Recommended Posts

11 minutes ago, windwalker said:

 

sounds like you might want to spend some time with your self and figure out way this is so.

 

Very well. Now that you've completed your chastisement, correction, and instruction, and I've enabled you to regain your sense of authority and superiority do you think we could get back to the actual subject matter?

 

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, ilumairen said:

 

Very well. Now that you've completed your chastisement, correction, and instruction, and I've enabled you to regain your sense of authority and superiority do you think we could get back to the actual subject matter?

 

 

Good, 

 

feeling one is in control is good but can be misleading when you're not.

 

In answer to your question, no don't think so.

 

But you can create a safe space.

 

Helps to limit the conversation to what you want to hear instead of what you need to hear.

 

 

Edited by windwalker

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, windwalker said:

 

Good, 

 

feeling one is in control is good but can be misleading when you're not.

 

In answer to your question, no don't think so.

 

But you can create a safe space.

 

Helps to limit the conversation to what you want to hear instead of what you need to hear.

 

 

 

 

What exactly does she need to hear?

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, windwalker said:

 

Good, 

 

feeling one is in control is good but can be misleading when you're not.

 

In answer to your question, no don't think so.

 

But you can create a safe space.

 

Helps to limit the conversation to what you want to hear instead of what you need to hear.

 

 

Your posts in this thread are showing your patriarical conditioning. Do you see it? Or will this observation  just be viewed as an attack to fight back against also?

  • Thanks 2
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Pilgrim said:

Your posts in this thread are showing your patriarical conditioning. Do you see it? Or will this observation  just be viewed as an attack to fight back against also?

 

Quite contrary, here no one unless stated is anything,  just thoughts,  a conversation of mind. 

If you like some one telling you or accusing you of something in what some might call a passive aggressive mode.

 

Maybe its your thing donno...

 

Not mine.    

 

There were many ways she could have responded but chose one that both allowed her to be 

victim, and victor   

 

Its common....

 

Quote

Apech said : What exactly does she need to hear?

 

 

Maybe her self,   " I've enabled you to regain your sense of authority and superiority"

 

Maybe some here like being addressed in this way.   

seems to assume "she"  has some control over others or that others need

"her" to feel in control..

 

The only one, one has control of is oneself. 

The only one that can affect one, is ones self. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited by windwalker

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, windwalker said:

 

Quite contrary, here no one unless stated is anything,  just thoughts,  a conversation of mind. 

If you like some one telling you or accusing you of something in what some might call a passive aggressive mode.

 

Maybe its your thing donno...

 

Not mine.    

 

There were many ways she could have responded but chose one that both allowed her to be 

victim, and victor   

 

Its common....

 

 

 

Maybe her self,   " I've enabled you to regain your sense of authority and superiority"

 

Maybe some here like being addressed in this way.   

seems to assume "she"  has some control over others or that others need

"her" to feel in control..

 

The only one, one has control of is oneself. 

The only one that can affect one, is ones self. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

No passive aggressiveness at all an observation and a question and the reply says it all.

 

So are you ready to stop arguing and being the professional Internet forum board gotta win every discussion know everything  guy or not? 

 

I think she nailed it when she asked you what you are getting on about now :)  you are such a fighter !!! :) 

 

What is your personal view of what patriarchy is from the heart? from your life experience not another danged link to some article my goodness that has gone nowhere fast . I gave mine and I know darn good and well with your background you have shared you have one and I'll bet it is a strong view at that. 

 

For my part no judging either as I am convinced when it comes to this topic there is no complete consensus  I am asking windwalker  in a friendly serious way. 

 

Show me your Patriarchal conditioning as I have shown mine. What does has it meant to you personally what does it mean to you now?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Pilgrim said:

Show me your Patriarchal conditioning as I have shown mine. What does has it meant to you personally what does it mean to you now?

 

I think we look at this very differently. If you feel you've shown yours good on you.

 

My own views are innate , reflected in the natural world that we live in.

 

As such what the OP noted as a starting point I don't really agree with. 

 

Quote

the OP said :

 

As there seems to be much confusion around this word, I thought perhaps we could explore it to reach a better understanding together. 

