Neoreactionary men: Why should women accept the patriarchy?

banananutbranmuffin · 2019-08-29T19:20:08+00:00

We don't live in a patriarchy nor are we ever going to go back to it.

A patriarchy is a system in which land rights, wealth and the command of servants is passed down from father to eldest son or only son, if that is not possible then it goes to a male who's next of kin.

Carrying on about the patriarchy in this day and age is a ludicrous discussion.

jax006 · 2019-08-29T19:16:54+00:00

Why should women accept such a system?

Because they cant build a better one. It's not like patriarchal societies sprang up out of a 50/50 coin toss lmao men are just better at running shit.

pnadlerlaw · 2019-08-29T19:26:04+00:00

To quote from “The Power of Sexual Surrender” (Marie N. Robinson, M.D.):

“It is this trait [aggression] that most clearly defines him, and it is this trait that is at the root of the [] woman’s anger, fear of and feeling of rejection by men.

She is antagonistic to this aggression because she does not understand it. Since she cannot understand or accept her own role, her feminine nature, she feels that male aggression is opposed to her and she takes every opportunity to prove to herself that this is so. His strength, his ability to master the outside environment make her feel personally nullified, a drab, a slavey. She endlessly contrasts his essential quality of aggression with women’s essential traits, to her detriment.

Now, if men were out to enslave them, women would be very justified in fearing, hating, envying man’s central strength, his aggressiveness. But is he?”

...

“Far from seeking to enslave our sex, to exploit us through his strength and his aggression, man has put these two great and basic attributes entirely at our service. It is (and always has been) this fact that makes it safe for us to be women, to bear [our] children with a sense of security, to rear them, knowing that he is there, always and forever, earning our bread, watching over us ceaselessly, keeping his terrible anxieties about us and our safety to himself so that we will not worry as he does.”

It was men who fought in and defended against war. It was men who created the institution of marriage ... to protect and provide for the lifelong care of women. It was men who created the notion of child support for children born outside a marriage. It was men who drafted the Fourteenth Amendment. It was men who included “pregnancy” as a covered form of sex-based employment discrimination. It was men who relaxed the standards for pleading and suing for sexual harassment (starting with states like New York). It was men who reasoned that one could be raped within a marital relationship, abolishing the old English rule. It was men who paid greater insurance premiums under the affordable care act for OB/GYN services they had “zero” risk of ever incurring “as men,” so that those services are more affordable to women and “covered” as part of their healthcare insurance. It was men who authored Eisenstadt v. Baird and Roe v. Wade.

That is how men have actually used the power they have. Society used to hang people, cut off the hands of thieves, own slaves, etc.

The ancient, archaic and “primitive” starting points of human society are not exclusive to women. Humanity, as a whole, underwent (and continues to undergo) progressive development and advancement concerning the rules by which members of its society are governed.

Are there exceptions to any group of people? Of course. We will never live in a world without crime, criminals, manipulators, exploiters, liars, fraudsters, etc. Not everyone can use power for “constructivism.” Some people, particularly the religious, are prone to use it for “expressivism” (have society conform to what those in power “believe,” not what it objectively and rationally in the reasonable best interest of society as a whole).

But over the years, if it’s one thing that men have demonstrated, is that with respect to their own tribe, their own home, men (on average) use their power to protect and provide for ... whoever their tribe may be ... and often to their personal detriment.

angels-fan · 2019-08-29T18:42:41+00:00

If the patriarchy caters to women at a much, much higher percentage than men, why the fuck does it matter if it's a patriarchy??

Our current patriarchy is subservient to feminism, so why do women care?

