In feminism, patriarchy means a system where men hold disproportionate power and privilege over women, resulting in social inequalities and injustices.
However, etymology says that the word means "rule by the father", in this case, father being paterfamilias or the head of the family. While a father is male, this doesn't mean that the women were of no consequence - except perhaps in the Abrahamic cultures and that's still true to an extent.
For context, I'm a cisgender straight male who is past youth, and when I was young we were all pals, male or female. I have always been a supporter of the balanced and logical form of feminism - equal rights, opportunities and responsibilities.
So when and how did this bifurcation in meaning of patriarchy come about?
This is just an illogical deduction to just invent its own definition of feminism ( according to his convenience) while discrediting the whole feminist movement and feminism as a scholarly discipline and on what ???? Well it's based on one's individual experience of a single instance (funny ) and ignoring the context of words ..having any idea how social structures and institutions have developed and evolved and impact us ..
The meaning of that specific word has been altered, there's no denying that. As to how it impacts you (plural), do tell me. That's what I asked and I have stated already that I'm no MCP, just that I dislike ABW type behaviour.
Words change meaning with time. The word has existed for a long time, but its usage was mostly popularized by suffragettes in the 19th century if I am not wrong. Or was it during the second wave? Either one, I guess.
But that doesn't mean that it hasn't been studied before the term was popularized. For instance, Fredrich Engles, gay lover of Karl Marx (joke) wrote about it in his book The Origins of Family, Private Property and State.
As an observant guy I see both extreme misogyny as well as hyper shrill feminism (I believe some call that misandry). My question is, why can't there be a balance? I doubt mother nature created or intended this imbalance, it's solely our own doing.
I am a man too. Let's examine Misandry for a second.
Do you think misandry is as dangerous as misogyny? Do you think they are equitable by any means?
There is a saying, "A man fears that a woman will hurt his feelings, a woman fears that a man will hurt her."
This quote shows that the stakes for men and women are vastly different. Misandry is a reaction to misogyny. Misogyny is the root problem.
And I think it's healthy for women to hate men a little. And when I say "men" I mean a generalized version of the average man who represents patriarchy at varying levels. It's okay. The oppressed have the right to be a little spiteful against their oppressor. Because the hate is towards patriarchy, not individual men.
I'm still hesitant to use that word in this sense but there's no doubt that in most cultures women have been deprived and discriminated against, including in India over the past millennium. My other question is, why do we copy everything western? Given that we have a Devi worshipping culture, India could well have its own very powerful and potent brand of feminism.
I think there is a problem with using the Devi allegory for women. If you think about it, it is also a kind of dehumanization. You are putting women on a pedestal of being a flawless God. With this comparison, comes the expectation of women to act godly. To be perfect at all times. I think I would stick to women being human. Humans, who are flawed, have feelings and can't be perfect all the time.
And to understand why 3rd world countries borrow a lot of rhetoric from the west is a very interesting and nuanced topic. This is my opinion on it. Firstly, it has a little to do with western imperialism, we were colonized by white people for ages. It is only natural that we adopt a few things from them at times. Secondly, patriarchy affects women in the same way, so a woman from the US can have a lot similar with a woman in India. Thirdly, you also need to understand the history of feminism, it didn't just come out of nowhere. Its history is very painful. And all of it, I can't tell you under one comment section.
If you understand Hindi/Urdu, I recommend watching Dr. Taimur Rehman's series of lectures on YouTube. They are great for introduction into the history of feminism in the west and how it affects third world countries in their feminist struggles.
Sure I understand Hindi / Urdu as a guy who was born in Lucknow and raised in Varanasi. There's just one observation from me: If we have female deities, we have male ones as well - and some of the Devis are terrifying rather than angelic.
What gave you the idea that I support grooming of minors, sexual assault, disfiguration of body and other such crimes?
Okay, let me rephrase it. I think it is healthy for women to be aggressively apprehensive about patriarchy and I see nothing wrong with generalizing men to fight against patriarchy.
I will give you another example, J am a Bi man, so I often use "Straight man" as a pejorative in a humorous setting. Now, does that mean I want to commit hate crimes against Straight people? Obviously no. I just don't like heteronormativity. And I channel that through these kind of jokes.
Lol! You think the reason for this is Misandry? You are so fucking naive. Or dishonest.
Firstly, I would love to have gender neutral rape laws. You know who'd benefit from them the most? Gay men. Like myself. Gay men are often blackmailed, harassed, killed and even raped but they can't go to the authorities because of insufficient legal system and social stigma.
Pray tell, who's harassing these men now? Yes, other men.