 

We'll start the discussion with standard definitions, and a Wikipedia article, and expand as we see fit from there. 

 

 

 

There is no confusion about the word...It means what its been defined as.  

The confusion if any is the way the word is now used by some promoting an agenda 

 

as an example

 

" Sociologists tend to see patriarchy as a social product and not as an outcome of innate differences between the sexes and they focus attention on the way that gender roles in a society affect power differentials between men and women."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patriarchy

 

Would not agree with this and would question how anyone would or could arrive at such a conclusion that is not reflected in most of the natural world nor in the history of much of humankind. 

 

 Humans are born male and female  each based with innate abilities will tend to do and assume

different roles reflected of this.   In modern societies the roles become blurred in the "west" 

   

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, windwalker said:

 

I think we look at this very differently. If you feel you've shown yours good on you.

 

My own views are innate , reflected in the natural world that we live in.  

 

Yes they may very well be different.

 

I only value what is experiential to me all else is intellectual gibber jabber. 

 

Your own views which are innate, reflected in the natural world that we live in then? I refuse to discount your views out of hand what are they?

 

Remember when it comes to Daoism I am very much still a beginner learning as I go my natural  leanings are Hindu and Bon in nature.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Pilgrim said:

Your own views which are innate, reflected in the natural world that we live in then? I refuse to discount your views out of hand what are they?

 

 

Mu 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, windwalker said:

If you like some one telling you or accusing you of something in what some might call a passive aggressive mode.

 

Like this?

 

11 hours ago, windwalker said:

It seems as though an answer is really not wanted but nice write-up.

 

Quote

There were many ways she could have responded but chose one that both allowed her to be 

victim, and victor   

 

Its common....

 

As are personal attacks, when one is losing an argument. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I decided to look up the word patriarchy in an online dictionary.  Here´s the definition according to Meriam Webster (included below).  This is very much the same as Ilumairen included in the OP.  As with many words, there´s some wiggle room as far as what aspects of the definition we want to focus on: the idea of descent through the male line, the idea of men being in charge, etc.  Still, the meaning seems pretty clear to me.

 

Perhaps I haven´t been following the discussion well. Is there confusion or differences of opinion about the actual definition of the word?  If so, what´s the nature of the disagreement?

 

Definition of patriarchy

 

1: social organization marked by the supremacy of the father in the clan or family, the legal dependence of wives and children, and the reckoning of descent and inheritance in the male linebroadly : control by men of a disproportionately large share of power
2: a society or institution organized according to the principles or practices of patriarchy
 
 
 
 
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, ilumairen said:

 

Like this?

 

 

 

As are personal attacks, when one is losing an argument. 

 

try again, 

 

its not an argument,  if you feel it was  an "attack"  and personal 

maybe the net is not the place to be.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, liminal_luke said:

Perhaps I haven´t been following the discussion well. Is there confusion or differences of opinion about the actual definition of the word?  If so, what´s the nature of the disagreement?

 

 

The definition posted does not  cover the where the word came from 

which some other posters posted,  

 

"Patriarchy literally means "the rule of the father

 

"[6][7] and comes from the Greek πατριάρχης (patriarkhēs),[8] "father or chief of a race",[9] which is a compound of πατριά (patria), "lineage, descent"[10] (from πατήρ patēr, "father"[11]) and ἄρχω (arkhō), "rule, govern".[12]"

 

seems pretty benign

 

It is interesting in itself as many of the definitions seem to speak about power and control 

discounting that humans are composed of male and female each with a role to play in survival.

 

image.jpeg.d587625649cf8df5df1a3ffa186a86e5.jpeg

 

"Chimpanzee communities. Chimpanzees search for food communally when foraging or hunting prey. A group of males will chase, corner, and kill small monkeys for meat. ... Social groups consist of a dominant male, adult females and subordinate males and juveniles"

 

 

No one is arguing about the good, bad, or seems to be confused as to the what and why  this is so..

The genetic difference between Chimpanzees and humans is said to be around 1.2%

 

It would seem logical that many of  human social constructs would parallel what is  found 

in higher order of animals almost with out exception. 