Katzenpower · 2019-08-29T22:29:35+00:00

Cause patriarchy=civilization. And I have yet to see a feminine woman with power over men who doesn’t act out her contempt for weakness and inferiority in a cruel and demeaning way. Not saying masculine women can’t be good leaders but you know which women I’m talking about.

statusincorporated · 2019-08-29T20:39:36+00:00

Because only a small % of men hold all that power. Beneath them are women, who essentially get to choose who to hitch their stars to. And beneath the women are the rest of the men.

reluctantly_red · 2019-08-29T19:47:24+00:00

WTF are you talking about? TRP isn't about political power its about the dynamics of male/female relationships. Personally I'm all for equality so long as it's true equality (i.e. sharing the burdens as well as the benefits). If women want to do hard dirty jobs I'm all for it. If women want to be combat soldiers I'm all for it. If woman want to be equal partners in marriage (i.e. equally responsible financially) I'm all for it.

MrsChiliad · 2019-08-30T00:48:44+00:00

Why should I not? What delusional world are you living in to be thinking women are being left to be used by the whims of men?

I’m gonna copy what I replied on another thread a few days ago, because it’s just so tiring to keep hearing about this fictional world where we were so oppressed in the USA.

(...) But when men in general (as opposed to just the rich) got the vote, first of all, it wasn’t like they had it just for men for a long time. They had it just for the elite men for a long time. Then they made it available to all men because they could get drafted. So when women protested for the vote, they got it even though there wasn’t a condition on them having it, unlike men. I think that was really unfair. I think if it had progressed more naturally it probably would have been more like, women were becoming more of a part of the work force and being treated in other ways just like men, and therefore it didn’t make sense for them to not have the vote. It would have happened eventually regardless imo.

But I do think it’s a very silly world view to see men and women as completely equal and to treat them as such. That’s why I don’t really know how to express my reply to all of your other questions... in a sense, yes, I actually think women and society in general were better off when we weren’t pretending men and women are the same. At the same time, do I think it was fair when women were paid whatever percentage to the male pay they were working in textile mills? No. But my flair isn’t about that. There have been unfairness in the world for sure, no one in their right mind is denying that. But it doesn’t paint the whole picture to just say “women had no vote, couldn't open a bank account, take out a loan, drive, not able to go to a pub or get equal pay”. No, they couldn’t do those things. But at the same time, all that was expected of men when that was the case, wasn’t expected of women. It’s not like our society nowadays would have done that.

The problem is the current claims of unfairness. They simply aren’t true. A female cashier with the same amount of work experience doesn’t make less than a male cashier. A female employee to a big company who works 10 hours a week less because she has kids and isn’t willing to work over time, takes more sick leaves because of them and also took a break of a couple of years (so that she could breast feed and parent her kids)? She definitely makes less than a male employee in the same company. And that’s not bad. It’s not bad to prioritize stuff other than work in your life. And it’s not sexist to pay more to people who work more. Women, before they become mothers, statistically actually make the same amount of money and sometimes slightly more than men.

It’s also not sexist that there are less women CEOs. There’s very little men CEOs too. There’s very little men who want to be CEOs. Because to be one, you have to literally not care that much about other things in life apart from your job. Not many people want that, and much less women, who, statistically, have work as their main source of happiness less than men do. So it’s natural there are less women in those positions. It’s not sexism.

The claim of 1/4 women being sexually assaulted? Also not true. That came from a questionnaire done in campus asking women if they had ever been raped, but also if they ever had sex and then regretted it, if they ever had sex drunk, etc. all those numbers were put together and has been advertised as 25% of women are sexually assaulted in their lives in the west. It’s completely dishonest but it has become an absolute truth. It’s a given now. We have the same statistics of rape as the republic of Congo, where literally a woman could be gang raped and there’d be no prosecution of the men involved. Please.

