YOU SAID:I understand the point you want to make- people are fallible. I would hope this goes without saying...
You apparently do not understand my point at all. It was not just that people are fallible for that is a given, but that your argument as presented was irrational, fallacious and incorrect. (For the purpose of this discussion the term ‘irrational’ is used to describe arguments containing terms which are previously undefined or unknown.)
YOU SAID:To assume that this is an obvious statement- may we move forward? Is your position to oppose cultural analysis?
No my position is not to oppose cultural analysis. However unlike some women, whose opinions and positions I have silently observed in the last week or so, I understand my analysis is limited by my perspective and situation. As a man, I do not know what it is to be a woman. As a white man I do not know what it is to be a black man. As a Canadian I do not know what it is to be American. Apparently for some women, they are not constrained by the limited reality of their existence, and are perfectly willing to judge men on being men without being a man themselves. (One thing I saw, to give you an example was a woman who said “For those men trying to be decent men, we see you trying, and we appreciate it. Hopefully one day you get there.” ) As a man, I could never see myself saying something like that about a woman. How could I? Who am I to decide what it is to be a decent woman? I have absolutely no first hand knowledge or suitable benchmark with which I can do a reasonable comparative analysis. And regardless of how empathetic I try to be, I will never know what it is to be pregnant, give birth, or to be a woman. And therefor I will never have a full picture of the challenges they face and the burdens they carry. I also believe this works the other way too.
YOU SAID:Or, is your position to deny the state of a patriarchy culture?
Or, do you have a different pattern of patriarchy culture? If so, may one inquire as to what it is?
This statement is logically inconsistent. You ask if I am against ‘cultural analysis’ and then ask if I instead deny patriarchy culture, assuming that one must arrive at the concept of a patriarchy culture if one engages in cultural analysis. Prior to my analysis, I cannot hold this as truth.
YOU SAID:It is an observable pattern that when "a person" in patriarchy, that person being a woman, exists- she is denied that, as it intercepts the male entitlement and then she is subjected to aggrieved entitlement.
I unfortunately do not understand this statement at all. A woman is denied existence? Because it ‘intercepts the male entitlement’? And then she is subjected to ‘aggrieved entitlement’? What exactly does that mean? Although I understand the individual words, I am not comprehending the meaning you are assigning them when used as cultural terms and descriptors. I do understand you are assuming the existence of and hinging your argument on ‘male entitlement’ without defining or proving the existence of said concept. That sounds like an irrational argument to me. [Based upon context clues and statements you make later in this discussion, I am deducing that you are referring to an act of rape, that a woman denying consent is what you are calling ‘existing’ and that her denial of consent is disregarded (denied existence), and she is violated (subjected to aggrieved entitlement). Am I groking this correctly?] If that is what you are saying, I do not understand the reason or need to phrase it in such a convoluted and codified manner.
Maybe it is because I grew up with six sisters, all of whom became very successful in their fields and whom I hold in very high regard. Maybe it is because my parents instilled in me a deep respect for women. Maybe it is a function of having grown up in a household where I was completely outnumbered gender wise and we often decided on things by ‘majority rules, with parental veto’. Maybe it is because I am a male and we (as people) are hardwired to ignore or overlook benefits which are inherent. Maybe it is simply because the ‘entitlement’ of which you speak cannot be easily seen by the one so entitled. Maybe I am simply stupid. But I do not see this ‘male entitlement’ of which you refer. I see female judges, heads of states, politicians, bureaucrats, police, business owners, all of whom enjoy far greater authority and power in society than I do. I also know that some of my sisters have faced discrimination and harassment in the work place due to their gender. I hope none of them have ever been raped or beaten, but I imagine if they had they would hide that from me, because they know my response would almost certainly land me in jail. I do not see a patriarchy as much as I see a patriarchal hierarchy. In my view the problem is not the patriarchal part, it is the hierarchal part. Shifting the power balance so that there is a matriarchy, will not fix the problems facing us. Arguably it would make them worse. And arguing about the patriarchy without examining the hierarchy means the main problem is not addressed. It is akin to standing in a mud pit, arguing about who is throwing the most mud, and wanting to be able to throw as much as the other group. We should be getting out of the pit, not arguing about who has more mud to throw.