 

"SPOTTED HYENA SOCIAL STRUCTURE. Spotted Hyena have an interesting social structure, in which the females are dominant over the males. They form clans when together, but are often seen alone.Apr 24, 2018"

image.jpeg.2092bf7efd8a1244cce6a750097d9f17.jpeg

 

Some might wonder why this is so..

The females are lager then the males.

 

In this case size does matter.

 

 

Edited by windwalker

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
21 hours ago, Apech said:

 

My view, rightly or wrongly, is a patriarchal system is system which holds and transmits authority through the 'fathers'.  So the way in which society is ordered and structured is primarily based on men.  I think that all historical examples which we have are like this and the product has been the civilisation that we have today.  My intuition about this is that this arose because of success in holding order in the face of the natural entropic tendency to decay, for things to fall into disorder.  The model provided and encoded in western culture is the king who sacrifices himself for the people - the Judeo-Christian model in other words.  This is recognition that having authority is not easy - it is a burden or responsibility which few can master.  In fact all historical examples fail eventually because the task is so hard.  Witness how dictators of which there are many examples quickly decay into paranoia, poor health and bizarre behaviour and decisions.  The institutions of western society have been developed to allow authority to be given with enough checks and balances to prevent tyranny.  Or that is the intent.  So we allow authority because it is necessary but limit it in time or in the extent to which it can be exercised.

 

First, thank you for the well thought out and presented post. 

 

Quote

It is true that the morsel that men have been handed traditionally for fitting themselves in a box is that they are at least the master of their own home and as such have authority over a woman.  Hence the origin of macho cultural stereotypes.  Along with this is the myth of 'power'.  bell hooks describes this as:

 

"Patriarchy is a political-social system that insists that males are inherently dominating, superior to everything and everyone deemed weak, especially females, and endowed with the right to dominate and rule over the weak and to maintain that dominance through various forms of psychological terrorism and violence."

 

But you have to compare this with the actuality that most men are not dominating anyone, they are working hard to survive and provide (through most of history) and that any use of 'terrorism and violence' is the exception not the norm.  If it were the norm then society itself would quickly break down into a rabied mess.  In fact the success of patriarchal societies is that they do not break down in this way and that any authority granted comes hand in hand with responsibility.

 

Not sure if answered your question though :)

 

I believe the author was including the beating she experienced as a child in her understanding of terrorism and violence, along with the fact that the story about the beating was often repeated, and in this, outwardly accepted by anyone hearing the story - lending credence to the idea of domination through psychological terrorism and violence. 

 

While considering this, I recalled a time when my friend's father called her name, and she replied, "yes?" without rising from our shared perch on the fireplace mantle. He was there in a moment, and she was dangling by her little arm as he repeatedly spanked her while I sat stunned. 

 

Then I recalled numerous stories shared by others regarding their fathers.. some of which included belts, some switches, and some just angry and punishing hands. 

 

From that point I started considering wife beating, and how long this was acceptable in the country in which I live.

 

From this perspective, the violence does seem to have been the norm, and seems to have been widely accepted.

 

I see that you touch on this a bit here:

 

21 hours ago, Apech said:

If you are an individual, man or woman, within a structured society then you will experience to a greater or lesser degree limitations placed on your personal freedom.  Compulsion to fulfil roles, to form particular relationships and so on enforced by church and state through spiritual and temporal law and social convention (which is mostly enforced through peer pressure and morality and so on) - and in this sense we all suffer since as individuals we may not feel happy or fulfilled by the box into which we are fitted.  So there is suffering and struggle brought about by the inhibition of energies which can become violent when they try to express themselves.   Particularly this violence may be directed towards those closest to you when you mistakenly feel that they are responsible for your feelings of discontent.  So even the perpetrator of domestic violence is in this sense a victim because they have been deposited by nature with unresolved internal energetic conflicts without the kind of educative help which could help them resolve their own conflicts.

 

It seems to me that it may have a great deal to do with indoctrination.