I could go on. Men have been demonized and ridiculed for decades. Women are not held accountable anymore. Make way of thinking and behaving has been considered flawed and wrong. You get my point though. I’m pro-patriarchy because I think men and women are different. And men are the ones who, under good conditions, are the ones mostly running societies. And they’ve created really good ones if you ask me. I really don’t believe we would have gotten to the same place if women had been in charge for most of our history. But you know what? None of them would have been here without the sacrifices of women either. So, to me, the real sexism is thinking that the contributions women have always made to the function of society aren’t as relevant because they weren’t the ones earning the money or building bridges. It’s saying that child rearing doesn’t have the same value. It’s bigotry disguised as social justice, and families and children, and in consequence, society, have been suffering for it.

max_peenor · 2019-08-30T01:24:36+00:00

Even the more casual Red Pillers are in favor of traditional gender roles and generally, I rarely see a Red Piller who is not pro-patriarchy.

No. This is a massive straw man and yet again reveals how little you know about us. The current arraignment works best for us. Sure, society is fucked, but it was very kind of you to relieve us of that responsibility. But we aren't plugging back in so have fun with that.

I'm starting to think the fundamental blooper problem is that they WANT us to be patriarchal shitlords and do all that shit we used to do, while blowing smoke up their ass about how wonderful they are and turning a blind eye while they ride whatever dick that want to rick. Eat their cake and fuck it too.

No thanks.

Eastuss · 2019-08-30T07:59:43+00:00

your "patriarchy" is just women losing competition. Women can't win competition, they don't have to accept anything, they just can't compete. There's no law that enforces the patriarchy, women can turn it over only if they make matriarchy into the law. And the real question is why men should accept it?

blackedoutfast · 2019-08-29T19:50:19+00:00

for the same reason that dogs should accept the superiority of their human masters.

traditional society is dead. patriarchy is dead. women have just as much political power as men. and all of these things have been true since well before anyone posting on this site was born.

you're imagining that one day feminism will win and women will be just as powerful as men and it will be a wonderful utopia where everything is perfect for women. well guess what sweetie? all that shit has already happened (except the utopia part).

patriarchy isn't the problem. men aren't the problem. masculinity isn't the problem. traditional gender roles aren't the problem. you're just being told that those things are the problem so you'll be so distracted chasing ghosts that you won't see the real root cause of what's wrong. instead of allying with men to solve the real issues, you see men as your biggest enemy. it's the most blatant and obvious example of divide and conquer. and the fact that you fall for it so easily is exactly why you need to sit down and let men lead.

Blonsomio · 2019-08-29T19:04:07+00:00

They shouldn't, but the thing is that women's desires are in direct conflict with the advancement of civilization. If it was up to women 80% of men would be discarded while they shared/rotated the top 20% men. While this is the ideal for women, it wouldn't be as efficient as a society where every man has his family and incentives to work hard.

officerkondo · 2019-08-29T21:44:07+00:00

Why the hell should women accept such a system

If they don't want to accept the system you allege, they don't have to. They can fight back and make a system of their own, assuming you think women are smart, strong, and competent enough to do this, of course.

ianiemasns · 2019-08-31T03:50:03+00:00

I define patriarchy as the system where men have almost all of the economic and political power. If you don't like the term "patriarchy" then call it "traditional society" or whatever. The point remains the same.

Why the hell should women accept such a system when it obviously leaves them vulnerable to the whims of men?

To your point: women shouldn't accept patriarchy.

To add: neither should men.

Because I disagree with your definition in that you seem to be defining men as one cohesive group with shared "whims". And this couldn't be further from the truth.

I would even argue that men, as a group of individuals, are, on average, more dissimilar than women as a group of individuals. Men occupy both the highest and lowest levels of the legal system, political system, economy, etc.

While most of the people running the world are men, most men aren't running the world. Jeff Bezos is at the very top of Amazon, Amazon employs 575,000 people - how many of the people at the lowest levels are men? Do you think Jeff Bezos confers with his 400k male warehouse workers when making decisions? Or that the male dominated Senate and House call up the average man when determining policy?

All squares are rectangles but not all rectangles are squares. The men who have the economic and political power are squares (mostly older, white, cis, traditionally masculine, heterosexual, rich). Most men are rectangles. So while it's technically true that rectangles run the world, saying it that way implies that the non-square rectangles have more power than they actually do.

