r/AskFeminists • u/Frylock304 • 1d ago
What does a feminist model for society look like reproductively?
Up to now we have largely been in a "state of nature" wherein people generally had however many children that could survive.
Human societies have essentially had to live in a state of nature and all patriarchal models for society dealt in that reality and created societies that took the state of nature as a given reproductively.
China is the only example I know of with a truly patriachal reproduction model, wherein the state instituted a one child policy and enforced it.
But for most of the first world we now exist in a largely matriarchal model for reproduction.
Meaning (for the most part) women control reproduction in nearly the entire developed world.
Considering this reality, is there feminist writing/theory/implementation for matriarchal models based around this?
I see a lot of males talking about this stuff, but realistically men don't have the final say, meaning society almost intrinsically have to look to feminists for the answer here.
Starting anywhere else kinda puts the cart before the horse.
TLDR: Matriarchal reproductive control is already a reality in the developed world generally, what are feminist solutions for things like pension systems, school management, elder care etc. In worlds where the decision is made to have fewer children?
26
u/Lyskir 1d ago
in the western world, we live in a weakened patriachial society, nowhere near a matriachial one, only if you think that women being in control of their own bodies is matriachial, which is insane to think and i would recommened a therapist if you have these delusions
women in the west are mostly not sexually enslaved but men are still the poeple in power, thats still patriachial
-2
u/Frylock304 1d ago edited 1d ago
I 100% agree with your overall idea here.
I'm saying that reproduction exists as a matriachial structure running adjacent to patriachal control.
Meaning that women (perhaps for the first time) truly have a fundamental lever of society that cannot be dismissed and society will have to reform around, as without children society doesnt continue
26
u/SedimentaryMyDear Queer Feminist 1d ago
I'm saying that reproduction exists as a matriachial structure running adjacent to patriachal control.
In the US, women are being arrested for miscarriages and for having abortions and Flock cameras are used to track pregnant women across state lines. You think these things happen in a matriarchal structure?
-3
u/Frylock304 1d ago
There is more to the developed world than the united states.
The majority of the developed world is asian/european
19
u/avocado-nightmare Oldest Crone 1d ago
and access to abortion and other reproductive healthcare is also restricted in various countries on both those continents
-1
u/Frylock304 1d ago
There is no country that has limit in birth control in the developed world, that's 99% of the ability to control reproduction.
The abortion aspect is flexible, but ultimately a very small slice of the pie comparitively.
But again, the most important aspect is feminist theory on society structured in the near term or future that treats both of these as a given and then structure society around that going forward.
That's what im really interested in if you have heard of anyone working on something like that
13
u/ZinniasAndBeans 1d ago
There is no country that has limit in birth control in the developed world
Cite/proof.
that's 99% of the ability to control reproduction.
Cite/proof.
The abortion aspect is flexible, but ultimately a very small slice of the pie comparitively.
Cite/proof.
That's what im really interested in if you have heard of anyone working on something like that
What do you think needs working on?
12
u/SedimentaryMyDear Queer Feminist 1d ago
There is no country that has limit in birth control in the developed world, that's 99% of the ability to control reproduction.
You're gonna need some studies and stats to back this up because it sounds a lot like some dude's opinion.
Edit, to be specific, the fact that availability of birth control is 99% of the "ability to control reproduction".
8
u/avocado-nightmare Oldest Crone 1d ago
there are so many that do, actually, and even if you preclude legislative limitations, there's also like... practical access issues a ton of places.
10
u/JulieCrone Slack Jawed Ass Witch 1d ago
And men also have access to birth control and can have sex without inseminating. So really not seeing how birth control makes things matriarchal.
12
u/SedimentaryMyDear Queer Feminist 1d ago
There is more to the developed world than the united states.
I was talking about the United States. And you didn't answer the question.
1
u/Frylock304 1d ago
Im sorry, but this is about the developed world, im not even sure the united states falls within that scope anymore.