YOU SAID: This is most prominently displayed sexually.
How do we see this? rape culture language is good example. "boys being boys" "she asked for it" "blue balls" "cock block" etc.
Your use of the term ‘rape culture’ is I think disingenuous. It appears you want that concept accepted as self evident with no requirement to prove the existence of such a thing or define the term. I call that irrational. I do not think we have a rape culture at all. If we did rapist would not be hiding their rapey ways. Far more men would be rapists. Rape would not be unlawful and those convicted of rape would not be segregated in prison. I don’t know if you are aware of this, but our society frowns very strongly on rape.
YOU SAID:These popular expressions do not exist in a vacuum of 5 people. They exist...because of the culture that gives birth to it. Patriarchy culture. And millions of people know what these expressions mean because we live in that shared culture. The goal is to deconstruct the culture to bring voice to "people" and not the culture.
Yes they exist, but they do not prove the existence of rape culture. Nor do they describe a patriarchal one. As for deconstructing the culture, one cannot do so without looking at the historical and physiological aspects of the culture. One needs to be able to examine and present facts without those presentments or examinations being deemed to be proof of holding a certain view and then rejected for those reasons alone. Part of the problem I have found is this is a very sensitive and emotional topic. This makes it further challenging for me, as a comedian who is always looking for the funny. And it can be difficult for those who consider themselves to be victims to examine, analyze and discuss topics which are emotionally sensitive. I also do not wish to diminish anyone’s experiences or invalidate anyone’s perspective. I do not want to express anything but empathy for all who have had their denial of consent ignored and then been violated. Even if I could have a sudden and grand understanding of the female perspective in todays society, it would still be viewed from the perspective of a man, which means what I see will be tainted by my previous experiences as a guy. So, I can never truly see your perspective.
YOU SAID:Again, is your position to oppose cultural analysis? If so, many people will be silenced by the culture........
My position is most certainly not to oppose cultural analysis. As a comedian that is the foundation of what I do.
YOU SAID:Men loathe the ego culture of patriarchy. When men give respect to women- they risk ridicule from entitled men- "bitch didnt put out?!", "you're pussy whipped", "ball n chain", 'she got you by the balls', 'she emasculated you', 'who wears the pants?'...etc
I feel so sorry for you. And I am not saying that arrogantly or rhetorically. I sincerely mean it. I can only assume that your perspective is a result of your experiences, and I shudder to think of the men you must have had to deal with to bring you to such a place. What kind of men are you dealing with that are fearful of being insulted or being ridiculed by other men for showing respect to women? I have personally never felt that I would be seriously ridiculed by another man for showing respect to a woman for that reason alone. I have never seen a man ridiculed for showing respect to a woman for that reason alone. What you may not realize, because you are not a man, is that men often ridicule each other for baseless and asinine reasons. It is often how we bond. We ridicule each other about almost everything! (With one universal exception. Rarely do you find a man ridiculing someone’s SO. That will almost always lead to a fight. It will certainly get you sideways looks. It is contrary to the bro code.) I have often wondered why that is. I think boys experience ridicule far more than girls, because we are so different in many ways. Being ridiculed as a man is not as bad as you seem to think from your feminine perspective. Do you honestly think most men care if we are ridiculed, especially amongst our friends and cohorts? Believe it or not, men use ridicule to invite and welcome others into the group, whereas women use it to exclude. You can argue about how right or wrong or insensitive or whatever such a situation is, but it will not change what is. I think that the function of using ridicule in such a fashion, is it kinda of inoculates us against later ridicule, which is necessary for the advancement of ideas. If men where hobbled by the fear of ridicule, they would never do anything different. No new things would be tried. I think the ridicule performs an important function.
