Hacker News Reader

Comment by pdub123 | Hacker News Reader

If you think "The Patriarchy"^TM exists, you have a very simplistic, univariate understanding of reality.

You're associating causality for whatever negative things happen to you in your life, not with your own set of circumstances, choices, or human agency, but rather with one single factor-- some ethereal 00.00001% group of conspiratorial, ostensibly straight white old men... with whatever happens to you in life.

It's an absolutely foolish conceptualization & mentality. I'm afraid life is a bit more complicated than that, dear.

View on HN

Your comments have unfortunately been breaking the site guidelines. Would you mind reviewing them and sticking to the rules when posting here? https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

We're particularly trying to avoid flamewars and personal attacks.

We detached this subthread from https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21099474 and marked it off-topic.

There are many problems with your argument, but I’d like to focus on the fact that your understanding of the definition of The Patriarchy is wrong.

From Wikipedia[0]:

> Patriarchy is a social system in which men hold primary power and predominate in roles of political leadership, moral authority, social privilege and control of property.

How many female presidents have we had here in the USA? What percentage of Fortune 500 CEOs are women?

[0]: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patriarchy

If people consider a patriarchy bad does that mean a matriarchy is also bad? Or just that there isn't an even number of each type?

If society were structured that way (or if it had been), then probably. But there are notably fewer people who are against matriarchy for, I reason, the fact that matriarchal society has not been prevalent in the history of civilization and it isn't today. Most philosophers who are against patriarchy would argue that patriarchy is bad because of its power relations, not some mystical "innate badness" of the male sex. As such, their criticisms would likely apply to matriarchy too.

The majority of college grads are women. The majority of lower-class and blue collar workers are men. Depression and suicide rates are significantly higher for men than women. Nearly all workplace deaths and injuries occur to men. The fact that a small percentage of men are highly competitive and enterprising in a way that puts them in the top does not mean that our social system somehow coddles men or gives them power without reason, which is what the Patriarchy implies.

The college grad ratio is a relatively new phenomenon, and more women live in poverty than men IIRC. Your point about depression and suicide is well-taken, and is an excellent example of what groups like those outlined in the article are trying to address. Patriarchy isn’t good for men and bad for women. It’s bad for men and women, just in different ways. For men, it results in “toxic masculinity” where you get the message (like half the men in this thread) that you have to be stoic and “take care of yourself” so you repress everything as best you can. But that doesn’t work, and violence, depression, and suicide are predictable outcomes.

This condescending comment ("whatever negative things happen to you", "more complicated than that, dear") ignores at decades of research in sociology, critical theory and political philosophy - which, at the very least, say that concerns about the effects of gender in the structure of society cannot be so easily dismissed.

>but rather with one single factor-- some ethereal 00.00001% group of conspiratorial, ostensibly straight white old men

This is not what "patriarchy" or "the patriarchy" refers to in any academic text. What you're saying is more akin to an anti-male conspiracy theory. The claim is not that there is a group of conspiratorial men in charge, or even men with bad intentions. You can read the most rudimentary details of the theory at Wikipedia[0] or at the highly regarded Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy[1].

I'm not a strict adherent to the theory myself, but I think it's worth pointing out when a claim as to what the word means and what the theorists say is obviously wrong.

(Side note: it's curious how my comment, in line with current research and citing respected sources, is downvoted by people who don't bother to engage with the arguments themselves.)

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patriarchy [1] https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/feminist-power/

> concerns about the effects of gender in the structure of society cannot be so easily dismissed.

Why not? They've been entirely constant for the history of civilization.

For a great deal of civilisation, so was rule by tyrants and warlords, and eating meat. Arguments from nature don't get you very far.

Don't be reductionist. Most arguments have grounding in nature and the real world, believe it or not.

Having grounding in nature doesn't mean that it ought to be kept around though. Lots of harmful stuff is grounded in nature, and lots of amazing and good things have no grounding in nature. We have to examine everything and decide if it's worth keeping around regardless of the source.

And that's a fine opinion to have, but I doubt you'll find many people that think gender is harmful enough to be not "worth keeping around".

Sure, but I think you'll find a lot of people are more than happy to drop the idea that only boys can play with toycars and only girls can play with dolls, and that if a girl like toycars she isn't "behaving like she should".

It's not a matter of the number of people who think (after all, there are a great number of people believing climate change isn't real and that the earth is flat) but the arguments which are presented. If someone has made an argument to the effect that gender is harmful enough to not be worth keeping around, then you can respond to that argument. However, not all opponents of the patriarchy argue that gender itself shouldn't be kept around. In fact, that's quite a niche position.

I don't buy that gender is harmful at all.

> However, not all opponents of the patriarchy argue that gender itself shouldn't be kept around. In fact, that's quite a niche position.

I mean.. I'd hope so?

It seems to me that your comment being downvoted is a perfect illustration of the patriarchy.

> i'm afraid life is a bit more complicated than that, dear.

I had vouched this comment until I read this sentence.

The OP is being offensive but being patronizing strengthens their prejudices.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com