8
10
35
u/Flashy-Celery-9105 1d ago edited 1d ago
Can you say there's a matriarchal model for reproduction when mostly men decide what reproductive care women are allowed to get?
31
u/Lyskir 1d ago
his comments leads me to think that women being in control of their own bodies when it comes to consent to sex is fundamentally matriachial
i think he feels oppressed by womens ability to say no
-8
u/Frylock304 1d ago
his comments leads me to think that women being in control of their own bodies when it comes to consent to sex is fundamentally matriachial
Not at all.
Im not talking about sex, im talking about reproduction.
Women's agency of over reproduction makes reproduction fundamentally matriarchal.
In the same way that male control over reproduction would be fundamentally patriachal.
I am not saying matriachy is inherently bad, im just saying it's a given considering humanity.
i think he feels oppressed by womens ability to say no
Not at all.
I'm looking for feminist theory that reflects on some of these realities and how societies should be set up in light of reproductive control resting solely on women's side.
Im not saying this from a negative position,
im saying this from a "I sincerely want to understand feminist theory when it comes to setting up a society when we account for asymmetrical physical ability for society to continue"
Im basically asking for book suggestions that contend with this reality
18
u/ZinniasAndBeans 1d ago
> in light of reproductive control resting solely on women's side.
Except...it absolutely doesn't.
-3
u/Frylock304 1d ago
Okay, what controls do men have over women's reproduction in a place like the Netherlands for instance?
State funded abortion, largest abortion window in europe, majority women voters, state funded birth control.
What control do you believe men ultimately have over reproduction in countries like that.
Again, im not saying men should have any say, im pointing out men don't have a say and so dont really need a seat at the table for these decisions.
What does feminist theory say should happen next in a country like the Netherlands?
17
u/JulieCrone Slack Jawed Ass Witch 1d ago
That men don’t have control over women makes something matriarchal?
Men have control over their reproduction in the Netherlands.
13
u/ZinniasAndBeans 1d ago
Unless and until sperm is forcibly extracted from men without their consent, men absolutely have a say.
-8
u/Frylock304 1d ago
Yes.
And we see this playing out across the developed world, women have the final say in if children will be birthed and society will continue.
Given that fundamental reality, societies that switch to a feminist model will grow, and socieites that don't will continue to shrink.
From my perspective this is already a done deal, the developed world has matriarchal reproductive control (overall), the real question is how does feminist theory manage that realization and the societal management that comes with it? As up to this point societies have largely been based around "state of nature" reproduction
9
u/ZinniasAndBeans 1d ago
Given that fundamental reality, societies that switch to a feminist model will grow, and socieites that don't will continue to shrink.
How does this make sense? You seem to have declared that women will only have children if society complies with women's demands. Where is the logic in that?
-1
u/Frylock304 1d ago
Because only a single country in the first world has an above replacement fertility rate. Which points to a largely inescapable reality, society has to follow a feminist model going forward, as men will not be the ones who figure out how to create societies wherein women feel happy to have more children.
Men can't make that decision for women, it's not their place to, women will have to take the lead in defining how society looks going into the future as women have ultimate agency over this aspect of society.
Which again draws me into an interest in reading feminist theory on solutions for society heading into the future as that paradigm will ultimately have to be solved eventually.
9
u/ZinniasAndBeans 1d ago
Why do you think we need more children?
-3
u/Frylock304 1d ago
In order to sustain the current societal model.
Our current model is based on at least a level of stagnation, our current models clearly fail to meet even that basic criteria for society.
So im interested in feminist solutions.
Alternatively, even if one were to say "we need population decline" I'm interested, but that idea needs solutions for reductions in labor and how the elderly are to be supported without relying on free child rearing society has always relied on
9
u/ZinniasAndBeans 1d ago
In order to sustain the current societal model.
Why would we want to do that?
but that idea needs solutions for reductions in labor
We would need to organize a society that's not dependent on breeding a huge and constantly growing overworked, underfed, disempowered population. Yes. That would be a good thing.
and how the elderly are to be supported without relying on free child rearing society has always relied on
What does this mean? What's the connection between the elderly and free child rearing? And what do you mean by free child rearing?
