicit) criticism of masculinity - and sometimes that criticism is fair and deserved; other times it is neither, and it is appropriate to question some of radical feminism's ideological positions.

PS - just take a look at the initiating question of this thread - such a question invites exploration of feminist ideology; if one suggests the replacement of one ideology with another, then it becomes necessary to investigate the positions in the ideology being suggested as the appropriate "replacement."

[Turk]

Can someone tell me what's goals and thoughts of feminism as a summary?

[ELizabeth McC]

Deflection may or may not be an accurate explanation as to what has occurred in this thread. All ideas/concepts/philosophies submitted for discussion are open for exploration/criticism; feminism is not immune to the kind of contentions that show up in the evolution vs. creationism thread, the theism vs. atheism thread, the euthanasia thread, et al. Feminism offers an implicit (sometimes explicit) criticism of masculinity - and sometimes that criticism is fair and deserved; other times it is neither, and it is appropriate to question some of radical feminism's ideological positions.

PS - just take a look at the initiating question of this thread - such a question invites exploration of feminist ideology; if one suggests the replacement of one ideology with another, then it becomes necessary to investigate the positions in the ideology being suggested as the appropriate "replacement."

I'm not denying any of this but my point remains... Very little attention has been given to men's attitudes to women in this thread... except for some smart-a** comments which probably says alot. I wouldn't for one minute suggest "let's not talk about" a particular topic, or "let's avoid" this, or that as it's not relevant, I'm well aware of the broad remit of philosophical discussion and I'm not for one minute suggesting we "close down" the discussion or deem certain aspects of it LESS important than others.

What I'm saying is that a disproportionate or as in the case of this thread an almost complete side-stepping of men's attitudes towards women is, as I see it, typical of discussions on feminist ideology. I think it's essential for any discussion on ideological theories and socio-political movements to look at all sides (I think you would agree). I'm suggesting that a discussion of feminism often doesn't do this and tends to focus on women's attitudes rather than men's. It reminds me of the Late Victorians calling feminism THE WOMAN QUESTION.... as though the issue is ultimately a matter of female behaviour and attitudes and not a case of combined responsibility. How can one discuss an appropriate "replacement" of something if we can't even have a sustain and serious discussion on what that something is? If you think this is wrong and that discussions on feminism do not display a tendency to pay a disproportionate attention to women's attitudes over men's (at the expense of an intelligent and honest discussion of the latter) but rather examine both equally then fine, but I don't.

[ELizabeth McC]

Can someone tell me what's goals and thoughts of feminism as a summary?

Like any other philosophical theory, political ideology or socio-cultural movement there is no simple answer to this that all those involved will agree on and certainly not in summary... summarize any other centuries old cultural developments and see how many people will agree on the summary.

Feminism is sometimes derided as too vague and its advocates in too much disagreement. Partly this is based on misogynist gibes about women's lack of organization, inability to agree and jealousy of each other. But to my mind it's the sign of an active and challenging intellectual movement.

For me personally, feminism is about my and ever other woman's right to expect the same from life as any man... good and bad. It also about readdressing the past and acknowledging how it has and still does play a role in both men and women's lives.

[SleepyWitch]

Hilarious



I never suggested that one set of attitudes be examined over another. My point remains... there is a deflection of attention away from one on to another. There is a difference.

hi ELizabeth.. I agree with you, up to a point. i think the reason attention gets deflected is because feminism is a political movement/several movements... even though there might be many different flavours of feminism, it's comparatively easy to identify feminists and say "feminists' aims are this, that and the other". what's more, feminists call themselves feminists and set up clubs, organisations, committees, etc



patriarchy/masculinism(?) on the other hand is a system that's been around for thousands of years and (theoretically) every single man who is not openly anti-patriarchal can be said to be part of it. there is no Patriarchy Association or something. so it's difficult to pin down and identify and discussions of patriarchy can easily be dismissed as "conspiracy theories"

[ELizabeth McC]

hi ELizabeth.. I agree with you, up to a point. i think the reason attention gets deflected is because feminism is a political movement/several movements... even though there might be many different flavours of feminism, it's comparatively easy to identify feminists and say "feminists' aims are this, that and the other". what's more, feminists call themselves feminists and set up clubs, organisations, committees, etc



patriarchy/masculinism(?) on the other hand is a system that's been around for thousands of years and (theoretically) every single man who is not openly anti-patriarchal can be said to be part of it. there is no Patriarchy Association or something. so it's difficult to pin down and identify and discussions of patriarchy can easily be dismissed as "conspiracy theories"

I agree.

[SleepyWitch]

I agree.

hehe, I think patriarchy works on a more subtle level than feminism, if you know what I mean?
so what can we do about that? do you have any suggestions? how can we revive this discussion (in this thread) without alienating e.g. our good old Uncle Virgil?
(by the way, I don't agree with those radical feminists at all, but I can see why they expressed such extreme views, considering the historical circumstances)

[ELizabeth McC]

hehe, I think patriarchy works on a more subtle level than feminism, if you know what I mean?
so what can we do about that? do you have any suggestions? how can we revive this discussion (in this thread)

I think reviving this thread is going to be a lot easier than dismantling patriarchy...

I'm really not sure what the latter even means... This may seem like a depressing analogy to some, but to my mind you may as well suggest dismantling 'time and space' or the plot of The Big Sleep or something... it just seems too big and indiscernible a task to even grasp let alone put into action.

I suppose what I'm saying is that I really don't think in those terms but in more concrete daily concerns and what I and others can do to bring about positive changes in women's lives, changes which I very strongly believe will benefit men and women alike.

God, I'm such a hippy at heart... but no free-love... that's just patriarchal hog-wash