Emervila · 2019-08-29T18:56:37+00:00

Neoreactionary women: Why should men accept the Feminism?

Seroriman · 2019-08-29T19:01:25+00:00

A lot of the benevolent sexism we see is a remnant, of sorts, of patriarchal mores, with men giving women certain privileges and allowances in exchange for the various rights women lose - meaning men protect women and provide for women even outside their immediate family to some extent to maintain what is, essentially, an asset to men in general. For example dealing with threats to women as threats to the group, or, say, forcing the Alpha fucks who knocked a woman up to actually marry her and provide for her (and that was enforced, to some degree). With women being their own agents (and essentially marketing their own sexual capital) men have either abandoned those actions or chafe under the remaining "chivalrous" obligations and feel less inclined to do things for women without a clear transactional exchange.

Patriarchy is better for women who either, for psychological reason, prefer to have choices made for the them/cede power, or for those who are really bad at making good choices. A more free system arguably benefits women that have good strategies to use their new-found power and navigate the hazards that men no longer protect them from.

Neo-reactionary men also consider men, as a general rule, to be better at making those important decisions (I myself am not so sure and think there are arguments to be made either way)

iceicle999 · 2019-08-29T19:15:15+00:00

Might makes right. You're asking this question in a scenario where women have the choice. Many males over the time humanity has existed have been subjugated in some way. Harmed, exploited. Everything nasty under the sun. I'm saying this in a factual way, not a boohoo poor men way. In a real patriarchy, women would have no say, they'd just have to shut up and go with things. There would be no reddit either to spite all those guys that don't pay attention to them.

[deleted] · 2019-08-29T19:08:19+00:00

Heleniclady, please, read the PPD glossary if you are not interested in reading TRP community sites. We are above strawman here in PPD. You didn't make any sense on your assumptions or questions.

Here are the correct information.

TRP has nothing to do with traditionalism, or any previous systems. It exists to explore the system which was born recently which came forth by, among other things, the sexual liberation, which is relatively new on the planet. (and pushed by Feminist and Marxist rhetorics, two of its biggest critics, funnily enough)
TRP openly criticize traditionalism, that is why there is "con" in "tradcon" (the nickname TRP gave those people who believe in tradicionalism). You are confusing and mixing the groups.
TRP is a knowledgebase about the market and people. Some of the knowledge on people just happen to relate to traditionalist gender roles (probably because they are based on something). But tradicional gender roles are not perfect. That is why TRP uses the evolutionary psychology theory research to determine which are true and which aren't. It cares about information to navigate the market, it does not matter where from.
TRP is also really critic of this "patriarchy hypothesis" from the "feminist theory". After all, men and women have actually a distaste to the group "men" (An article, which yourself posted some time ago, heleniclady).
TRP is also free market friendly, women put themselves in the place they are today. Each individual has choices and should face the consequence of it for themselves. That is why MRMs, MRAs and traditionalists have a problem with TRP, The red pill prefer to "watch the market self regulate" than to change the market. As they consider it is each individual's choice what they do, The red pill community only help those which look for it. "Don't wanna use the knowledge? Your choice I guess."
Me and many in the TRP consider the traditionalist system as a poor choice, as both men and women don't have a choice and they usually suffer in the hand of one another. But also consider the system we are heading to a poor choice too as the ultra-competitiveness and gender war leads to unhappiness regardless of sex. That is exactly why they call this "the decline" regardless of politics or the future, don't matter who wins, feminism or traditionalism, the world is on the decline. Because there is no "happy system" to strive for. TRP focus on making the individual happy, not the world. Not everyone is an activist Heleniclady.

G0G07 · 2019-08-29T18:52:31+00:00

4th wave feminists: Why should men accept the matriarchy?

We all know the huge overlap between TBP and feminism. Even the more casual Blue Pillers are in favor of nontraditional gender roles and generally, I rarely see a Blue Piller who is not pro-matriarchy. This reply is aimed at those pro-matriarchy women.