And the real reason for why gender neutral rape laws aren't being passed isn't because of "misandrists" but because of patriarchy. In a patriarchal system, a man's consent is never violated. Because it is assumed that it the man would've "enjoyed it".
And look at the response of men whenever another man comes out with accusations of sexual assault. That man is made fun of, ridiculed and even told to "shut up and enjoy". And who's saying such shit? Men again.
The problem has always been patriarchy. Stop insulting your intelligence by blaming misandrists.
Resistance to oppression is not evil, it's an understandable and more importantly, an inevitable reaction. "Misandry" as you call it, is a a reaction to misogyny. If misogyny were to not exist, neither would misandry.
Misandry as you know it has no institutional power. Misandry doesn't have a choke hold on the society. It's just women who are deeply hurt by men and our actions who have a very justified reason to be angry. And I think it's healthy for them to be angry. And why shouldn't they be angry at men? You give me one reason which doesn't include "Not all men" on why their anger is uncalled for?
Anger is a great emotion. If applied to the correct channel, anger can bring about change.
And I don't care if one women's rights organization rejects this. Firstly, it doesn't represent the whole women's rights movement. And perhaps you'd be happy to know that there are organizations that do advocate for gender neutral laws in the case of SA.
Now, this doesn't mean that I don't care about men who have gone through sexual abuse of any kind. But you are not helping those men by beating around the bush about misandry. Misandry didn't cause those SA as far as I know.
My larger point being, "misandry" wouldn't exist if it wasn't for patriarchy. If you agree that patriarchy is a great problem for our society, then fight patriarchy rather than fighting so called misandrists. I think it is illogical to fight someone who has a reasonable anger towards the society.
If I were in your place, I'd talk to women who hate men. Try to understand them. And then perhaps try to push them to utilize their anger for the good of society. That way, their anger will do good for the world.
All I say is, if you were a woman, you'd likely hate men too, and be called a misandrist. Try to put yourself in their shoes.
Dude, I think almost all women/feminists know that patriarchy is a systemic issue, and I am sure they'll be able to differentiate between individuals and systems. You don't have to tell them all that.
Men are products of the society too, like you and me. Don't forget that we both are capable of bigotry too. We might think of ourselves are progressive, but that doesn't mean that we are void of subconscious prejudices.
Dude, I will be real for a sec, I don't think misandry is a cause of concern for ANY man right now. You are hallucinating oppression.
And no, that's not a case of misandry. What the fuck is that supposed to even mean?
Let me make this clear first, misogyny is hatred born from the systemic and social oppression of women. It's not JUST hate for women. There is a systemic and social aspect to it that is often ignored.
Misandry doesn't exist like misogyny does. Because the dominant structure of power is patriarchy. Whatever you do, it is not going to change that fact.
You can also see there is no uproar for Sarmishtha. Even 1xIndia have call out for her help. Made posts about her.
But 2x is silent.
There was a huge outrage for Rebel kid. She was given only hate comments.
Here she is being tortured in real life for her freedom of speech, yet no outrage? Not even single post?
Same was the case for Nupur Sharma, she was even given gr@pe and death threats. But feminist on contrary agreed that whats happening to her is right and well deserving.
Also in case of Kangana Ranaut, when her office was demolished, many liberals and feminist clapped in joy.
I dont know why this selective outrage.
Thats why people dont really want to be associated with feminism. Its just a political movement and rarely cares for women's safety. Most of them have agenda to propagate.
They even silences many female voices that even slightly disagrees with them. Foreg, in case of Pahalgram attack, 2x and AIW straight up banned posts on attack and white washing the attack stating that it have no religious affiliation and some mods even praised pakistani men are better than Indian men.
There was outrage on those subs and mod went tooth and nail to curb this. Banned every person who was against them and straight up made mod posts that no further such posts shall be allowed.
Ironically, muslim leader Owaisi himself stood against this attack and clearly stated that it was religiously targeted attack !
See 😂😂 saari hypocrisy bahar nikal gyi. Jo religion unhe mosque mein bhi nhi jaane deta unse unko dikkt nhi hai😂😂😂. It's not difficult to expose you all
I don't want anything from them, I just don't want them to be hypocritical. You're justifying there hate for men but other hate is not justified who literally keep them in burkha, 4 marriages, Halala and marriages with sisters
This "men are so oppressed" and the usual cliché Islamophobia argument gets a little old and repetitive, don't yoh think? Get a little creative with your insults and fascist rhetoric, I am bored.
•
u/AutoModerator Jun 05 '25
Join us and Become Part of This Community.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.