Edited by ilumairen

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

yeah well, I have never read about this topic, I meet it daily though.

 

so yes, in chimps the alfa male is the dominant one in the grup, in hyena's the female, because she's larger and thus stronger. In lions the ' alfamale' get fisrt choice at the food, but only the females do the hunting. So essentially he's a lazy bum.

 

to me, patriarchy has it roots in the simple fact that males are bigger and stronger then women so have the ability to beat women ( or their daughters) and rape them into submission. But as we are not chimps but humans we all have a seed of morality, in some larger then in others. So males tend to hide behind patriarchy being benign ( like the short period of dad/mom/kids and dad as sole provider. This I think was not only small in time but also just a portion of the population).

 

I do not say modern males do intentionally do this, but historically I observe that. We are all conditioned into thinking that males are the strong dominant good fathers, and the females the childish, irresponsible weak ones.

Well, just looking around everywhere this just does not click with reality.

 

On the piece of mud were I live, women have been sytematically denied the little freedom they had under the ' benevolent' influence of the very patriarch catholic church.

 

At least in this country, people were not that enthusiastic about ' being ' Christened' There's a legendary story from the North of my country where a missionary ( Bonifatius) has been killed. This guy reputedly chopped down a holy oak. The folks were not amused, they wanted to keep their own gods and goddesses. It took to around 1000 before the northern half of my county was christened. But they had to sneak it in slowly.

 

then around 1500 the hammer of the witches was written and brought into effect. The dutch wiki tells us this.

https://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heksenhamer

 

Quote

In the Malleus maleficarum more than hitherto was warned against the woman as the greatest danger. The woman would naturally be bad, weak and inferior. Furthermore, she would be disbelieving, ambitious, vindictive, domineering, and greedy. Despite her outward attraction, it was advisable to stay away from her because she would have an insatiable carnal desire. Witches preferred to work in the field of reproduction and sexuality.

 

This, to me, is about how a lot of men tend to think about women, and this is were it comes from.

 

For women and men alike it meant that the wisewoman of the village were arrested and killed. Wise in the ways of herbs, wise in the ways of relationships, in essence they were the medical doctors and psychologists of a village. They lost their doctor and were send to the monks with their aches and illnesses.

 

These women did midwifery, they helped women with childbirth, but also with how to get rid of unwanted children. This for a woman is of utmost importance. It's better to be able to feed the child you have then to loose them both because you get pregnant to soon. When too young or too old it's better to not be pregnant at all. Whether to have children or not ( or how many) has a causal relationship with the amount of freedom a woman has.

 

Church changed this. Around 1900 church told women that breastfeeding is sinful ( remember, women have insatiable desire and are inherently sinful)  and the kids should be fed animal milk, can you imagine the amount of dying children, the women who became pregnant again and again because they did not breastfeed. 

This was the result of male patriarchy, to the detriment of women and children, not benign at all.

 

church stepped in and handed the medical profession to the ( male) monks, the nuns in general were allowed to help but not to be practitioners them selves. By now that bastion is broken, but there is no balance yet, there still more male doctors then female doctors, and more female nurse then male nurses.

Medicins are tested out on males, but females are half of the population and react differently, guess how that comes about? our bodies are way more intricate then males because of that baby-bakery we carry around. Female bodies live in circles, every month again, were male bodies  live linear.

 

Due to the warped ideas that males have about females , females are taken less serious when they go to a doctor.

6 years ago I fell ill, a good friend of mine preceded me with that for about half a year, he was send to every sspecilasis there was, I was told that I probably had had too much stress, that i shuld take an antidepressivum and go see a therapist.

 

we had the exact same symptoms, and my case is not unique.

Know what MS is? Females are much more prone to get it then males, I think about 75% is female, it was called hysteric paralysis. 

females are hysteric ya know...

 

Now we have HIV, AIDS, its about solved by now, hey...that's an illness were primarily men were ill at first, and then prostitutes, so there were clear male interests there. It is more or less solved. 

