(question) Did men build this system that men suffer in it thousands of years ago?

TisIChenoir · 2023-07-29T07:45:36+00:00

Yes we did. And women did too.

The idea that for all of History, women never even had a say in the way things went is absolutely bonkers.

What happened from early on is that male and female homo sapiens took on tasks dependent on their respective physical attributes. Women bore child and gathered food, men became hunters and protectors.

That solidified in what became traditional gender roles.

But it's not like men decided that women were the ones bearing child and breast-feeding them. We also didn't decide that women would have better color acuity and men would have better movement acuity.

And I'd think early women were pretty ok with not hunting mammoth by -30°C, instead of staying inside.

All in all, one rebuttal I'd say is pretty good is that, if women were traditionally tasked with taking care of the child, that would include education, and propagating the system. So, if we accept that idea, then women were partly responsible with maintaining the system.

Plus, saying men had all the power is ignoring the real soft-power women had.

All in all, the system was built because it played well with each sex's strength and weaknesses. It was born out of necessity. And both men and women in it benefitted and suffered differently.

Do traditionnal gender roles still have a place in society? That's for society to decide. But women and men both still impose them (mostly on men, ironically enough, with many (the majority of?) women insisting on men being providers, having to be traditionally manly, etc...).

But saying that it's a system by men, for men? That's disingenuous at best, dishonest and manipulative at worst

throbgoblyn · 2023-07-29T09:32:04+00:00

I kind of think about it in a way that relates to socialism. Modern feminism uses the “patriarchy” concept to try and make the argument that all men are the bourgeoisie, privileged class, and actively even if subliminally, work to keep women oppressed and exploited in the proletariat class.

When one brings up negative issues that affect men, feminists will usually say “the patriarchy also harms men and that’s why men need feminism”. My question is, how can all men be in the bourgeoisie and proletariat classes simultaneously? How can the thing that puts me in the upper class also put me in the lower class at the same time?

They would also be skipping over all of the female rulers throughout history. There were female monarchs, pharaohs, and rulers from all kinds of different cultures. Did all of them lead feminist utopias free from war and oppression and hard gender roles?

Female monarchs of Europe were often more ruthless and successful than their male counterparts. Female monarchs who were married had a husband and a general to advise her in matters of war, because women weren’t involved on the battlefield. Male monarch’s that were married would usually only have one general to advise them, because women weren’t involved in the battlefield. I’m sure a feminist rebuttal would be that the patriarchy was doubly influencing female monarchs, but it was simply that women weren’t involved in battle. The upper class will try to expand its power by any means necessary, regardless of gender.

MSHUser · 2023-07-29T08:53:10+00:00

This mainly goes back to history. Feminist like to say that because most men held positions of power throughout history (despite women holding those same positions), we live in a patriarchy. It's a theory largely rooted in an apex fallacy and is just meant to demonize men and encourage misandry.

ArmchairDesease · 2023-07-29T09:06:00+00:00

Patriarchical societies, in my opinion came to be because of:

a) The environmental pressure and constant under-population threat humans had to deal with.

b) The prevalence of war for the majority of human history.

Point a) makes women more precious than men, because of how human reproduction works (pregnancy is a bottleneck in the process of generating new people). Under the threat of under-population, you wanted to limit women's and children's mortality as much as possbile (that's where "women and children first" comes from).

Point b) makes men the ones to deal with war at all levels. Being more disposable (from a reproductive point of view) they are the ones who should be involved with such high risk activity.

We are now used to think as the State's leaders as separate from the Military leaders. And the Military leaders as separate from the infantry.

But even up until medieval times (which is extremely recent), it was possible for the Head of State to die on the battlefield. Think of roman emperor Valens, who burned to death after the defeat of Adrianople. Or Richard Lionheart, who spent most of his life fighting in crusades, and died because of a crossbow's wound.

Being the leader used to be a dangerous affair. Honors and richness were needed to make the role palatable. Otherwise who would want to be a king?

To be clear. I don't think that because of this, patriarchy is somehow necessary or right. Different environmental factors could have created matriarchical or egalitarian societies. Now that we are relatively free from survival pressure, we can work towards building egalitarianism and leave behind the old ways.

Also, I'm aware that this division of gender roles DID turn into oppression of women in some specific instances. It's because when societal organization becomes more and more detached from its original reason to be (evolutionary pressure), it turns into culture, which can model our worldview and make some people think that men don't merely have a functional role, but they ARE natural leaders and agents, while women ARE natural resources and passive subjects. It's the same process through which we forget we are animals depending from nature, and we believe we are actually superior to the natural word.

