fandomsecrets | [ SECRET POST #2709 ]

⌈ Secret Post #2709 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.

__________________________________________________

02.

__________________________________________________

03.

__________________________________________________

04.

__________________________________________________

05.

__________________________________________________

06.

__________________________________________________

07.

__________________________________________________

08.

__________________________________________________

09.

__________________________________________________

10.

__________________________________________________

11.

__________________________________________________

12.

Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 02 pages, 041 secrets from Secret Submission Post #387.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

Power. Somebody has to be on the bottom in a hierarchy, and if it isn't women, it'll have to be men, and some men are terrified of that, and not totally without reason, because it's nightmarish being nothing more than a somewhat appreciated object with very little voice or humanity. But in a hierarchy, in this case, patriarchy, somebody has to occupy that role nonetheless, and people who believe hierarchy of some sort is human nature and can't ever be dismantled, will fight tooth and nail not to be put in that role, to put someone else there.

Octavia Butler explored a lot about this concept in her Xenogenesis trilogy, wherein humanity's tendency towards hierarchy destroyed us, and then the survivors continued to destroy each other, and our inability to think past who should be on top enabled us to be manipulated by an alien race for their own ends. It was a pretty bleak and fucked up vision of humanity's future if we don't stop this alpha dog bullshit.

The thing that I really dislike about this whole discussion is that a lot of women actually believe that women would behave completely differently than men if they were in the position of power. Which is just silly.

Well usually they cite the fact that historically, matriarchal societies have been peaceful and not actually oppressive to men. I haven't studied up a lot on them myself, so that fact might be oversimplified... I think women would behave differently from men if were in power on a global level, but different doesn't mean better.

Well a lot of anthropologists argue that there have never been any matriarchies (just matrifocal, matrilineal societies where women inherit and men don't, men marry into women's families, and women lead the group) because in the sense of being reverse-patriarchies, they just don't pan out. Men always have considerably more freedom and legal recognition and the ability to wield power in those societies than women do even in some modern patriarchal societies.

I suspect that this is less because women are kinder and gentler and fairer with power, and more that they can't physically force men to extremes that men can force women - stoning and beating to death and setting on fire and gang raping women as men do to control women (see the latest news from Pakistan, ugh) in patriarchal societies. If we could, I bet we would. But we can't, so matriarchies are by necessity more open-handed. Remember, it was only in the 20th century that spousal rape was considered a crime and that beating your wife wasn't considered "normal" even where it wasn't legal. It still is, in many places. Without corporal punishment and sexual abuse as means of control, you have to rely on society as a whole (and thus men) to maintain your power structure.

Yes, I think that is kind of what I was getting at. If we had found some way for women to get the advantage over the usual ways men have traditionally gained control -- like the physical advantage -- there would be a completely different type of oppressive power structure.

True, that was badly put - I should have said "any better" instead of "any differently".

But yeah, there never have been long running, big giant matriarchies in a way that's compareable to the patriarchies throughout history. Maybe some, here and there, for not a terribly long time. They definitely weren't the majority. So there really is no way to compare it.

as if men don't believe that too, why are you singleing women out? either women are the peaceful etheral beings that would never wage war or they're ticking time bombs waiting to pms all over the planet.

I'm singleing them out because with a lot of men, exactly this "peaceful angel or angry bitch" are the only two options. Women should know better.

True, the brand of feminism that believes women are inherently better tends to have a more superficially nuanced view of women's supposed moral superiority. Trust me I know lots of these women. They say "Oh, of course we don't think women are perfect! But there's still overwhelming evidence that the world would be better off than it is now if women were in charge..."

[ SECRET POST #2709 ]

Re: Why

Re: Why

Re: Why

Re: Why

Re: Why

Re: Why

Re: Why

Re: Why

Re: Why