It’s a Man’s World, and It Always Will Be

The modern economy is a male epic, in which women have found a productive role — but women were not its author

  • Share
  • Read Later
Andrew Burton / Getty Images

If men are obsolete, then women will soon be extinct — unless we rush down that ominous Brave New World path where women clone themselves by parthenogenesis, as famously do Komodo dragons, hammerhead sharks and pit vipers.

A peevish, grudging rancor against men has been one of the most unpalatable and unjust features of second- and third-wave feminism. Men’s faults, failings and foibles have been seized on and magnified into gruesome bills of indictment. Ideologue professors at our leading universities indoctrinate impressionable undergraduates with carelessly fact-free theories alleging that gender is an arbitrary, oppressive fiction with no basis in biology.

Is it any wonder that so many high-achieving young women, despite all the happy talk about their academic success, find themselves in the early stages of their careers in chronic uncertainty or anxiety about their prospects for an emotionally fulfilled private life? When an educated culture routinely denigrates masculinity and manhood, then women will be perpetually stuck with boys, who have no incentive to mature or to honor their commitments. And without strong men as models to either embrace or (for dissident lesbians) to resist, women will never attain a centered and profound sense of themselves as women.

From my long observation, which predates the sexual revolution, this remains a serious problem afflicting Anglo-American society, with its Puritan residue. In France, Italy, Spain, Latin America and Brazil, in contrast, many ambitious professional women seem to have found a formula for asserting power and authority in the workplace while still projecting sexual allure and even glamour. This is the true feminine mystique, which cannot be taught but flows from an instinctive recognition of sexual differences. In today’s punitive atmosphere of sentimental propaganda about gender, the sexual imagination has understandably fled into the alternate world of online pornography, where the rude but exhilarating forces of primitive nature rollick unconstrained by religious or feminist moralism.

(MORE: Women in Federal Workforce Face More Obstacles Than Men)

It was always the proper mission of feminism to attack and reconstruct the ossified social practices that had led to wide-ranging discrimination against women. But surely it was and is possible for a progressive reform movement to achieve that without stereotyping, belittling or demonizing men. History must be seen clearly and fairly: obstructive traditions arose not from men’s hatred or enslavement of women but from the natural division of labor that had developed over thousands of years during the agrarian period and that once immensely benefited and protected women, permitting them to remain at the hearth to care for helpless infants and children. Over the past century, it was labor-saving appliances, invented by men and spread by capitalism, that liberated women from daily drudgery.

What is troubling in too many books and articles by feminist journalists in the U.S. is, despite their putative leftism, an implicit privileging of bourgeois values and culture. The particular focused, clerical and managerial skills of the upper-middle-class elite are presented as the highest desideratum, the ultimate evolutionary point of humanity. Yes, there has been a gradual transition from an industrial to a service-sector economy in which women, who generally prefer a safe, clean, quiet work environment thrive.

(MORE: Report: Younger Women Nearing Pay Equality With Men)

But the triumphalism among some — like Hanna Rosin in her book, The End of Men, about women’s gains — seems startlingly premature. For instance, Rosin says of the sagging fortunes of today’s working-class couples that they and we had “reached the end of a hundred thousand years of human history and the beginning of a new era, and there was no going back.” This sweeping appeal to history somehow overlooks history’s far darker lessons about the cyclic rise and fall of civilizations, which as they become more complex and interconnected also become more vulnerable to collapse. The earth is littered with the ruins of empires that believed they were eternal.

After the next inevitable apocalypse, men will be desperately needed again! Oh, sure, there will be the odd gun-toting Amazonian survivalist gal, who can rustle game out of the bush and feed her flock, but most women and children will be expecting men to scrounge for food and water and to defend the home turf. Indeed, men are absolutely indispensable right now, invisible as it is to most feminists, who seem blind to the infrastructure that makes their own work lives possible. It is overwhelmingly men who do the dirty, dangerous work of building roads, pouring concrete, laying bricks, tarring roofs, hanging electric wires, excavating natural gas and sewage lines, cutting and clearing trees, and bulldozing the landscape for housing developments. It is men who heft and weld the giant steel beams that frame our office buildings, and it is men who do the hair-raising work of insetting and sealing the finely tempered plate-glass windows of skyscrapers 50 stories tall.