My overall point is that the matter is much more nuanced and complex than what everyone likes to think. The patriarchy is not a system which was "built". It deposited itself through millennia. Dismantling it doesn't mean to " take down the man", because the man wasn't really up there in the fist place, it was mostly a cultural construction.

galacticdude7 · 2023-07-29T12:57:22+00:00

I have several problems with this line of feminist argument

It assumes that because the vast majority of the positions of power throughout history have been held by men, that those men used their power to craft a society that uniquely privileges men, and that's simply not true. These men in power throughout history did not craft the laws and policies of society for the benefit of men as a class of people, they did it for the benefit of themselves. The King did not care about the men working in his fields or the men fighting in his wars, he only cared about what those men produced for him. Any concern for the happiness and quality of life for the men in his kingdom was limited to keeping them just happy enough to keep their labor under his control and prevent them from revolting and installing a new king. It may be men at the top writing the laws, but they aren't writing the laws for the benefit of men everywhere.
It denies that women played a role in shaping society throughout history. The idea that women have just sat on the sidelines while men did everything in building our society for thousands of years is completely bonkers. Women have held large amounts of soft power throughout history, the Queen whispering in the King's ear and gently shaping policy through history, and with their roles as mothers and caregivers, raising the next generation and being their teachers through the most impressionable part of their lives. And most of the gendered expectations that society has placed on men, were placed there by women through the sexual selection process. The King never cared if the man was the breadwinner in his house or a protector, the King just cared that enough bread was made to prevent a revolt and enough men willing to fight to put down one, but the women in that man's town sure did care if he was a good breadwinner and protector. It was the women that expected their men to be strong breadwinners and protectors, just as the men expected that their women were nurturing mothers and homemakers. The other men in town don't care if that man is a strong breadwinner, in fact they'd prefer it if he wasn't, one less man to compete against for a good woman.
It places the blame for men's suffering on men and the responsibility for undoing that suffering on men alone. For a group that claims to hate victim blaming so much, they sure as shit do a lot of it when the victim is a man. What feminists say when they say things like this is that they don't care about men's suffering and are trying to abdicate any responsibility for causing that suffering and any moral duty for working to end that suffering. Its something they say to try and shut people up about men's issues so that they can continue to advocate for women's issues alone.

JetChipp · 2023-07-29T11:58:52+00:00

It doesn't even makes sense imo, if powerful men were willing to create the system that is responsible for the problems that affects mainly men (except them of course) then why would they bother bulding a system to benefit men as a class, since they clearly couldn't care less about men underneath them?

EndHlts · 2023-07-29T20:55:01+00:00

Men didn't create the system, the historical ruling classes did. Do you really think a feudal peasant who worked 12 hours a day to pay his lord's taxes had time to think about how much he was oppressing his wife?

MarcusAITA · 2023-07-29T07:39:01+00:00

I'd say itvwould be more truthful to say. "A few select men in power built a system that benefited them at the expence of everybody else"

Real-Degree-8493 · 2023-07-29T14:38:59+00:00

Were things fundamentally different under Catherine the Great, Queen Elizabeth, Zenobia, Empress Irene? Feminist ignore that much of what they call patriarchy is actual hierarchy where elites extract, monopolize and fight to protect and expand their unequal share of resources, include human resources.

As far men being the bread winner that is an extreme modern view for most of history both needed to equally contribute their labour to agriculture in order to survive. And before that both men and women engaged in hunting and forging in order to make ends meet.

As society became wealthier those ordinary began to affect that mode of living of elites and as society becomes poorer you see the ideal of the man being sole provider become not a reality as it was for most of human history. It is only a matter of time before reality and expectations catch up on this one.

bloodfuel · 2023-07-29T12:42:51+00:00

Even if this was true it wouldn’t matter, other men creating this system doesn't mean I as a man am not oppressed, nor does it mean I'm not a victim. This whole argument relies on the assumption that men are a monolithic/homogenous entity. That basically means they are assuming all men share the same beliefs and are associated with each other. One of my favorite ways of illustrating the folly of this argument is with the analogy that if you were stabbed by someone and the person that stabbed you was man does that mean it's your fault you got stabbed? That you're responsible for getting stabbed simply because the person who stabbed you was also a man? Obviously not. Just because I'm a man doesn't automatically mean I have influence over what other men will do. I'm not responsible for what other men do just because we're both men, that makes absolutely no sense if your think about it. Joe Biden is a man, but he couldn't give less of a shit about the rights of his fellow men. Since being president he hasn't done anything to help men achieve equality, Selective Service still only applies to men, there is only an Office for Women's Health but no Office for Men's Health despite men on average living shorter lives than women and having lower life expectancy, being the majority of homeless, and the majority of suicides. I didn't vote for Joe Biden, I never supported him, so why should I blame myself for his actions when I had no control over them?