 

Now ME ( myalgic encefalomyelitis) which was around the bock long before HIV stuck up its head. Primarily females are falling ill with this, just as with MS. And they get send to psychiatrist and told they should do more. Even though research clearly shows that there are many bodily dysfunctions that make these patients unable to do that. If such a patients believe doctor and starts to ' do more' they almost invariably fall back to bedridden for years , sometimes for the rest of their lives

 

Well...there is not much interest in this illness, even though patients are more ill then MS patients, their suffering is unbelievable. There goes more research money to find a solution to male baldness then to millions of people laying in bed, unable to move, to read, to endure light or sound, sometimes tube fed, in the dark. 

 

patriarchy pushes women into kitchen and kids, there not allowed to be anything else, and it is those remnants that are still around everywhere in western world that get women fed up with patriarchy. 

Take a look at several Muslim countries, that is patriarchy in it's pure form, and if we do not keep up fighting, western world will revert to that, i will fight against that as long as I live.

 

I am not a girl, I am a human endowed with just as much knowledge, morality and compassion as a man.

two differences, I can have a baby, you cannot. You can ( if you're up to it) do heavier physical work then I can

 

so what...lets work together, do away with these historically construed conflicts.

 

to me, the way in life is about balance, in my own body and life, and in relationship with others. As long as men belittle me, act as if I'm a child, not able to live my life independently, as long as that exists, there is no balance.

 

 

 

 

 

 

  • Thanks 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
16 minutes ago, blue eyed snake said:

On the piece of mud were I live, women have been sytematically denied the little freedom they had under the ' benevolent' influence of the very patriarch catholic church.

 

Wonder how you would feel had you grown up muslim in one of their little pieces of mud. 

My mistake I see you have

 

Quote

Take a look at several Muslim countries, that is patriarchy in it's pure form, and if we do not keep up fighting, western world will revert to that, i will fight against that as long as I live.

 

Your fight seems to be from a place where you have the most freedoms historically assuming your female

it would be better to go there and fight....better yet help those females who follow it in the US free themselves. from it.   You do, do that right...

 

16 minutes ago, blue eyed snake said:

so yes, in chimps the alfa male is the dominant one in the grup, in hyena's the female, because she's larger and thus stronger. In lions the ' alfamale' get fisrt choice at the food, but only the females do the hunting. So essentially he's a lazy bum.

 

 

A human assigning value to what animals do or not. 

Its called survival of the fittest .  Unfortunately something that some dont seem to understand directly. 

 

In directly its manfasted in who and what many females look for in a mate. 

Edited by windwalker

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, blue eyed snake said:

I am not a girl, I am a human endowed with just as much knowledge, morality and compassion as a man.

two differences, I can have a baby, you cannot. You can ( if you're up to it) do heavier physical work then I can

 

so what...lets work together, do away with these historically construed conflicts.

 

to me, the way in life is about balance, in my own body and life, and in relationship with others. As long as men belittle me, act as if I'm a child, not able to live my life independently, as long as that exists, there is no balance.

 

 

 

 

As was mentioned look at the etymology of the word.  Understand the time 

and understand now that this word is being used by those who seem to be confused about themselves.

 

mmm,  we want to be human and want to do away the historically construed conflicts. 

 

I wonder.. who this we always is that many use when its only them posting

 

"At the 2016 Rio Olympics, Semenya won the gold medal in the 800 meters, and things got ugly. Some of her competitors complained that she's not a "real" woman: Scottish Olympian Lynsey Sharp, who finished sixth, she said there were "two separate races."

 

care to talk about what a "real" woman is?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, blue eyed snake said:

then around 1500 the hammer of the witches was written and brought into effect. The dutch wiki tells us this.

https://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heksenhamer

 

30 minutes ago, blue eyed snake said:

 

This, to me, is about how a lot of men tend to think about women, and this is were it comes from.

 

For women and men alike it meant that the wisewoman of the village were arrested and killed. Wise in the ways of herbs, wise in the ways of relationships, in essence they were the medical doctors and psychologists of a village. They lost their doctor and were send to the monks with their aches and illnesses.

 

This was indeed, a great loss. 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, ilumairen said:

Do you hunt your own food @windwalker, or do you walk into a grocery store?

