Does anyone have a concise, sourced, factual refutation of the existence of a patriarchy in first world countries?

Pecanpig · 2013-10-23T20:18:17+00:00

Well, there's the black and empty void where they say The Patriarchy™ resides?

We do not need to prove that it does not exist, they need to prove that it does.

MakhSC · 2013-10-23T19:10:43+00:00

You'll be hard pressed to find a 'factual' discussion of patriarchy at all. It's a social theory - a framework for understanding the world.

You can't 'refute' it with facts - all you can do is that try to show that it gives a poor understanding of the world. You can provide examples of male oppression, you can provide examples of female privilege, you can provide sources, and you might convince some people. It won't be concise, though!

anon_and_on · 2013-10-23T18:25:36+00:00

I have yet to see a concise, sourced, factual demonstration of its existence.

miroku000 · 2013-10-24T00:23:20+00:00

Well, patriarchy predicts that Men will be the head of the family. But 40% of households with children are headed by women. Patriarchy predicts that women will lack political power. But, all the laws in the US that discriminate on the basis of sex/gender favor women. Patriarchy predicts that men should control the money. But in fact, 70% of the spending is done by women. Also, something like 66% of the wealth in the US is possessed by women. So, in summary, we have a society supposedly controlled by men, but which consistently makes policies favoring women. You would also predict that if men ran society, then women would be relegated to the dangerous jobs. The analogy is this. How many slave owners left their slaves in the house while they went out and worked the fields for them?

TRPACC · 2013-10-23T18:37:24+00:00

Given the feminist appropriation of the term Patriarchy means a proxy for Capitalism, its hard to deny its existence. We all live in neo liberal capitalist systems.

Pecanpig · 2013-10-23T18:28:45+00:00

Nope, The Patriarchy keeps it all hidden.

vaselinepete · 2013-10-23T22:58:23+00:00

Comments like 'it doesn't exist' don't help OP. Nor does 'they have to prove it does exist first'.

The unfortunate reality is, feminism has better PR than we do, and the idea of Patriarchy has already taken root. So much so, it's taught in schools. The general public believes it's real. So, we can be clever about it all we want, but we actually do need to find an answer to the question.

As for what that answer is though.... fuck knows!

rightsbot · 2013-10-23T18:24:17+00:00

Post text automatically copied here. (Why?) (Report a problem.)

nihilist_nancy · 2013-10-24T01:51:55+00:00

The fact that a canadian ran under the patriarchy party representing all the specious accusations feminists accuse men (via their invention of the patriarchy - an invention made of whole cloth in order to dispute the fact they're misandrists) should debunk this adequately.

2013-10-24T03:00:07+00:00

I can also point out that there is a documented counter-theory. Evolution explains it quite well if you count nature as an oppressor of both men and women. Gender roles follow naturally from that model given that only women can carry children.

Patriarchy as men men running the non-childbearing/raising aspects of society did exist, and is well documented. Evolution is the theory that best describes/predicts it. With evolution, it is assumed the to sexes of a species are net cooperative, since competition would end the species.

Patriarchy as a social construction by men with the intent to oppress women such that female-only advocacy would be the solution is different. It takes a cooperative pair and describes it with a competitive model. This hypothesis has only been validated with selection bias (by ignoring the "glass cellar"). So it really hasn't been validated.

What should have happened:

The conclusion of the second hypothesis/model is that female-only advocacy would be necessary to end the intentional oppression that puts women above men. Also, if the oppression is intentional, the resistance should be the strongest initially, before anything has weakened the oppressors. Therefore, the MRM should have been strongest when feminism was fighting for things like voting rights. If the sexes were in competition, it should have taken some sort of force to change the situation (like the force used to end slavery in the US Civil War). That period of history is well documented, and no overt force was used. Also, the MRM was basically non-existent.

What did happen:

In reference to the effects and course of feminism, the results have not fit the model. There was little opposition to many early feminist policies, and with the right to vote, women gained huge political power with almost no struggle. Oppressors would not have allowed that. Next, since the old gender roles had some balance to them, continued female advocacy further offset that balance. Therefore, you can expect men's "negative" stats to increase relative to women's. Jail, suicide, etc. for the first few decades of feminism. If this goes on too long, the hurting half of the species drags the whole species down. You see the MRM pop up and grow, and a growing feminist acknowledgement of "patriarchy hurts men, too", and "feminism attacks gender roles" as opposed to is just blindly advocating for women. You also see a backlash of blind advocacy for women and for that aspect of feminism to lose momentum. Right now it outsources it's raw data points from other cultures, while most MRM datapoints are domestic (by this I mean gendered violence, rape, etc.).

So basically, the history of feminism and the MRM show that the initial feminist description of patriarchy is bogus. To find sources for the second hypothetical about what happened, just look around MRM sites since that is one of their missions. You shouldn't be able to find reputable sources for the first hypothetical, because it is a false narrative.

The_Patriarchy · 2013-10-24T14:02:24+00:00

Does anyone have a concise, sourced, factual refutation of the existence of a patriarchy in first world countries?

There's this:

http://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/e2vme/im_trying_to_put_together_a_solid_refutation_of/

luxury_banana · 2013-10-24T16:07:47+00:00

Quality of life metrics in first world countries such as homelessness, imprisonment rates, life expectancy, and so overwhelmingly show men worse off.

Title	Does anyone have a concise, sourced, factual refutation of the existence of a patriarchy in first world countries?
Author	HoNThrowaway1
Upvotes	13
Comments	30
Date	October 23, 2013 6:23 PM UTC (12 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/MensRights
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/1p2efw/does_anyone_have_a_concise_sourced_factual/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/MensRights/does-anyone-have-a-concise-sourced-factual.1160588 https://theredarchive.com/post/1160588