Every day along the Delaware River in Philadelphia, one can watch the passage of vast oil tankers and towering cargo ships arriving from all over the world. These stately colossi are loaded, steered and off-loaded by men. The modern economy, with its vast production and distribution network, is a male epic, in which women have found a productive role — but women were not its author. Surely, modern women are strong enough now to give credit where credit is due!

MORE: Where Are the Women of the Year?

Paglia’s opening statement at the Munk Debate, “Resolved: Men Are Obsolete,” held in Toronto

1226 comments
MarkWellsJr.
MarkWellsJr.

Thank you for this article. I support feminism to the point of equality, and have stood up for it often, but I have often felt the degradation that comes out of the mouths of many feminists. They lack honesty about men and about what men have done and will do for society for millions of years to come. I appreciate your words, because I believe this reverse sexism that has come out of most modern feminism is counter productive and honestly naive. I think you nailed this.

#props 

Jim_Bob
Jim_Bob

HaydenAshman, how can you come away thinking this article espouses the superiority of either sex? Free your mind.

paladinrja1
paladinrja1

Tsk. After all these years... women really do not understand men at all; especailly western women. No species on this earth has been more appreciated or loved than human women and history would suggest through shifting belief structures alone that this is not the first time such a social shift has occurred between us. 


I think the underlying warning peripheral to mens psyche is that there is a serious balance of under appreciation. Its not paranoia, more like something that is nagging for logical attention. Most men ignore it and wonder why they end up king hit by the women in their lives so often. Thats really what this article is about.


Men generally seek to better themselves and compete with the ghosts of their personal failings and women seek to gain a unification ignoring all imbalances. Its rather funny to think, for instance; that a man at work will make issue of his partners inequality and his partner in the same position will absolutely rationalize leaving him out on a limb.


It may come as some surprise to many women but men are not really ambitious at all, by not denying our natures we are actually driven by purposeful sense which is not sense at all. In fact all the logic is really so we don't have to fight out base natures and can continue to find some way to merge sense with peace. If I want an expensive car, I will get an expensive car but if I get an old heap of this and do it up, its because that is what i wanted and giving me an expensive car makes me wish I was driving the care I went out of my way to rebirth.

I'm not looking at the guy my female partner(?) decides to point out and wish I was him, I actually don't dare to know what motivates him and simply hope he is happy, I am just angry that she does not understand what motivates me. At that point she has her rationale, because there will be only one outcome.


Men share a strong internal dialogue that women sometimes glimpse. Its what makes her love him and eventually what will make her hate him; because inevitably she will attempt to infiltrate it. Its the process of persistent analyticism that women find refuge in that seems to always have men standing with their heads bobbing around for something to do, reminiscent of meerkats, that really annoys us.


Men generally applaud their partners drive to exceed and succeed. It can be enlightening. Feelings of inequity are not born of jealous rebuke but the disparagement of knowing with a certainty that she is not covering all the base level of factors, especailly that of other people as men are not generally in fear of their world they simply do not invite vulnerability into their sphere of influence. At that point we leave you.


Its not that men feel emasculated, its that they feel fundamentally disappointed; that on some level it seems like we keep going through this scenario and as far as most men know, this life is their first and only life, where does this subtext come from if not via some pre-history. How does a man feel appreciated by the women in his life or the women he shares his life with no man has ever experienced it.