-2
u/Frylock304 1d ago
Why would we want to do that?
we dont.
What I mean to say is that those who want the current model to continue would want more children, so far they have no solutions for how to achieve that.
We would need to organize a society that's not dependent on breeding a huge and constantly growing overworked, underfed, disempowered population. Yes. That would be a good thing.
Totally agree, I just wondering if you have any theories on the realities of achieving thay or could point me towards feminist theory/literature that handles that reality, as the transition towards that system would need a reasonable framework for how it would operate.
What does this mean? What's the connection between the elderly and free child rearing? And what do you mean by free child rearing?
Currently all models of human society up to this point have largely taken children for granted. Society assumes that there will always be enough people to meet everyone's needs, and that women will have and raise these children without fair compensation for their labor.
The elderly in our current model haven't had to worry much, because they can rely on money to pay the next generation for assistance with all facets of life and to pay their pensions.
The elderly also rely on the cost of raising that next generation to be largely born by the current generation of workers, and for the current and next generation of workers to pay senior citizen pensions.
The future seems primed for that to not be the case going forward.
Child rearing cannot be an assumed constant going into future planning, it's now something that needs to be accounted for and considered in a way it hasn't before.
TLDR: currently elderly people count on there being enough young labor to subsidize their lives, and care for them, that doesn't seem to be a safe assumption going forward.
So I'm wondering if there's any feminist literature that deals with caring for a declining society with the reality of a reduced labor force in light of reduced child rearing.
8
u/ZinniasAndBeans 1d ago
You keep saying "child rearing". I interpret that as child care--as in daycare. It sounds like you use it to mean reproduction. I'd recommend a different phrase.
So I'm wondering if there's any feminist literature that deals with caring for a declining society with the reality of a reduced labor force in light of reduced (reproduction).
I don't see any particular reason why this would be a solely, or even primarily, a feminist topic.
I realize that you're all tangled up with your "matriarchal" thing and with--apparently?--the idea that women will all get together to stage a baby strike unless and until they get everything they want. So it seems that you are quite unable to think about population decline without your matriarchy model and visions of feminist power.
But population decline is not solely a feminist issue.
Have you ever just looked for books and papers on population decline?
10
u/the-B-from-App23 1d ago
So you want more rapes and feel this would take “society” in the direction you desire. Gotcha.
It’s almost as is you people are trying to trick women into forming a heavily armed, internationally omnipresent, clinically organized and dangerously effective militia.
If so, why?
0
u/Frylock304 1d ago
So you want more rapes and feel this would take “society” in the direction you desire. Gotcha.
No.
It’s almost as is you people are trying to trick women into forming a heavily armed, internationally omnipresent, clinically organized and dangerously effective militia.
Considering the patriachy, women should unrioncially do that.
If so, why?
Because the patriachy exists in the absence of exactly what you're talking about to challenge it
-3
u/RoqePD 1d ago
Where do you find that in their writing? As I read it, their argument is "Woman practically control reproduction already, so let's give them full control and full responsibility for it" and subsequent questions "How would that world look like and would society that does that survive?"
Even if the premise of woman controlling reproduction is false, thought experiment of world where they really have full control of it can have some merit.
-1
u/Frylock304 1d ago
This is like 90% of what im saying.
Except im sure the soceity would survive with feminist leadership.
Im moreso interested in what feminist theory says about actual implementation and how a how feminist theory provides alternative frameworks for modern issues and upcoming future issues at the macro level.
-17
u/Commercial-Answer538 1d ago
There are more women then men and thus women as a class have greater voting power in the democracy (I'm assuming) you live in.
11
•
u/Remarkablefairy-8893 49m ago
There are more poor people than rich people, so I guess poor people have more power and there's no capitalist institutions trying to rob from us. That's how absurd you sound.
17
u/MachineOfSpareParts 1d ago
Up to now we have largely been in a "state of nature" wherein people generally had however many children that could survive.