I define matriarchy as the system where women have almost all of the economic and political power. If you don't like the term "matriarchy" then call it "progressive society" or whatever. The point remains the same.

Why the hell should men accept such a system when it obviously leaves them vulnerable to the whims of women. Do you not see how it is a bad deal for men? Why should men accept such a system? I want to see arguments.

Does it illustrate my point?

GayLubeOil · 2019-08-29T20:01:49+00:00

The obvious flaw on your logic here is that a "Political Platonist" wouldn't democratically impose his values, he would ask women to accept anything.

That's the big issue here.

rus9384 · 2019-08-29T20:26:13+00:00

the system where men have almost all of the economic and political power

Okay, there are more male millioanaires than female ones. However, those are a minority of men who control most of the resources. Tell me, why should MEN accept it?

Regarding political power, the majority of voters are women. The fact their representatives are mostly men, is not an argument for patriarchy.

If you mean, why should women accept a system like in old days, I don't think they should.

crackrocksteady7 · 2019-08-29T20:30:32+00:00

Why are you bargaining when the proposition is an offer you can't refuse?

Who do you think is asking women to accept patriarchy?

bonusfruit · 2019-08-29T23:30:28+00:00

Because you can't build anything better. In fact , you can't build anything

PickUpScientist · 2019-08-29T23:53:07+00:00

you shouldn't accept the patriarchy because it doesn't exist anymore.

men have almost all of the economic and political power

women spend the most money by far. that's power.

sitting politicians are less likely to be women because women are less likely to run. but that doesn't really matter, the laws being passed increasingly support women, often times to the point of complete preference. that's power.

patriarchy as a idea is propagated by angry bitter sexists that nobody wants to fuck, not unlike hypergamy.

LeJacquelope · 2019-08-30T01:38:16+00:00

LOL Patriarchy is fucking trash.

immaculacy · 2019-08-30T05:05:51+00:00

>Do you not see how it is a bad deal for women?

Not at all. How on earth is it a bad deal?

Sepean · 2019-08-30T08:38:53+00:00

What do you mean, “accept it”? Look at the people who are driven enough to make it into the elite, the majority of them are men. It’s that simple. It’s not a conspiracy, it is just a reality that only say 1% of men and 0.1% of women have what it takes to make it to the top.

Pontifex_Lucious-II · 2019-08-30T09:15:29+00:00

No need. It’s doesn’t exist. Just like “neoreactionary” as a word doesn’t exist.

Dunuk419 · 2019-08-30T16:53:18+00:00

I don't think neoreactionary men want to bring back wife beating and arranged marriages. People who do usually don't even understand what that word means.

G0G07 · 2019-08-31T00:48:57+00:00

4th wave feminists: Why should men accept the matriarchy?

We all know the huge overlap between TBP and feminism. Even the more casual Blue Pillers are in favor of nontraditional gender roles and generally, I rarely see a Blue Piller who is not pro-matriarchy. This reply is aimed at those pro-matriarchy women.

I define matriarchy as the system where women have almost all of the economic and political power. If you don't like the term "matriarchy" then call it "progressive society" or whatever. The point remains the same.

Why the hell should men accept such a system when it obviously leaves them vulnerable to the whims of women. Do you not see how it is a bad deal for men? Why should men accept such a system? I want to see arguments.

Does it illustrate my point?

eboy4hire · 2019-08-29T18:55:10+00:00

Because it doesn't hurt you, and why do you want to work? Working is not that great.

fevertree · 2019-08-29T18:42:00+00:00

“We” do not know of this overlap. What is neoreactionism?

NockerJoe · 2019-08-29T18:45:40+00:00

I'm gonna go off the rails and say they shouldn't. Just like an increasing amount of men aren't accepting the current dynamic. Things are the way they are because nobody wants to accept anything on the table and there's a refusal to compromise.