Marge2014
Marge2014

I may not be as well versed in this topic as others in the comments, and trying to make sense of all the verbose debates going on is too difficult. But just wanted to ask...Isn't this as much about class as it is about gender politics? Like personally, I know a lot of educated guys who went to school, who work in office settings (safe, clean environments that the author mentions), and a lot of these guys wouldn't be caught dead working in manual labor fields. Which is fine! I'm not passing judgement--But the people who work in labor jobs are usually people who don't have access to education, come from lower income families, ect. And, to suggest that working class/low income females were not performing manual labor is a mistake, no? Sure women were not building roads next to men, but they worked in factories (WWII), cleaned houses, and many other jobs outside of the home. The author also suggests that new industrial machinations freed women from daily drudgery. Those creations were created by educated men--engineers, architects-- because most women weren't given access to higher education. Whose to say that if women did go to school at the time, they couldn't have come up with new industrial innovations as well? 

Also, aren't we then belittling men who work in more "feminine" office jobs, especially the type of men who work in metropolitan areas like NYC? The paradox then is that most office jobs are inherently very testosterone driven, competitive, like in the white collar sector (Wall Street, Banking)  due to how companies are run, and who runs them (men) and just the nature of our capitalistic econonmy. Another paradox is, if women were thriving in this line of work (office jobs) why are there still way less women in the upper management and executive positions than men? Sure, women work many office positions, but they usually remain in lower to mid level positions like assistants.

I have a hard time taking Paglia or Rosin seriously. The role of men is not dying in our society, it's just changing. Just like the role of women is changing. I'd like to think that if there was another apocalypse (It's kinda funny that such an extreme example was used), that our society would have at least advanced a tad, and that when my husband came home tired from a long day running away from wild animals while trying to get some berries for our family, I could say, "thanks babe, you look tired, how about you stay home for the rest of the week with the kids and I'll get us some berries and squirrels. But when I get my period at the end of the month, you can go back out." I mean, at that point it's about team work and survival, right?


JurijFedorov
JurijFedorov

Thank you for this article. It was a great read and it shows us that we shouldn't fight other groups just to get what we want.

AdaMussina
AdaMussina

Women and men in general are equal. But when it comes to difference between one man and another woman, result is very individual. Just for example compare Mother Teresa and Jeffrey Dahmer(disgusting serial killer).

There are some men who are standing in the shadow of one great woman, as much as there is some women who's standing in the shadow of great men. So if any of you men or women really don't want to be obsolete, here's advise - BE A GOOD HUMAN

Don't forget there are even some men and women who are great companions/lovers/friends... Different genders are fun and made for so much more than competing ;)

HaydenAshman
HaydenAshman

The idea that men are superior is an idea that harms both men and women everywhere by forcing standards upon them that may not adhere to their personal morals and may infringe upon their happiness.

Feminism is not just about women. Women are affected more greatly than men by this stigma, but they are in no way the only victims. Feminism is about human beings, and the fact that we are all born with rights and needs that should not be dictated by whether or not your sexual organs are inside or outside of your body.

HaydenAshman
HaydenAshman

You are completely and utterly missing the point.

Feminism does not condemn men. It condemns the social infrastructures in place that promote and encourage sexism. The fact that a women wrote this proves my point. It is engrained in us from birth that men are stronger and better than women.

Yes, throughout the majority of history, men have dominated the professional world. Yes it was almost entirely men who built our cities and nurtured the complex economic systems of the world. The point of feminism is to ask, "Why could a woman not have had a part in this?"

If it was truly about physical strength. If women were REALLY incapable of physical labor, then there would not be weightlifting competitions where women lift more weight than I, as a man, could ever hope to.

This brings to mind another point. The only way that this comment will be taken seriously is if it is noted that I am a male. If a woman were to have this opinion, she would automatically be seen as a raging man-hater who fills her time by chopping off penises to take away men's power. We are born and raised being forced to swallow the unrealistic notion that men are stronger and better than women.

Feminism is not about

JonCleaves
JonCleaves

This article prompted me to write this and post it to my facebook page...


The Last Stand of Man
I am all about equality. I reject society’s method of seeking equality by removing what it means to be a man. 
I will watch the Notebook with you, once, but for Steel Magnolias, you are on your own.
I will wear jeans, but they won’t be skinny. I will wear a scarf, but only when it is really cold. And the only time you will catch me in a sweater vest is if the bear I am wrestling rips my sleeves off.
I won’t use face cream on the lines at the corners of my eyes, but I will laugh with you to put them there.
I will go on a shopping date with you, but we won’t be hitting the same stores.
I’ll be sexual, but not metrosexual.
I’ll be Frasier at the opera, but Martin in the living room.
I will open your door, chop your wood, change your tire and pump your gas. Not because you are not capable, but because we are not the same.
I will go do stuff with the guys, not instead of you, but when you are also doing your own thing.
Keep your mascara, thanks.
You can order whatever your heart desires. I’ll be having steak.
You should have all the same opportunities that I do, but I will not become you to make that happen.
I’ll be your wolf or your shepherd, but never your puppy.
One can be loud and strong and stubborn without treating someone poorly.
You will never have to think twice about walking on a dark street if I am with you. 
The last stand of man begins here. This far, and no further.

tim14
tim14

idiot. feminism has got nothing to do with who does the hard physical labor. it's about a particular category of people (mostly males) have come to shape the world only to their hearts' [and genitals'] desires and values, in the process building a society that is sexist and one-sided to their preferences. 

JonasAureliusBlom
JonasAureliusBlom

Really great, it's been interesting for me personally to see how in danish culture feminism is another word for being unfeminine, asexual and left wing. The only battle of sexes here is moreso a battle against both sexes, where the beauty of Ying & Yang is destroyed by unattractive, obese women in cellars on the internet.

George_Rock
George_Rock

Obviously it's a man's world, and always will be.  Women will always stand in the shadow of man, and no amount of social engineering can change that fact.   Women need to learn the facts of life, and accept them like mature adults.  

RoseKnows
RoseKnows

Wow, really rational article! This is truly awesome to me how well-constructed and logical it is. As a woman, I want women to have writes and be equal in society, but men and women have different strengths. Love this article! Also, my favorite part is how she used the apocalypse to justify a need for men, very humorous.

RationalMale
RationalMale

Ironically only a woman could write this and be taken seriously – that's the degree to which the feminine imperative has insaturated itself into the social narrative. If a man had written this Time would never publish it and it would be dismissed as some privileged male bemoaning his condition.

ThomasAndrews1
ThomasAndrews1

Camille Paglia is just another narrow and confused woman with a false perspective of reality and distorted view of feminism. She is a card carrying supporter and mouthpiece of the overbearing and conceited patriarchy. Her views will never be shared by a vast majority of women continuing to struggle on their own and not needing men at all to form their lives. Being blinded by the promise of equality of all people has made her into someone basically supporting of a male supremacy that will never function. Her missing vantage on ecology is harrowing and her obviously unmistakable failure to even understand women, marks her as the perfect arm candy for the corporate industrial complexes of the world, a machination designed to withhold material wealth from women, unless they protege as men, behave like men or are ample token representatives for a glossy status quo that needs helmsman on an eternal ship of fools. The article http://ideas.time.com/2014/01/02/men-are-obsolete/?iid=gs-article-mostpop2 is much better articulated than this codswallop and actually cites prevalent facts and figures. While selective amnesia and collective female guilt against feminism are eschewed, women are still breaking chunks out of the bastions of male psychopathic control and grinding this lamentable state of existence into shards. The disappearance of the over weaned tool belted male jack of all trades and master of none is thankfully at its end and males such as myself can be the traitors and the arm candy that males traditionally only wanted from women. Backlash becomes a biological matter when things turn around on their very own due to complete obstinance and lack of participation from both men and women, while we go onwards to challenge one unassailable bulwark after another and take no captives.

jjordanresg
jjordanresg

Kudos to Camille Paglia for having the courage and intellectual honesty to address the countervailing forces that simply undermine the complementarity and harmony of the sexes, and only serve to weaken our social fabric. We will surely be much more successful in tackling the daunting problems that we face as a society, by 'attacking' the root causes of those problems, rather than attacking each other. Let us challenge the ideologues to expend constructive energy advancing the real needs of the country.