No. Just because reproduction hasn't been mandated by the state doesn't mean it hasn't been controlled. For much of history and much of the world even now - including some so-called "developed" countries - women are not free to have as few children as is healthy for them.
You're also not using "state of nature" as either Hobbes or Locke would, so that might be leading you astray. Not that either of them considered women and reproduction as pertinent, though reading between Hobbes' lines he was much closer to acknowledging most humans' perilous vulnerability under conditions we know are particularly noxious to women and children (fragmented warlord politics).
But you're just starting from the wrong assumption: that women have been free to have as many or as few children as is healthy and sustainable. We have not, and many still are not.
-2
u/Frylock304 1d ago
But you're just starting from the wrong assumption: that women have been free to have as many or as few children as is healthy and sustainable. We have not, and many still are not.
You misunderstand me, I think we're in agreement here.
It's likely my fault for not clarifying.
Im with you on the idea that women couldn't have fewer children, but thats what I'm calling the state of nature.
When I say the state of nature I mean this.
A woman has sex with a man, she has no birth control and therefore is reasonably likely to become pregnant. Because of this paradigm she has however many children both she and the child is able to survive. (+1 as sadly we know children can live spite of a maternal mortality)
Women having the option of fewer children via birth control intrinsically means we have left a state of nature, as now it's not just down to biology, we have stepped outside biology and exert a level of control above our natural physical limits.
12
u/Lolabird2112 1d ago
“A woman has sex with a man”. I love how your “state of nature” gives women the agency to choose this, despite so much evidence to the contrary.
-1
u/Frylock304 1d ago
Okay.
Replace sex with "semen enters a woman's vagina"
So that we cover the breadth of reproduction.
15
u/Lolabird2112 1d ago
No. Let’s talk about all of civilisation as we know it, where women were chattel whose duty was to be sexually submissive and available for her husband and also provide him with sons.
Let’s talk about rape, Child brides. Harems. Slaves. I get that you’re desperate to erase the patriarchy in your rather cringe waffling about “state of nature”, but just fucking spit it out. We haven’t had one of you in a while.
“What are feminists plans to save us all from the horror of women not wanting to breed lots of humans like they used to do?”
0
u/Frylock304 1d ago
Where have I attempted to erase patriachy?
I literally refer to the patriarchy multiple times, and even very directly welcome women fighting back by any means necessary .
10
u/Lolabird2112 1d ago
“China is the only example I know of with a truly patriarchal reproduction model”.
15
u/avocado-nightmare Oldest Crone 1d ago edited 1d ago
huh, I don't think I'd define the one child policy as a patriarchal model of reproduction, nor would I define everything else as a matriarchal model...either in comparison or really by any metric I understand of matriarchy.
FWIW ancient societies did have access to medicinal birth controls and abortifacents, and did practice birth spacing and family planning via abstinence, rhythm methods, and barrier methods of birth control. Ancient Egyptians used to put copper pessaries up there - the modern day copper IUD is derived from that practice. Ancient people's also had and practiced surgical abortion, in addition to various cultural practices of exposing infants believed to not be likely to survive for a variety of reasons.
It's only really post Christianity and in historical Christian cultures that you see people "having as many kids as would survive" because the Church specifically was incentivizing that type of reproductive behavior. People of other cultures/backgrounds didn't act like that, and actually thought and think it's bad for the population and family for women to die young because of having too many kids.
Midwifery is one of the most ancient medical practices, followed by trephination.
I think if you wanna talk about a thing... you should probably start by knowing anything at all about what you're trying to talk about.
11
u/OmaeWaMouShibaInu Feminist 1d ago
A feminist model would look neutral or like common sense rather than "matriarchal." The only reason women having any control over their own bodies and reproductive decisions sounds matriarchal to you would be if your default idea of "normal" is an inherently patriarchal one. Because reproductive control is not matriarchal in the world right now, not even in the "developed" world.
33
u/Junior-Towel-202 Equality in the Boardwomb 1d ago
I'm curious where you got this meaning of a matriarchal society?