this post was submitted on 14 Nov 2023
1217 points (96.9% liked)

tumblr

3479 readers
3 users here now

Welcome to /c/tumblr, a place for all your tumblr screenshots and news.

Our Rules:

  1. Keep it civil. We're all people here. Be respectful to one another.

  2. No sexism, racism, homophobia, transphobia or any other flavor of bigotry. I should not need to explain this one.

  3. Must be tumblr related. This one is kind of a given.

  4. Try not to repost anything posted within the past month. Beyond that, go for it. Not everyone is on every site all the time.

  5. No unnecessary negativity. Just because you don't like a thing doesn't mean that you need to spend the entire comment section complaining about said thing. Just downvote and move on.


Sister Communities:

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] teruma 20 points 1 year ago (1 children)

That's why it's so important to specify that men are victims of patriarchy, not victims of men. Everyone, regardless of gender, has an environmental tendency to reinforce the societal structure that we label "Patriarchy", as you say (and I/many agree), but there's far more to it than the idea of "men first women second". The idea behind the phrase is not "everyone vs. men" but rather "everyone vs. harmful but deeply engrained social construct".

[–] [email protected] 20 points 1 year ago (4 children)

Then why use the label "Patriarchy"? It has a very specific meaning that I don't feel applies to many western societies and definitely not to the sociatal structure and norms that we happen to live in, regardless of who is in charge. I think we agree on everything but the term.

[–] matter 12 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Because it still puts men on top in most ways, even while it hurts them too.

And it definitely applies to all western societies.

You can see it in this very story. "Men are strong, they don't need help. Women are weak and emotional, that's why they need support." Yeah, it's devastating for men in this situation, but it's the same logic which makes people say men are natural leaders or whatever.

[–] [email protected] -5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Don't forget that leadership is not a cakewalk either; it comes with responsibility and sacrifice. It is a burden as are most 'advantages' that men 'enjoy'.

[–] matter 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

In a just world it would be, but the consequence of being labelled and perceived as a "natural leader" is that one can get away with shirking their responsibility, avoiding sacrifice, and abusing their position without much repercussion.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

That's fair enough. I guess it depends how you view leadership.

[–] Drivebyhaiku 0 points 1 year ago

The Patriarchs in question does not refer to all men. It specifically calls out the culture of the "elders"and those who have had ample opportunity to become established influences through the system. Those who subscribe to old fashioned beliefs and those at the top of the power structures that benefit from their compliance from younger, poorer generations. Emotionally distant men and limiting variability within the group makes the entire demographic more easily exploitable. A lot of roles in the family and society exist for men outside the title of "patriarch" but patriarchs specifically use their role to self legitimize their power over other people and make everyone in some way subservient.

It's kind of a shorthand for "old fashioned" conservative systems of organization that prime men to be "leaders in embryo". The gendered component is still valid because it is still a dominant model that is marbled with minor subversions of it. Women and non-standard men may have changed their place in the family but even when they reach the top they have to make themselves non-threatening to the cohort of established powers and play by their rules to succeed.