andrewducker (![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
andrewducker) wrote2010-06-22 12:01 pm
andrewducker) wrote2010-06-22 12:01 pm
Entry tags:
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
?
That's not helpful. I'm asking to learn.
That's not helpful. I'm asking to learn.
Se my comment to marrog as of about 2 minutes ago.
Because I basically agree with you. I know _why_ it has the name it has, but I don't find the general phrasing of it very useful.
Because I basically agree with you. I know _why_ it has the name it has, but I don't find the general phrasing of it very useful.
You know, I've never done this before, but I'm getting bored with tolerating derailing behaviour and have decided not to bother. The longer this goes on the more sarcastic and less interested I'm going to be, and so it's better I don't continue. This was not the argument I became involved in - not every discussion that takes place, even on your own journal, is a reason for you to chase around expecting people to clarify and qualify and define everything they say for your benefit.
When I say The Patriarchy, I mean The Patriarchy. I'm not using some mysterious personal definition. Go look it up yourself. One last time, I've done it for you:
Within feminist theory, patriarchy refers to the structure of modern cultural and political systems, which are ruled by men. Such systems are said to be detrimental to the rights of women.
When I say The Patriarchy, I mean The Patriarchy. I'm not using some mysterious personal definition. Go look it up yourself. One last time, I've done it for you:
Within feminist theory, patriarchy refers to the structure of modern cultural and political systems, which are ruled by men. Such systems are said to be detrimental to the rights of women.
Thanks for that.
Originally (when I was 15), I assumed it meant men in charge, and the mythical boardroom. How awful, sure don't want to be one of those villains. Later, I learned it was more general and described male dominance - how awful, I'll try not to be one of them either. But when I read arguments about how there's a patriarchy dominating, say, a woman-run charity, I lose track of what problem is being described.
Originally (when I was 15), I assumed it meant men in charge, and the mythical boardroom. How awful, sure don't want to be one of those villains. Later, I learned it was more general and described male dominance - how awful, I'll try not to be one of them either. But when I read arguments about how there's a patriarchy dominating, say, a woman-run charity, I lose track of what problem is being described.
And I'm not derailing, I'm discussing. If you don't want to take part in this discussion then that's fine, but don't expect me to stick to whatever guidelines you want put in place for a discussion on my journal. Discussions _wander_. It's one of the great things about them. We can start of talking about elephants and end up talking about South-African politics, via how much we like kittens. If somone dislikes the term patriarchy then they are absolutely within their rights to discuss that when the term is used in a way they dislike. That doesn't mean that they can't discuss the other points that are going on as well - that's one of the great things about threaded discussion forums.
Picking on a semantic point as a reason not to take an argument seriously is derailing, Andy.
Of course it is.
Which is why I didn't do that.
Which is why I didn't do that.
Page 4 of 4