Normal_Study · 2023-07-29T19:14:10+00:00

I mean, yes and no. Men did, so did women. But gender doesn't really matter when comes down to "who did it", class does. The rich royals, government leaders, and powerful religious leaders all saw commoners as fodder for their causes. The common men were workhorses and, when needed, warhorses. The common women were nothing but broodmares. Both obviously incredibly dehumanizing and sexist. But the rich and powerful never had to worry about a day in the mines or battling in war. They could sit comfortably in their cozy castles and mansions.

psychosythe · 2023-07-29T14:39:29+00:00

Millions of factors went into human social developments, the primary ones were climate and desease. Nature doesn't care as much about gender roles as we do.

matrixislife · 2023-07-29T15:11:39+00:00

Anything built over generations must have input from both men and women, it's impossible that it doesn't.

throweezus · 2023-07-29T16:25:51+00:00

Yes it was majority men that set this up, sure.

But if we are going to have a system that is harmful to a majority of men, and arguably more harmful to men than women, maybe we need to find another word for it besides patriarchy. Maybe those that implement and perpetuate the system have something else in common besides being male. (No war but the class war)

Prudent_Medicine_857 · 2023-08-01T21:26:22+00:00

Even if it is true, it's counterproductive. No single man alive is responsible for what other men did hundreds and thousands of years ago. Feminists should be interested in cooperation with men, not blaming them without sufficient reasons.

Maybe, technically, this system was built by men, but it doesn't mean they had much choice. Even if they had any choice, modern men are not responsible for the choices of their ancestors.

Neptune-Jr · 2023-07-31T20:38:21+00:00

It doesn't matter who built it. The problem is that it's hurting people.

Due-Lie-8710 · 2023-07-29T10:22:06+00:00

men built it but i dont think it was about making it for people to suffer but for what was the most productive and sustainable at the time , and what they thought made sense, women also contributed to this because unless they were all just slaves and had no input, there wouldnt be any matriachs in existence or female leaders and feminism wouldnt have the in fluence it has today, i dont think there was an intention system of oppression built because if thats the case , no one who was oppressed would be able to overcome it till now no matter how much they fight back, and , men would not have also suffered the way they did , it also doesnt correlate with the idea that men and women are equal in intelligence

AssociationDue3077 · 2025-06-24T03:58:12+00:00

Okay well then the women saying that are dumb as bricks, like honey its not thousands of years ago anymore

Soft-Distance-1811 · 2025-11-15T14:11:23+00:00

Men opress men in the system where the only solace for men at bottom is opresing their wife. Women in patriarchy are seaprated and cant participate in decision nor hold men accountable.

Basically men were afforded education jobs and women based on being men and status not because of actual effort fitnes skill. It is just hierarchical system of opression. Just like today in corporation as woman you can have all the skill and do all the work but random dude will get promoted over you on potential.

FlugzeugFlieger · 2025-12-28T16:27:26+00:00

Men didn't suffer. Men were men. What we have today are men who are becoming weaker because of equality. Men fail their role and it was men's mistake to let this happen.

SirBonobo · 2023-07-29T10:54:58+00:00

I'm not sure why it sounds unreal to you. People participate in structures that hurt them all the time. There are mothers who push female genital mutilation on their own daughters knowing how painful it is. One can't underestimate the power of culture and social pressure. On some level, it is more important to create an egalitarian society than focus on who "created" the patriarchal system thousands/millions of years ago. It's more important to ask who reinforces this system today.

The USA has historically been governed by men. If we have the draft, men would have been the only ones able to get rid of it. Men could have easily made circumcision illegal too. Men could make female genital mutilation illegal as well in countries where it is practiced today.

Also,the stress of being a breadwinner is outweighed by the independence it gives you. Divorce rates go up when women have an education and employment.

I just dont see men as the main victims of patriarchy when it comes to political/economic power. Most feminists I've talked to recognize that patriarchy hurts men. I think both men and women have a role in shaping gender expectations such as your "not opening up" example.

Current_Finding_4066 · 2023-07-29T21:48:15+00:00

Ask them why are they out of the kitchen if they are against change.

Title	(question) Did men build this system that men suffer in it thousands of years ago?
Author	mohyo324
Upvotes	74
Comments	110
Date	July 29, 2023 7:32 AM UTC (3 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates/comments/15cm0da/question_did_men_build_this_system_that_men/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates/question-did-men-build-this-system-that-men-suffer.1226827 https://theredarchive.com/post/1226827

Comments