 

 

Do you enjoy sex or  feel its only for procreation .

Its the same question. 

 

Humans are considered to be tripartite beings 

" body, spirit, and soul."

 

In most spiritual practices this is acknowledged in different ways, the object being to 

understand it,  freeing ones self from it...Humans are part of the animal kingdom 

and come wired with all of its inner instincts. 

 

Not to acknowledge this at some  point often leads to confusion. 

 

Quote

This, to me, is about how a lot of men tend to think about women, and this is were it comes from

 

as shown here by asking were does it come from should be obvious....

 

Edited by windwalker

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, windwalker said:

I wonder.. who this we always is that many use when its only them posting

 

:makes a cup of tea, serves it to @blue eyed snake, and sits by her side:

 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
59 minutes ago, windwalker said:

Do you enjoy sex or  feel its only for procreation .

Its the same question. 

 

Interesting, I was just looking at the American wiki page on the Hammer of the Witches.

 

There was this about the author:


 

Quote

Kramer wrote the Malleus following his expulsion from Innsbruck by the local bishop, due to charges of illegal behavior against Kramer himself, and because of Kramer's obsession with the sexual habits of one of the accused, Helena Scheuberin, which led the other tribunal members to suspend the trial.[26]

 

 

 

Quote

 

Humans are considered to be tripartite beings 

" body, spirit, and soul."

 

In most spiritual practices this is acknowledged in different ways, the object being to 

understand it,  freeing ones self from it...Humans are part of the animal kingdom 

and come wired with all of its inner instincts. 

 

Not to acknowledge this at some  point often leads to confusion. 

 

Unless you were a medicine woman during the time of the witch trials. At that point in time such understanding and connection became a death sentence. 

 

Quote

 

as shown here by asking were does it come from should be obvious....

 

 

The Hammer of the Witches sites multiple sources:

 

Quote

The treatise often makes references to the Bible and Aristotelian thought, and it is heavily influenced by the philosophical tenets of Neoplatonism.[86] The first section of the book's main text is written using the scholastic methodology of Thomas Aquinascharacterized by a mode of disputed questions most notably used in his Summa Theologica. It was a standard mode of argumentation in scholastic discourse with a long tradition.[87][88] Most of the citations in the Malleus come from multiple works of Aquinas, a highly influential author in theology. Aquinas is a main source for Section I but is cited in all sections; Formicarius by Johannes Nider is the important source for Section II, and Directorium Inquisitorum by Spanish inquisitor Nicholas Eymericis a crucial source for Section III.[89]

 

Edited by ilumairen

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, windwalker said:

 

 

As was mentioned look at the etymology of the word.  Understand the time 

 

times have changed

 

29 minutes ago, windwalker said:

and understand now that this word is being used by those who seem to be confused about themselves.

 

here you tell me I'm confused about myself, I'm not. ( that's typical male dominance  behavior  that you're displaying here :D)

 

 

29 minutes ago, windwalker said:

 

mmm,  we want to be human and want to do away the historically construed conflicts. 

 

nope, I am human, and my essential humanity, or better, the essential humanity of women is denied them.

 

29 minutes ago, windwalker said:

 

I wonder.. who this we always is that many use when its only them posting

 

easy, that half of humanity that gets born with a baby bakery.

 

29 minutes ago, windwalker said:

 

"At the 2016 Rio Olympics, Semenya won the gold medal in the 800 meters, and things got ugly. Some of her competitors complained that she's not a "real" woman: Scottish Olympian Lynsey Sharp, who finished sixth, she said there were "two separate races."

 

that's beside the point.

I was talking about the place in society of women in general, your picking out something that is not relevant thereby trying to divert me.

 

29 minutes ago, windwalker said:

 

care to talk about what a "real" woman is?

 

nope, not with you.

but I know I am

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, ilumairen said:

Interesting, I was just looking at the American wiki page on the Hammer of the Witches.

 

I find what's interesting is that we're in a time and a place where women have the most freedom and opportunity to that historically they've ever had.

 

Many of them argue from a place the US where there's really not much to argue about.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites