What happened to the Matriarchal Cultures

[Taomeow]

5 hours ago, Apech said:

This thread is so full of tired clichés that against my better judgement I am drawn back in.

 

 

 

To add another?..

 

5 hours ago, Apech said:

 

If it is true that the defining feature of women is 'nurturing' then explain to me why it is that when in the first time in recorded history women have the rights and freedom to pursue alternatives they do so.  Middle Class - the more affluent and educated women in the US and Western Europe delay childbirth and have fewer children than ever before.  If the nurturing instinct is so powerful then why is this?  (by the way I know you are going to blame it on patriarchal oppression just so you can insult even more those women that make this choice  ).

 

 

 

To your "why" -- because they are women of patriarchy and the only attractive spots to fill in a patriarchy are patriarchal spots.  The only pigeonholes that come with money, recognition, rank, respect -- are patriarchal spots.  Women, given the "freedom" to fill in those spots, take it, because the alternative is not nice and nurturing, the alternative is to be objects (not people!) handled by those who occupy them. 

 

"Insult those women that make this choice" -- how is stating the fact that women take patriarchal  spots in patriarchy when patriarchy makes some of those spots available to women but still remains patriarchy as the only template for a desirable position in society insulting to women?  It's a fact.  They have only two "freedoms" granted by patriarchy: to be given a chance to serve as honorary males, or to be left in the position of marginalized females.  How is it insulting to women to notice?  I couldn't help noticing if I tried.  My mother worked as an engineer, and was exceptionally good at it, so good (always and under all circumstances the top performer) and so fiercely competitive that she would have become a big boss if...  well, nevermind the speculations, let me stick to the facts.  She was  a minor boss over some 30 people, most of them males.  She lived a professional life indistinguishable from that of a professional who is male. 

 

Nothing she would have done in the invisibility of her other role, that of mother, would have earned her any points.  Money, fulfillment, recognition, admiration for her talent, doing things the right way because she says so and she is the competent one -- all these things came only as the benefits of the patriarchal spot she took, so the other spot, that of mother -- guess what?  She was very smart, and society has always been very clear on where her rewards lie, in which role she has a chance to get rewarded for her dedication.  How is it insulting to her if her daughter happens to have noticed?..  It is what it is.  For every woman in her position.  A position in a patriarchy.

 

How is it a tired cliché to put two and two together?  Women in a patriarchy do not seek women's roles because patriarchy has made those roles, women acting as women, undesirable, unrewarded, and has made women occupying them into objects of handling (not people) of low value and quality.  So the only way a woman in patriarchy can avoid that fate (which to many throughout history was worse than death) is by taking on a male, patriarchal drive, profession, performance, goals and reaching for male, patriarchal accomplishments, the only kind a patriarchy rewards. 

 

How is it that men (and too many women descended from thousands of years of patriarchy, not of their "instincts" which have been suppressed into nonexistence with extreme prejudice) manage not to get it I used to marvel.  How can otherwise smart people be so incredibly dumb?..  But now I understand.  They don't get it because to get it is punished and to not get it is rewarded.  We now have 96 genders with associated pronouns to address people who think they have "chosen" to belong to those genders freely.  Freely chosen.  Uh-huh.  

Edited November 17, 2017 by Taomeow

[windwalker]

8 minutes ago, Taomeow said:

My mother worked as an engineer, and was exceptionally good at it, so good (always and under all circumstances the top performer) and so fiercely competitive that she would have become a big boss if...  well, nevermind the speculations, let me stick to the facts.  She was  a minor boss over some 30 people, most of them males.  She lived a professional life indistinguishable from that of a professional who is male. 

 

You feel she should have achieved more for just doing her job

but did not because ?

[rene]

Hi Aetherous,

 

2 hours ago, Aetherous said:

Hi rene, thanks.

It seems to me that would be an easy way of dodging the truth.

Matriarchy is rule by women, and Patriarchy is rule by men...and specifically, these types of rule don't have to do with being elected to a position or being the best for a position, but have to do with passing it along family lines, such as the eldest daughter or son.

I think that women could only be said to be patriarchal if their actions support the patriarchs.

 

 

Yeah, this is why words don't work, lol. What I'm unsuccessfully trying to convey is that there are particular sets of behavior, methods and ideas (BMI, for brevity)  that have been in place for a long time. The BMIs under discussion have arisen through male-dominated systems. BMIs are not inherently good or bad, nor are women or men inherently good or bad.

 

What I'm trying to describe, again unsuccessfully, is that a new set of BMIs might be a good idea and It doesn't matter if they arise through male-led or female-led systems... it is because the new BMIs would be more (but not exclusively) yin in nature, a female-led system might have a better shot at it.   

 

 

2 hours ago, Aetherous said:

 

But it's not true that any woman who does something bad...like beats her weak willed boyfriend if he doesn't do what she asks, or has a hard drug orgy at 4 am in a house with paper thin walls and other tenants that work normal hours, or an English teacher who inappropriately touches her middle school student...it's not true that those women are patriarchal. They are just women...and they are perfect examples of how a 'rule by women' isn't any better than a 'rule by men'.

 

You are right, and 'rule by women' using the same sets of BMI would be no better than what we've all had for 1,000s of years. To me, this isn't about which gender might be at the helm... but rather is our path one of peaceful and dynamic balance.

 

Thanks for your reply!

[Taomeow]

1 minute ago, windwalker said:

 

You feel she should have achieved more for just doing her job

but did not because ?

 

No, quite the opposite.  Yes, she could have been a bigger boss if she wasn't a woman, but all those spots were occupied by actual males, and there was a glass ceiling, but that's not what I'm driving at.  What I'm driving at is, in a real society (matriarchal until the unnatural intervention that changed it), she should have been in the position where her choice between her career and her child would have been rewarded by society if she chose her child. 

 

She kicked me out at the age of 11 months for getting sick too much, at a crucial juncture in her then-budding career where staying at home and nurturing her child to health and thriving would have been punished by society -- forever, for the rest of her life.  So she chose the reward, and got it.  However, in a parallel universe, where she is rewarded rather than punished for her role as a mother, she would have been a wonderful mother.  She could have used her talents to create happiness and love and peace -- every second of every day there's demand on a woman's natural creativity and intellect and heart to create that.  But in this one, it would have only generated misery, frustration and poverty if she chose that.  That's what I'm talking about all along.   

[blue eyed snake]

very simple, in our society smart women who are top engineers will not get the place she would have if she had been a big hairy male....

 

16 minutes ago, Taomeow said:

How is it a tired cliché to put two and two together?  Women in a patriarchy do not seek women's roles because patriarchy has made those roles, women acting as women, undesirable, unrewarded, and has made women occupying them into objects of handling (not people) of low value and quality.  So the only way a woman in patriarchy can avoid that fate (which to many throughout history was worse than death) is by taking on a male, patriarchal drive, profession, performance, goals and reaching for male, patriarchal accomplishments, the only kind a patriarchy rewards. 

 

i recognize so clearly what TM writes. I'm pretty smart myself, wanted to pursue a job as researcher, and had the qualities for it. But, the care of a handicapped son was not to be combined with the 60 hour workweek that was expected of me.

 

so that was out... nurturing.

O yes, I could have let him go to an institution...

 

any reason why a researcher cannot do excellent research working 25/ 30 hour a week??

 

Where I live women are expected to have a job, being economically self supporting, care for their children and care for their elderly parents. Women who (can) choose to not have a job because they have a working husband, those woman are looked down at, because they " don't work" 

 

so much for 'being nurturing' as a value in this society.

 

 

[windwalker]

7 minutes ago, Taomeow said:

What I'm driving at is, in a real society (matriarchal until the unnatural intervention that changed it), she should have been in the position where her choice between her career and her child would have been rewarded by society if she chose her child. 

 

and your father her husband does not seem to be mentioned why?

 

You really dont understand what men do for the wife and  children do you?

 

society allowed her to raise a child and have the choice 

what should have or could have been was also a choice, in this society her choice in others 

maybe there would be no choice.

 

 

[Taomeow]

5 minutes ago, blue eyed snake said:

very simple, in our society smart women who are top engineers will not get the place she would have if she had been a big hairy male....

 

 

i recognize so clearly what TM writes. I'm pretty smart myself, wanted to pursue a job as researcher, and had the qualities for it. But, the care of a handicapped son was not to be combined with the 60 hour workweek that was expected of me.

 

so that was out... nurturing.

O yes, I could have let him go to an institution...

 

any reason why a researcher cannot do excellent research working 25/ 30 hour a week??

 

Where I live women are expected to have a job, being economically self supporting, care for their children and care for their elderly parents. Women who (can) choose to not have a job because they have a working husband, those woman are looked down at, because they " don't work" 

 

so much for 'being nurturing' as a value in this society.

 

 

 

Amen, sister.  A lifetime of impossible choices...  that's what women live.  

 

Not to brag, to illustrate the point further -- my IQ can't even be calculated (it is literally "off the chart" into the area where it is impossible to quantify) but ask of me to use that toward a "career" that I must combine with raising two kids and taking care of absolutely everything life-related and, not being a machine that peak performs 80 hours a week on no sleep, having to sacrifice quality somewhere -- guess where I would have to sacrifice it for my "career" to be "successful."  Hell no.  I'm not dumb enough to buy into trying to please patriarchy.  I'll have it remain displeased with me, thank you.  Zhuangzi's "useless tree," I will remain until it rewards me for my being a tree, not for the tables and chairs it could have made out of me if I "tried harder."    

[rene]

22 minutes ago, Taomeow said:

How is it that men (and too many women descended from thousands of years of patriarchy, not of their "instincts" which have been suppressed into nonexistence with extreme prejudice) manage not to get it I used to marvel.  How can otherwise smart people be so incredibly dumb?..  But now I understand.  They don't get it because to get it is punished and to not get it is rewarded.  We now have 96 genders with associated pronouns to address people who think they have "chosen" to belong to those genders freely.  Freely chosen.  Uh-huh.  

 

Hi TM

I agree, and would add that males have also been indoctrinated into not having faith or trust in their "instincts", specifically the aspect of them that would have tempered and mitigated extremes. I celebrate the mostly-yang-ness inherent in males and the mostly-yin-ness inherent in females. Can you imagine a world wherein what we all had at birth was allowed to arise and develop on it's own?? The gentle rain would fall, methinks.

 

 

 

2 minutes ago, Taomeow said:

She could have used her talents to create happiness and love and peace -- every second of every day there's demand on a woman's natural creativity and intellect and heart to create that.  But in this one, it would have only generated misery, frustration and poverty if she chose that.  That's what I'm talking about all along.   

 

I know, and wish it was easier to convey. Time for a new set of behaviors, methods and ideas. It would be interesting to watch them develop, for sure.

 

 

[Chang]

12 minutes ago, blue eyed snake said:

very simple, in our society smart women who are top engineers will not get the place she would have if she had been a big hairy male....

I find the use of language here unfortunate to say the least. "Big, hairy male"?????

37 minutes ago, Taomeow said:

How is it a tired cliché to put two and two together?  Women in a patriarchy do not seek women's roles because patriarchy has made those roles, women acting as women, undesirable, unrewarded, and has made women occupying them into objects of handling (not people) of low value and quality.  So the only way a woman in patriarchy can avoid that fate (which to many throughout history was worse than death) is by taking on a male, patriarchal drive, profession, performance, goals and reaching for male, patriarchal accomplishments, the only kind a patriarchy rewards. 

What nonsense is this? Patriarchy has not made these roles, nature has.

 

i recognize so clearly what TM writes. I'm pretty smart myself, wanted to pursue a job as researcher, and had the qualities for it. But, the care of a handicapped son was not to be combined with the 60 hour workweek that was expected of me.

 

so that was out... nurturing.

O yes, I could have let him go to an institution...

 

any reason why a researcher cannot do excellent research working 25/ 30 hour a week??

 

Where I live women are expected to have a job, being economically self supporting, care for their children and care for their elderly parents. Women who (can) choose to not have a job because they have a working husband, those woman are looked down at, because they " don't work" 

 

so much for 'being nurturing' as a value in this society.

 

 

Whilst you do have a point here it is only too simple to show the other side of the coin. In the U.K. positive discrimination has been a fact for some time. In this brave new state of play women and those from transgender or minority backgrounds are given preference over white males when applying for jobs or seeking promotion.

[Aetherous]

In a truly patriarchal society, women as mothers and housemakers is the ideal. They are rewarded for doing that, by not having to earn money to survive and thrive.

But now we're saying that the first and second wave feminist movement with its liberation of women, where they can be anything they want, is what's patriarchal? Because jobs are patriarchal? And women can still choose the mother/housemaker route today, and live for free...but they're stuck in the patriarchy?

Maybe women should be given a government stipend for their service of having children, and it's not dependent on having a father/husband around...is that what the matriarchy would be? Nah that would probably be patriarchal, too. Perhaps if women were just given money, and no men were allowed around, then it would finally be a matriarchy.

Edited November 17, 2017 by Aetherous

[Taomeow]

5 minutes ago, rene said:

 

Hi TM

I agree, and would add that males have also been indoctrinated into not having faith or trust in their "instincts", specifically the aspect of them that would have tempered and mitigated extremes. I celebrate the mostly-yang-ness inherent in males and the mostly-yin-ness inherent in females. Can you imagine a world wherein what we all had at birth was allowed to arise and develop on it's own?? The gentle rain would fall, methinks.

 

 

Ah yes.     

 

I don't have to imagine, I remember.  I can't prove it of course and won't try, but there's no harm in mentioning it I hope.  I'm not supposed to have accessible genetic memories according to the paradigm that passes for "scientific" these days, but I do.  For me, it's not a belief or a fantasy that I miss, it's real human life, miracle of miracles, which I remember living, countless times. That's why what's going on today with us humans hurts me more than it does the scientifically sanctioned genetic amnesiac.

[gendao]

13 hours ago, Aetherous said:

4) If the patriarchy is bad due to men abusing their position of power, sexually harassing women as we see in the news...that goes both ways! I had a female English teacher sexually harass me in middle school...she called me back to the classroom while everyone else was watching a video, and was stroking my lower abdomen while talking to me. Is that what the matriarchy is like?

Wow, would love to hear more stories about that! 

 

Here's another recent example of this.  A girl essentially got widely championed for ceremoniously dumping her frat boyfriend, who had "called her disgusting," publicly on social media.

Quote

“After getting called disgusting last night I successfully dropped 200 lbs!! (Before and after pics)”

Ohhh yea, you go girrrl!!!  What a f'n jerk!!

Quote

They apparently spent the Saturday afternoon together and ate lunch with her parents before heading back to their dorms to get ready for his college frat formal.

At the formal, he allegedly criticized her behaviour from earlier in the day.

“He said to me, ‘The way you were acting today was disgusting and unattractive,'”  she told the Daily Mail — although she didn’t elaborated on the behaviour in question.

Umm wait, OK...what "behavior?"  Let's dig a little deeper here...  From her ex's response:

Quote

I just want everyone to know that there’s definitely a difference between saying someone is “disgusting” and saying that “I think it’s disgusting and unattractive when girls try to blackout every weekend and get uncontrollably drunk” don’t take something out of context

Ahhhh...and there it is.  He wasn't criticizing HER, but her BEHAVIOR (key difference).  And a fair complaint, no?  I mean, you KNOW it's BADDDD...when a FRAT BOI is complaining about what a drunken fish his girlfriend is!!!

 

So, couldn't she have taken his valid criticism CONSTRUCTIVELY (and not so personally) and thought, "Hmm, maybe I have a drinking problem?  Maybe I'm destroying my liver and drowning my problems in alcoholism?  Maybe I should work on that, for my own sake, if no one else's???"

 

Orrrr...HELL NAW, I can do no wrong!  So, I'll just blame it all on DA MAN instead and SHOW HIM who's BOSS!!!!!  How dare he stop enabling my habit!

Cue soundtrack, ladies!!!

 

And it's not just her...feminism as a whole does just have a tendency to scapegoat men for ALL wrongs, while giving women an irrevocable free pass.  While the ACTUAL full role of the scapegoat in sum total ONLY becomes revealed if he is REMOVED from the picture. 

 

Just like when "oppressive Whites" were all scapegoated and eventually left Detroit...

Of course, I'm not saying men or Whites are without blame in any of these cases, either.  But, (racial, feminist, etc) scapegoating is an unfair distribution of blame and shadow projection - that can interestingly even sometimes lead to "reactionary" crime, mass shootings, etc...

Quote

The exiled goat may… turn its back on the collective. The anger may be too great, and personal pride may also be involved. The exiled goat may say, “I don’t need them anyway. In fact, I am going to do everything in my power to sabotage and destroy the collective which has rejected me…” The exiled goat can become an anarchist and a revolutionary. It is the lone gunman, the social outcast who consciously chooses the role of outlaw. In its most extreme form, it is Charles Manson, who gleefully accepts the projection of the collective shadow and says, “Since you will condemn me whatever I am or do, I may as well do what I have been accused of, and justify your condemnation of me.” That response provides a form of power and a feeling of being special, and this can compensate for the humiliation of rejection. Such exiled goats are necessary to a community which is unconscious of its own sins, because they carry the collective shadow.

 

Edited November 17, 2017 by gendao

[windwalker]

17 minutes ago, blue eyed snake said:

very simple, in our society smart women who are top engineers will not get the place she would have if she had been a big hairy male....

 

wow maybe those big hairy females should make their own companies 

 

or get a job at google...

