Was Patriarchy a Women's Scheme to Control Men?

self | 10/30/2002 | SauronOfMordor

[Lorianne]

Oh brother. You're not bigotted are you?

I did not call "natural rights" unsavory, I was instead referring to the human tendency to be corrupted by power which our Founders understood and wisely feared.

They understood that absolute power corrupts the one weilding it. That is why they set up a system where no individual or small elite group could grab all the power. They understood implicitley that previous "patriarchal" (and I use that word much more broadly than you do) systems depended on the unassured benevolence of the king or the ruling elite, which they wisely did not trust. This is why they set up the balance of power between ruling bodies and wanted a lose federation of states rather than a strong centralized government. This is also why they wisely separated church and state realizing that religions at the time were modeled on strict elite heirachies which demanded absolute allegiance, anathema conceptually to what they wanted to try. (Note, they were not anti-religious, but rather anti-unilateral elite control).

I do not know what you mean by "natural rights" but I assume from your posts you mean male domination. It also wouldn't surprise me in the least if the "natural" dominating class in your retro view is a smaller category than males.

[Lorianne]

You're simply affraid a patriarchy places more power in the hands of men.

Half right. I'm afraid of any one group, particularly one based on biology, having unilateral power. Therefore, for example, I would be equally afraid of women having more power than men.

You might be thinking, who is going to regulate the men? Men don't get pregnant, women do.

Women don't get pregnant through parthenogensis. It is YOUR attitude which omits men's role in procreation and separates pregnancy from conception that is the basis for the decline in the family. You unwittingly are in bed with pro-Choice feminists in this belief! You probably don't even recongnize that you'e supporting their viewpoint.

If biological lineage is important to "patriarchy", it makes no sense to only control 1/2 of the conception equation. This is illogic. Men who pro-create outside of marriage are equally to blame for the decline of the "family". But then, you illogically discard conception and focus only on the pysiological state of pregnancy which results. Odd logic for a patriarch.

Obviously, biological control of lineage is not the concern or you'd advocate strict control of males and females. Therefore you agenda seems to be control of females "just because" as in fundementalist countries where they stone women adulterers but not their partners in crime. Heaven's, even Jesus himself had a problem with this kind of hypocrisy!

That might be the case, but it is the only way to regulate a woman's natural sexual promiscuity, and the distruction of the family.

More illogic. A woman cannot be promiscous without a male or males willing to be promiscous with her! The math simply doesn't compute. (Unless you are referring to homosexual unions. But even there, men have women statistially beat. Males homosexuals are 15% of the male population, female homosexuals are 5% of the female population). Therefore, if heterosexual promiscuity is the benchmark as you suggest, males are equally to blame for destroying families since it takes on of each to commit a promiscous act! This is simple mathematics.

[right2parent]

Your not listenning. Read the article again.

You unwittingly are in bed with pro-Choice feminists in this belief!

I think there would be a few that disagree with you there.

[right2parent]

I do not know what you mean by "natural rights" but I assume from your posts you mean male domination. It also wouldn't surprise me in the least if the "natural" dominating class in your retro view is a smaller category than males.

Please get a clue. Good night.

[Ippolita]

Very good points check out my post at :

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/956535/posts

You may find it interesting.

[SauronOfMordor]

Yes, thank you

[SunkenCiv]

A Blast from the Past. This topic is from 2002. I found it while looking for something else.

Just adding this to the GGG catalog, not sending a general distribution.

To all -- please ping me to other topics which are appropriate for the GGG list. Thanks.

Please FREEPMAIL me if you want on or off the
"Gods, Graves, Glyphs" PING list or GGG weekly digest
-- Archaeology/Anthropology/Ancient Cultures/Artifacts/Antiquities, etc.
Gods, Graves, Glyphs (alpha order)