Have Men Oppressed Women?

[Poitier]

I think you're right.
Income disparity is a major issue that no one talks about. The conservatives use Orwellian language to scare the poor into voting against their interest.

But jeez, I'd really hope this thread doesn't get into a racial, political debate. This is gonna go 1,000 pages.

It's not really racial, though. I mean, it is, but it's also basically everyone else that isn't a White male from the middle-class or higher. Everyone is reeling from their ineptitude and selfishness. Everyone who isn't them is oppressed, so where do you go from there?

Don't make this a race thing. Fine, they "stole" it from the Egyptians. Did they steal it from Egyptian men or women?

Some people keep trying to steer this discussion into a white man's opression angle, and I'm the one enganged in a pissing contest.

Women and Men contribute to a culture. Ancient Egypt has extensive history of females who ruled and contributed greatly to their civilization.

 

[Remote]

It's not really racial, though. I mean, it is, but it's also basically everyone else that isn't a White male from the middle-class or higher. Everyone is reeling from their ineptitude and selfishness. Everyone who isn't them is oppressed, so where do you go from there?




Women and Men contribute to a culture. Ancient Egypt has extensive history of females who ruled and contributed greatly to their civilization.

I meant to say that you touched on race in your comment, and income disparity.
And knowing how these things go on the internet...I can just see how it'll devolve.

 

[Mr. Pink]

I think it's difficult to come to the conclusion you're insinuating because we really don't have a "true" record of how things were from the very beginning. Have a read through this article...it gives a very good overview of how roles have changed over time:

http://www.classics.ucsb.edu/mythF09/Bamberger.pdf

I'm going to give that a read. Thank you.

And I hate to go into the "might is right" argument, unpleasant as it may be, but that's the case when it comes to nature/evolution. The ultimate proof of men's competence is the very existence of patriarchal societies. They are proof unto themselves. If women as a whole would have shown more competence(they would have been better suited evolutionarily to lead), then the world would be run by matriarchal societies. But no matriarchal society ever reached the heights of their patriarchal counterparts, has it?

 

[Poitier]

I'm going to give that a read. Thank you.

And I hate to go into the "might is right" argument, unpleasant as it may be, but that's the case when it comes to nature/evolution. The ultimate proof of men's competence is the very existence of patriarchal societies. They are proof unto themselves. If women as a whole would have shown more competence(they would have been better suited evolutionarily to lead), then the world would be run by matriarchal societies. But no matriarchal society ever reached the heights of their patriarchal counterparts, has it?

You're using Barbarism and using it as a means to justify injustice in an enlightened society. It makes no sense.

 

[Desirous]

I'm going to give that a read. Thank you.

And I hate to go into the "might is right" argument, unpleasant as it may be, but that's the case when it comes to nature/evolution. The ultimate proof of men's competence is the very existence of patriarchal societies. They are proof unto themselves. If women as a whole would have shown more competence(they would have been better suited evolutionarily), then the world would be run by matriarchal societies. But no matriarchal society ever reached the heights of their patriarchal counterparts, have they?

It's a good read.

I see what you're saying, but I believe patriarchy is sustained because of societal reasons and not genetic.

 

[Mr. Pink]

You're using Barbarism and using it as a means to justify injustice in an enlightened society. It makes no sense.

It's not "barbarism". It's the social equivalent of natural selection. Patriarchy has been the norm because patriarchy works. There are no matriarchal societies to speak of, so the logical conclusion to draw is that they don't work. That's how natural selection works, isn't it? It may not be pretty or fair. But those are human notions. What is fair in the face of nature? Is it fair that the homo sapiens survived and prospered while the neanderthal and other homo variations didn't? The answer doesn't really matter. What matters is that the homo sapiens survived because it worked. The others didn't.

I'm sorry if I've given offense to anybody, but in my opinion there is absolutely no way around that universal truth.

 

[Desirous]

It's not "barbarism". It's the social equivalent of natural selection. Patriarchy has been the norm because patriarchy works. There are no matriarchal societies to speak of, so the logical conclusion to draw is that they don't work. That's how natural selection works, isn't it? It may not be pretty or fair. But those are human notions. What is fair in the face of nature? Is it fair that the homo sapiens survived and prospered while the neanderthal and other homo variations didn't? The answer doesn't really matter. What matters is that the homo sapiens survived because it worked. The others didn't.

I'm sorry if I've given offense to anybody, but in my opinion there is absolutely no way around that universal truth.

But neanderthals etc are beings. Patriarchy is a system, not a being.

 

[BangerzAOTY]

yeah, I've never been into calling women bytches and they have to tolerate that if they listen to hip-hop. Men oppress women.

 

[Mr. Pink]

But neanderthals etc are beings. Patriarchy is a system, not a being.

I understand that. And it survived as a system because it works better than the alternatives. That's natural selection. Social systems only exist because they are the best alternative for the propagation of the species. If humans could better survive without social systems then there would be no social systems. It's the same thing with men being 'dominant'.

The underlying rule of nature is "whatever works". I'm just applying it to the subject at hand and drawing the logical conclusion.
Like I said, it isn't pretty, but it seems arrogant to think that just because we are 'enightened' we humans are above the immutable law of nature.

 

[NotaPAWG]

It's not "barbarism". It's the social equivalent of natural selection. Patriarchy has been the norm because patriarchy works. There are no matriarchal societies to speak of, so the logical conclusion to draw is that they don't work. That's how natural selection works, isn't it? It may not be pretty or fair. But those are human notions. What is fair in the face of nature? Is it fair that the homo sapiens survived and prospered while the neanderthal and other homo variations didn't? The answer doesn't really matter. What matters is that the homo sapiens survived because it worked. The others didn't.

I'm sorry if I've given offense to anybody, but in my opinion there is absolutely no way around that universal truth.

This isn't no universal truth lol this is your interpretation from an authoritarian perspective

irst of, patriarchy hasn't been the norm because patriarchy works, it's "the norm" because the benefits, and the want of power. The same way capitalism doesn't "work" ie: rome & greece, all of this is fueled by the selfish and cruel nature of man, not the logical aspect. thankfully, unlike you, my logic controls my feelings, not the other way around

To use the existence for something for a long period of time as evidence that is works is just straight up stupid because "working" is subjective

we evolve, our knowledge, and understanding of things doesn't come to a halt. we aren't finished beings, bro.

 

[Desirous]

I understand that. And it survived as a system because it works better than the alternatives. That's natural selection. Social systems only exist because they are the best alternative for the propagation of the species. If humans could better survive without social systems then there would be no social systems. It's the same thing with men being 'dominant'.

The basic rule of nature is "whatever works". I'm just applying it to the subject at hand and drawing the logical conclusion.
Like I said, it isn't pretty, but it seems arrogant to think that just because we are 'enightened' we humans we be above the immutable law of nature.

Communism didn't work in the USSR...yet it has survived in Cuba and China. Would you say that communism, as a system, is then successful or unsuccessful? Also, it is a fact that patriarchy still rules, but women are gaining more rights and respect as a whole, so this to me, signifies a gradual deviance from patriarchy.

 

[Chesirecatdaddy]

a Patriachal society doesn't always equate women being oppressed.

 

[Chesirecatdaddy]

omg men are evil and women/gays should team up with blacks to overthrow them!

how do you undap or opposite dap?

 

[Dirty_Jerz]

how do you undap or opposite dap?

tell me you hate me

 

[Remote]

a Patriachal society doesn't always equate women being oppressed.

Example?