Chystallilly
Chystallilly

@AdaMussina  "Women and men in general are equal" - this is an awful, ii-thought out platitude. We are very different.. Differences have been noted in the behaviour of babies just a few weeks old. 


To make your point that women and men as individuals are different, you compare a supposed, virtual saint with a serial killer.I suspect your doing so is to re-reinforce the feminist narrative that women are good and men are evil. Incidentally, 'Mother' Teresa presided over great suffering when she was in the position where she could have arrange for medical intervention to alleviate it and justified this evil by claiming it supposedly bring the sufferers closer to God. 

billybobmcmanus
billybobmcmanus

@HaydenAshman  "Feminism is about human beings"  - I guess the clue is in the word feminism itself which relates exclusively to human beings?   As a feminist you surely would object to the phrase "mankind" yet you glibly and deceitfully subsume the needs of all of humankind under a movement that is dedicated by definition to the self-interest of women only.   When rich people tell poor people not to complain because of the crumbs they receive from the banquet table then at least there is some truth to that, but feminism gives nothing to men.  

billybobmcmanus
billybobmcmanus

@HaydenAshman  on the contrary there are any number of raging man-hater's who also happen to be feminists.  They are the stereotypical self-hating jews of the modern age, overcome with guilt for their association with violence they never authored and a phallus they've never misused.   BTW she does address the point you make about female exclusion from professions:  the social division of labour.  The fact that women may perform better at certain traditionally male tasks than some men doesn't mean it was less rational in bygone ages to have a gendered division of labour that met the needs of that society.   That gendered division of labour may or may not have been optimal - but its wrong to conflate optimal with social progress imperatives that have no necessary to connexion with what is optimal.   Paglia's point is that latter day feminism is resentful and contemptuous of a male civilization that excluded them in various / structural ways.  Such resentment / contempt only makes sense if it could and should have been otherwise.  What Paglia points to and which feminism's resentment (played out every day in demands for restitution) fails to acknowledge is the fact that the very possibility of feminism depends on a civilization that was overwhelmingly built by men, and which had it not be constructed in that way would have ensured that feminism remained a pipe-dream.   


It is time feminism paid homage to its enablers:  men

JaneFlaherty
JaneFlaherty

@JonCleaves My kind of man:)  Just take out the garbage for me on Weds. nights and I will love you!

billybobmcmanus
billybobmcmanus

@tim14  she may be many things, but idiot isn't one of them.   She has made a perfectly sane and rational case for why women benefited from 'male dominated societies', namely that in important ways they were reciprocal, and met the needs of women for protection and safety.   Feminism picks out evidence to advance the non-reciprocity of gender relations in traditional societies and it brooks no opposition where its - typically marxist - description of dominated, oppressed females and oppressor males - is contradicted or even softened.  

YummyProsciutto
YummyProsciutto

@tim14 A few males succeed brilliantly.  On the other hand, many men occupy the lowest, dirtiest, deadliest rungs of society.  Historically, it was a trade-off between more limited opportunities vs greater protection and safety.  Overall, hard to argue that the average woman had it worse than the average man.  

JaneFlaherty
JaneFlaherty

@JonasAureliusBlom

Like the Danes, my brother says that feminists would be more aptly named masculinists because there is nothing feminine about them!

FrankGulla
FrankGulla

@RationalMale You're absolutely right . Any woman will listen to another woman before she listens to a man. In order for a man to be heard he needs several initials after his name and even then he may not be taken seriously. But a woman will be taken seriously just b/c she's a woman degree or no degree.

billybobmcmanus
billybobmcmanus

@ThomasAndrews1  Almost incoherent post.  You are confused about many things.  one of those things is the corporate industrial complexes of the world .... or at least the western world, where corporate capitalism has been a driving force of both feminism and immigration as both result in enlarged workforces and enlarged consumer markets.  Socialism got into bed with capitalism a long time ago in the west, but I wouldn't want you to have to rethink your sentimental picture of how the world, which was certainly cutting edge in the early days of marxism.