YOU SAID:If I'm to follow your logic of anti cultural analysis- these expressions are alien to you and you have no clue what they could possibly mean when "people" say them. As far as you would know- it could be women saying them, right?
But I'm pretty sure you know exactly who the "people" are. Then you just did some cultural analysis. Which is what the point of the post is. Not "people".
They are not alien to me, but I do not assign as much value or weight to them as you seem to. Your label, which I reject of ‘anti cultural analysis’ is a misunderstanding or misrepresentation of my logic and reasoning. I cannot understand how one can do a proper cultural analysis without including ‘people’. Are you saying we can only examine the cultural situation if we maintain a distinction between the sexes and that examining the whole of a population is somehow contrary to such an analysis? I am not anti-cultural analysis at all. And I will soon share with you my analysis, although I doubt you will agree with it, or all your friends like it. (Some of them seem rather hostile.)
YOU SAID:When women exist [saying no thanks] and men respond with entitlement- it has NOTHING to do with "people" or [your] feelings. It is an observable culture pattern. If you dont like this pattern- then call it out. Instead of derailing into "people" rhetoric. Would you say thats fair?
If you want to change patterns you have to change the impetus. If you want power over your life you have to accept responsibility for your present. If you want to change what you call ‘rape culture’, then you have to accept certain responsibilities. Because doing so will also allow you to realize you have certain ‘abilities’ which are not very easy to see when one is wearing victim goggles.
Here is where I engage in victim blaming, because that is exactly what it is. Before anyone gets triggered, I am not saying that wearing sexy clothing justifies rape, what I am saying is that as human beings, we should maintain situational awareness and wear clothing that allows us to both run and fight. I think high heels are fundamentally stupid. I think tight restrictive clothing is stupid. I think walking down the street with ear buds in and texting, and having no situational awareness is stupid. Will you argue that women should be able to walk down the street wearing whatever they want, and be completely oblivious to their surroundings, without consequences? Would you claim they have that same right in the bush? Because life does not work that way. It is sad that there are sociopaths and psychopaths in the world. It is sad there are broken and undeveloped people who get off harming others and imposing their will on others. Many of them I imagine feel very powerless and are lashing out. Or maybe they have mommy issues. I don’t know how a rapist thinks. But the fact is they do exist, and it is unwise to act like that is not the case. And this is true for men and women. Women are subject to more sexual assaults, but not more assaults.
The simplest and fastest fix for this, I hate to say, is for women to learn how to fight and to increase their situational awareness. I know that sounds cold and unfeeling. It is not meant to justify the actions of psychopaths. We must not only teach our young men not to rape and to treat women with respect, we must teach our young women to demand that respect, and be able to defend themselves. Teaching young men to act with greater respect towards women, and planting the seeds of equality will take generations. Some now are already lost and damaged. Some are being damaged as we speak. That is the long term fix. The short term one is women learning to fight. If they were to spend half as much time learning to fight, as they do complaining about social patterns, they would change those social patterns. (I suggest krav maga for anyone thinking of becoming rapidly efficient at self defence.)
I am not saying there is not a problem; I will propose that the problem is not the patriarchal hierarchy, it is the hierarchy itself. You will not succeed if you are attacking only the patriarchal aspect of the hierarchy. See the system is not patriarchal as much as it is parental, and shifting it to a more matriarchal model will not fix the problem. The people at the top of the hierarchy do not care which model they employ. Also I could easily argue that a patriarchal one is more stable. Please do not consider that to be an expression of support of any parental socio-economic system. It’s just entropy increases, and men are better warriors. The problem is our governments treat us like children, and we allow it, and the problem will not be fixed until all people, men and women, stop acting like children and victims and claim their authority over their lives.
The more authority and control over your reality you want, the more responsibility you have to accept for your situation. The less you play the role of victim, the greater your ability to change your situation. This is a fundamental truth and it has nothing to do with your feelings. You cannot wave the victim flag and become empowered. You can demand others change, but it is far easier to change yourself. And more rewarding.
What I see is a fundamental abandonment of responsibility, in favour of a path of lesser empowerment. It is also what seems to be an abandonment of responsibility for the state of the world, with a desire to place the blame upon the shoulders of men, or ‘the patriarchy’ with women getting to play the role of victim and deny any responsibility at all. What raises my hackles, is it is clearly divisive while allowing the true problem to go unrecognized. It is disempowering for everyone except the ones at the top of the hierarchy who clearly benefit form it. It seems to me like we are being played off of each other.
I also sense more at work, specifically a growing awareness of consciousness, which we are learning we share. Old ways are falling aside, and blaming one side or the other for what is now being seen as historical injustices and inefficient societal mechanisms is counter productive. It is also, as I see it, rather hypocritical.
I say this because the same people who decry the patriarchy without recognizing the hierarchy, also support the system which imposes it on them. I see them rejecting the patriarchy, and not rejecting the hierarchy, but struggling instead to secure a higher position therein. This solidifies the hierarchy. Like that’s gonna fix anything. Our house is burning down and the sexes are arguing about who is feeling more heat.
The fundamental problem can be traced far further than the differences between the sexes or what is called ‘the patriarchy’. If you really wanted to do some in depth societal analysis in order to identify the primary source of injustice, you will inevitably end up looking at the banking system and the way money is put into circulation. The next thing you would see would be our system of government, which is archaic and detrimental to our existence in a limited and closed system or environment.
I am all for this discussion. I am saddened that women highlighting how them being violated was what was necessary to bring it about. I have been trying to get this discussion happening for decades. And now that we are here, since we are discussing culture and society, let’s shine the light on where it really should be shining, and that is on the concept of CONSENT.
Let us expand this discussion past the part about women being subjected to nonconsensual sexual violations, and make it bigger. Because there is a reason why this absence of consent is not being honoured. Here is what I think the reason is: Men are being taught that their consent is not required to be governed. And this is shit, and it flows down from there. There is an imposed hierarchy, and the fact that consent is apparently not required poisons the outlook. And it does it insidiously.
If women really wanted their lack of consent to be recognized, and they wanted to end the ‘patriarchy’, they would attack the hierarchy itself. They would stop being legally the children or the wards of the state, and claim their own authority. Abandon your SIN/SSN and return your government issued ID. Serve notice on the government that you no longer consent to their governance and that you are not their legal ward. And here is what most won’t like, this patriarchal system which you bemoan, is in fact resting firmly on your consent. You don’t see it, because you do not understand how you have given it legally, but if you hold government issued ID, and a SSI/SIN, and you pay taxes, you most certainly have consented. And your continued consent, is what fuels the hierarchy/patriarchy.
You will find, that hierarchy is most certainly based upon the method of creation of money in our culture. That is without a doubt in my opinion the most important thing we need to fix. I see direct causation from that to the issues you are protesting.
That is why to me, protesting the ‘patriarchy’ while supporting the hierarchy, is hypocritical and self-defeating.
In closing thank you for letting me share. I am sorry for those who have been disrespected or violated and hope you find resolution and closure and that it does not taint your own view to the fundamental goodness in most people. I trust my words are not taken as an attempt to invalidate anyone’s opinions or perspectives or diminish their experiences. I do stand on my own actions, and I refuse to be responsible for the actions of other men, or accept liability for their actions, when I have neither control nor authority over them. Finally, and I realize this may anger many who have suffered, and I hope it does not come off as disrespectful, but unless you are willing to join me, and abandon your SIN/SSN and government issued ID, and revoke your consent from the patriarchal hierarchy, and deny consent to be governed by our archaic system, you are doing far more to support and feed the thing you rage against than I, and I think your angry energy towards me is badly misspent.
Kind Regards
Rob