If there is a patriarchy it will have to somehow be enforced, both against women and against men who don't want it. Or else, somehow, it will have to be the best option currently available from a cultural standpoint. I don't see the latter happening so that leaves us with the former.

There's been a pretty drastic swing to the right among some younger demographics and that's going to have political effects on it's own, as it already is. Abortion and contraception becomes harder to get, old stigmas come back, so on and so forth. They aren't going to convince you of anything, they'll simply remove any other option.

[deleted] · 2019-08-29T18:58:18+00:00

Because "Women & Children First"

Mr_Smoogs · 2019-08-29T19:10:28+00:00

Anytime a woman accepts a job offer, she is accepting “patriarchy.”

New age intersectional feminism claims that capitalism and patriarchy are one in the same, or at least two things that can’t be divorced.

Why should women want capital and private ownership? There are many reasons why women would want private property laws.

reluctantly_red · 2019-08-29T19:39:40+00:00

If women choosing higher earning men to mate with is patriarchal, then women indeed have not rejected patriarchy, and in fact cannot, because they're the ones who bear and primarily care for children.

This can only be otherwise if women are liberated from being the means of (re)production and primary carers of children.

This is at its root an argument about wealth, how it is distributed, and the implications of that distribution on reproduction.

And unfortunately, because the west is so insistent on ignoring issues of class in any other context but in isolation, it is virtually impossible to have a serious discussion about how wealth influences mating (usually devolves into "I ain't saying she's a golddigger" nonsense)

And there is an associated tendency to undermine the importance of money. So declasse right. But it's everything. It's the difference between life and death. Which means that in choosing a higher earning partner to mate with, a woman subjects herself to his power one way or another.

Women indeed should not accept patriarchy. But every time a woman chooses a higher earning man to mate with, that is what she is doing.

But here's the thing....why wouldn't she. To put it in the crude terms of the zeitgeist, why shouldn't she be a golddigger? Why shouldn't she maximize the resources available to her child and to her, to give her child a better footing in the world, to make their lives easier?

So in that sense, at least that aspect of patriarchy (women choosing to mate with higher earning men when they choose to mate) is so rooted in basic biological realities that there is no way women would ever choose to reject it....

Unless those biological realities are alleviated.

shipiaozi · 2019-08-29T19:42:44+00:00

TRP promote alpha male and oppose "tradcon" or other forms of patriarchy, basically alpha male are males who cater to woman and don't earn much resources. They are cancers of society and harshly suppressed by traditionalism (Be Alpha male in Saudi Arab, get stoned to death lol).
Patriarchy and Gynocentrism are two sides of one coin, you can't oppose one while support another. Why some loser man like MRA oppose patriarchy? The answer is very clear.
In traditionalism society or other possible forms of Gynocentrism patriarchy, man have extra power while woman have extra rights. Compare females in US-China-Japan or females within same country, traditional woman can't sleep with hottest guy but could work less and receive more money from her provider husband.
One may ask, why man need extra power and not vice versa? Because male reproductive ability is too high. Gynocentrim Patriarchy result in monogamy, man's rights and feminism result in single mothers.

AutoModerator · 2019-08-29T18:39:55+00:00

Attention!

You can post off topic/jokes/puns as a comment to this Automoderator message.
For "CMV" and "Question for X" Threads: Parent comments that aren't from the target group will be removed, along with their child replies.
If you want to agree with OP instead of challenging their view or if the question is not targeted at you, post it as an answer to this comment.
OP you can choose your own flair according to these guidelines., just press Flair under your post!

Thanks for your cooperation and enjoy the discussion!

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

Title	Neoreactionary men: Why should women accept the patriarchy?
Author	[deleted]
Upvotes	5
Comments	258
Date	August 29, 2019 6:39 PM UTC (6 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/PurplePillDebate
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/PurplePillDebate/comments/cx4yu5/neoreactionary_men_why_should_women_accept_the/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/PurplePillDebate/neoreactionary-men-why-should-women-accept-the.254219 https://theredarchive.com/post/254219

Comments