BPS81
BPS81

@ThomasAndrews1 She is a iconoclastic Legend of the Feminist movement making a case for the health of Masculinity, so I'd say that that makes you the narrow minded fool for not even comprehending her point.  Your tripe about "grinding down bastions" against woman today is not even realistic, woman of Paglia's day won their battle and woman have grown and keep growing in our society.  It is people like Gloria Steinem who are the "anti Male" and "gender is only a social construct" Feminists that she takes issue with.  Camille Paglia has been an iconoclast of the feminist movement for decades, she believes in "equal opportunity" feminism of the role model of a woman like Katherine Hepburn.  That is the moxy and form of equality that this country needs, and your apathy about becoming "arm candy" to some woman is just gender self loathing idiocy at it's finest.  Camille is seeking the singularly pure ideal of gender EQUALITY, but you have to want to have two EQUAL genders to do that.  You don't quite get that it is the modern Feminist movement of the "male hostile" variety that is the unassailable bulwark of society today.  People like Camille are making the principled case for Strong Womanhood and Strong Manhood to live side by side as equals but you behave too stupidly to see that and then argue the ideology of pseudo equality seeking "hate towards men" second or third wave feminists.  Sorry to tell you, but plenty of other Men aren't interested in your self loathing interest to see men endure "generations of suffrage".  You are an ideologically trained fool see only two opposing sides who is missing those who argue the ABSOLUTE Ideal of full gender equality rather than one imbalance over the other.  This is an issue that the Left's current position on is toxic to real gender equality and that's because it seeks to marginalize men and perpetually empower women over them.  That will turn out no better than the misogyny that feminism sought to fight.  So why don't you grow up and realize what Camille was really talking about and stop making it into something about bringing back misogyny.  Over emphasis on women and young girls has had real effects on men and especially boys.  School Recess for Boys has been cut down to the point that young boys don't get time to release their vital energy anymore.  It is no wonder that one in five boys has ADHD and lag behind girls in going to college these days.  So no one need call you a "traitor to manhood", but rather just a "deluded bore" full of ideological dogma rather than a truly idealistic/iconoclastic position on gender equality.

rj88631
rj88631

@ThomasAndrews1 Wait, saw that you called Hanna Rosin articulate and logical. The satire is obvious now.

CodyK
CodyK

@ThomasAndrews1Another sad academic sack with his mind poisoned by feminist rot, I see.

LisaBuchanan
LisaBuchanan

@billybobmcmanus  

A rose under any other name smells just as sweet, but know this, Humanist is an atheist blanket belief. Can you find a better name that all can understand without negative connotations? One that focuses on elevating women to a just and equal position to men and helping men take of the facade forced on each them, but yet recognizing physical differences in law such as abortion, and that men can't abort because it costs that taxpayers, while when a woman does it it costs the taxpayers nothing (however, I believe life begins at conception, but that's not the debate here, because women can still use a hanger...)? Although men get into more trouble when they hit, such as the amount of physical damage done when someone hits another (medical bills).

Did you know that the etymology of the word woman means wife man, and that if a woman is not married, she is actually just a man? How backwards is our modern world...

LisaBuchanan
LisaBuchanan

@billybobmcmanus @tim14  

We benefit from a male ran society because men protect us from other men... 

A woman actually invented the circular saw, and we would still be doing our own construction, and the modern tools, don't need physical strength anymore. I trim my own trees. I change my own tire. I lay my own flooring. I assemble my own furniture. I don't understand why we have to need you anymore, but I don't understand why men can't just be happy with the fact that we WANT you around.

billybobmcmanus
billybobmcmanus

@YummyProsciutto @tim14  - so you'd prefer to be cut to pieces on the battlefield while saving your country, homestead, family from destruction, than suffer the humiliation of baking cakes in a rudimentary aga-free kitchen.   Life was hard for everybody in the past.   Men died in battle.  Women died in childbirth. Other bad things happened to both sexes.

cmarrero1
cmarrero1

@JaneFlaherty You're very uneducated aren't you? I model in my off time (my stats: 5'2 101lbs), work for a fortune 500 company at the age of 23 and am brilliant (just got a full ride to Harvard)....Maybe you're just such a loser that you need to learn to read a little bit better to understand what REAL feminists are about... and actually that word is ugly so I don't utter it, I personally am an equalist..not people who simply don't believe inequality....to me, feminazis are paradoxes because they aren't promoting what they are voicing that they are trying to promote....sorry.