 

 

 

[Taomeow]

Dawei split off this thread from another, where I merely responded to something Hillary-Trump, something that purportedly made a non-supporter of Hillary a misogynistic women hater -- I objected to that, tried to explain why exactly.  Wasn't planning on launching this as a separate topic, I damn well know better by now.  Of course got pulled in, having inadvertently become the instigator, but now I pull myself out.  Thanks everyone, but my time is not made of rubber and I can't stretch it any further toward having a "bless you" to every sneeze.  Carry on to wherever the spirit moves you without me.  

 

Profound thanks to those who get it.    You know who you are and I love you.

Edited November 17, 2017 by Taomeow

[Aetherous]

I didn't realize this was a split thread. Totally understand not wanting to get into a back and forth...I almost deleted my second to previous post here for that very reason.

[rene]

2 minutes ago, Taomeow said:

Profound thanks to those who get it.    You know who you are and I love you.

 

Back 'atcha 

[Aetherous]

12 minutes ago, gendao said:

Wow, would love to hear more stories about that! 

 

Just some of my personal experiences...I don't have many more.

[ralis]

2 minutes ago, Taomeow said:

Dawei split off this thread from another, where I merely responded to something Hillary-Trump, something that purportedly made a non-supporter of Hillary a misogynistic women hater -- I objected to that, tried to explain why exactly.  Wasn't planning on launching this as a separate topic, I damn well know better by now.  Of course got pulled in, having inadvertently become the instigator, but now I pull myself out.  Thanks everyone, but my time is not made of rubber and I can't stretch it any further toward having a "bless you" to every sneeze.  Carry on to wherever the spirit moves you without me.  

 

Profound thanks to those who get it.    You know who you are and I love you.

 

Thanks for the input. My one observation is that this thread and others on this site absolutely demonstrate that the human species fails at cooperation. That will be our downfall! The needs of a few are far outweighing the needs of the many.

[ralis]

9 minutes ago, windwalker said:

 

wow maybe those big hairy females should make their own companies 

 

or get a job at google...

 

 

 

 

Your mentor and hero Molyneux again, ad nauseam! "Big hairy female"?  You must have a real problem with women.

[windwalker]

some interesting thoughts 

 

 

 

[gendao]

12 minutes ago, Taomeow said:

Dawei split off this thread from another, where I merely responded to something Hillary-Trump, something that purportedly made a non-supporter of Hillary a misogynistic women hater -- I objected to that, tried to explain why exactly.  Wasn't planning on launching this as a separate topic, I damn well know better by now.  Of course got pulled in, having inadvertently become the instigator, but now I pull myself out.  Thanks everyone, but my time is not made of rubber and I can't stretch it any further toward having a "bless you" to every sneeze.  Carry on to wherever the spirit moves you without me.  

 

Profound thanks to those who get it.    You know who you are and I love you.

Well, and that whole Talk Trump thread was started out of the blue from one of my posts split off from another, making it seem like I really wanted to talk about Trump, when I don't, lol.  I'm really not that interested in that topic, just like you aren't in this one.

 

I think if and when these posts are split off into their own threads, they need to be prefaced with a link specifying from where and how they were created by the mods from other threads.  Otherwise, it gives the false impression that someone is a lot more vested in some topic, than they really are...

Edited November 17, 2017 by gendao

[windwalker]

1 minute ago, ralis said:

 

Your mentor and hero Molyneux again, ad nauseam! "Big hairy female"?  You must have a real problem with women.

 

Well I thought we'er talking equality, if there are "big hairy males " as someone noted,  there must be big hairy females

 

Just wanted them to have equal billing.  I know  you got a thing for Molyneux,  Thanks makes me smile every time

I use him... 

[Kar3n]

4 minutes ago, gendao said:

I think if and when these posts are split off into their own threads, they need to be prefaced with a link specifying from where and how they were created by the mods from other threads.  Otherwise, it gives the false impression that someone is a lot more vested in some topic, than they really are...

 

At the top of the first post in the thread, it states, in red caps, that it was split from another topic.

[Taomeow]

2 minutes ago, Kar3n said:

 

At the top of the first post in the thread, it states, in red caps, that it was split from another topic.

 

But hardly anyone except the splitee notices anyway.  

[ralis]

6 minutes ago, windwalker said:

 

Well I thought we'er talking equality, if there are "big hairy males " as someone noted,  there must be big hairy females

 

Just wanted them to have equal billing.  I know  you got a thing for Molyneux,  Thanks makes me smile every time

I use him... 

 

You incessantly post Molyneux and Black Pigeon who are both known misogynists who blame the ills of the world on women. Obviously, you seem to be in agreement with their ideology, otherwise you would not be foolish enough to post such blather.

Edited November 17, 2017 by ralis