LisaBuchanan
LisaBuchanan

@FrankGulla @RationalMale  I think it's funny, he said " a woman will listen to another woman before she listens to a man."  LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!111!!@!

OcéaneGougeon
OcéaneGougeon

@FrankGulla @RationalMale As a woman, I find this article totally shameful and I don't care if it has been written by a woman or a man ! It's completely awful to see people talk like that in our time. The author here has clearly understood NOTHING about Feminism. We don't want women domination. What we want above all is EQUALITY. Same rights, same perspective. Freedom. It's simply too hard to understand for all those people who are totally blinded by the patriarchal society in which we are living.

YummyProsciutto
YummyProsciutto

@rj88631 @ThomasAndrews1 Oh God… the ridiculous verbiage here…. signifying nothing... 

Yeah, my heart bleeds for the noble struggle against all odds of the upper middle class, college educated goofballs that instead of having real jobs, perform an intellectual circle jerk writing this nonsense.

I specially love their high IQ posturing.  Buddy… I'll match wits with you any day on any topic.  Make sure you eat your Wheaties first. 

billybobmcmanus
billybobmcmanus

@OcéaneGougeon @FrankGulla @RationalMale  men are dominant where they dominant.  Women are dominant where they dominate.   Latterly women dominate in areas such as sex, control of reproduction,  access to / continued access to family and children,  areas such education,  the services, and large parts of the media.  With regard to academia feminists have become virtual party officials ensuring that all ideas are feminist approved, with huge implications for funding and therefore what kind of research can take place.  Women increasingly dominate the professions,  and they are making headway in the boardroom as well, but the thing is patriarchy doesn't relate to just to politics and the boardroom: it also relates to the family where women are no absolutely dominant by default.   Wouldn't it make more sense to argue that we live in a matriarchy or at least a mixed economy of matriarchy / patriarchy  where the latter is systematically being dismantled just as the former is being put into place.


The equality you speak of is equality of outcome, which tends to measure only areas where men have traditionally predominated but completely ignores any realm of influence or power where women may be dominant.  As such it simply manipulates assymetries to its advantage.  Equality isn't meant to benefit everyone equally whatever you think

billybobmcmanus
billybobmcmanus

@RaeAllman @rj88631  men are the patriarchy.  That statement is evidently so obviously true you didn't feel the need to explain how that is actually the case.  I think you are the donkeyarchy

YummyProsciutto
YummyProsciutto

@OcéaneGougeon @FrankGulla @RationalMale It's funny how consistently the freedoms and rights supposedly envisaged by modern feminism never encompass the right to a dissenting opinion

The pearl clutching at the merest attempt to question their Great Ideology™ is laughable.   

RaeAllman
RaeAllman

@rj88631I don't think you understand what the word "patriarchy" means, nor the concept being expressed. Men ARE the patriarchy, so your comparison just doesn't work because the Eagles ARE NOT the Saints.

rj88631
rj88631

@OcéaneGougeon @FrankGulla @RationalMale How are men the dominant class yet dominated by the patriarchy? 

That is like saying the Eagles lost the game to the Saints but they also won the game to the Saints.

Light*Bringer
Light*Bringer

i would love to see you do construction, and i would love to see you go into the military or become a bio engineer............ no one is stopping woman from becoming these things they are booking up on being nurses and therapists that's just what they choose, but there's probably a reason woman are rushing for those things and not going after the dangerous jobs or the high stress jobs or jobs that require you to use your left brain more. Probably a reason its because woman don't want them and i doubt you have ever done any of those things.