The answer to peace on Earth is being confined to remote places sparsely located across the globe. I believe the new goal of feminism should be to halt capitalist industrial development and spearhead a movement toward matriarchal global takeover.
Oh yeah, I said it. Matriarchal global takeover.
And I’m not kidding.
Look around the world and ponder on how far we’ve come under male rule. For millennia, elite men have been telling marginalized non-elite men what to do, what not to do, what to think, how to feel, what’s acceptable, what’s not, who to be, what to wear, what to believe. the list goes on, into every aspect of life.
This is the masculine way: You listen to me, and I won’t listen to you. And it’s great for a precious little fraction of the world that is the “elite,” but for a vast majority of the world, it isn’t fair. I use capitalism as my example of exploitation because it is applicable to all people. It is the “masculine” Global North, with all its industry and domination; and it is the “feminine” Global South, with its agriculture and exploitation. The masculine Global North thinks it knows what’s best for the feminine Global South, but it doesn’t. The two are completely different. It doesn’t have the understanding to implement a system that works for it onto the feminine Global South.
Modernity today often connotes the result of progressive movements toward democracy, capitalist industrial development, mitigation of wealth disparities and gender, class and racial equality. But what I find interesting is the under-the-radar government discontent, labor exploitation, growing wealth disparities and social inequalities present in “modern” societies, like the U.S.
I cannot help but look at the ideological foundation of these problems. In the case of the U.S., I refer to patriarchy. The most potent connotation of modernity is economic. It is often thought that capitalism and its compliment — democracy — are the basis of all other social improvements. Social improvements mean education for all, which means opportunity for all. But within the framework of patriarchy, these things come at a cost to women.
This cannot be clearly understood without looking at the concept of matriarchal societies, most notably found in non-developed areas around the world, such as the Mosuo civilization in Southwest China, the Igbo people of Nigeria, pre-colonial Cherokees of North America and the Minangkabau peoples of Indonesia.
Study of these societies reveals that the modern economics and democracy of America are not necessarily the answers to gender equality. It is important to look at the discrimination still faced by women in the U.S., both culturally and in their careers at the hands of men. While women in the Mosuo, Igbo, Cherokee and Minangkabau societies have specific roles and duties, these are not dictated by their inferiority to men, while in Western patriarchal society this has always been the case (whether admitted or not, it is clearly evident).
These societies are founded on a system of balance and cooperation between the essential-to-life male and female, which often results in more peaceful relations in the society. This is because “these patterns are not just a reversal of patriarchy, with women somehow ruling over men — as the usual misinterpretation would have it — rather they are … gender-egalitarian societies, and in many cases fully egalitarian societies” (“Matriarchies as Societies of Peace: Rethinking Matriarchy”).
Complete egalitarianism is antipodal to capitalism, which survives by exploitation. This is the underlying difference between patriarchal and matriarchal societies: The former is based on hierarchical structures, the latter on mutual cooperation and harmony. If ideals create systems, then it is clear that masculine ideals are competitively based; it is a race to the top, and the stairs are the heads and shoulders of other people. Feminine ideal, as reflected in all matriarchal societies’ economic and political systems, is interdependence, recognizing that each part is needed and holds value.
The masculine-feminine symbolism is ubiquitous. And in all cases, the female perspective is left out. There is no attempt at mutual understanding on the side of the male. And furthermore, there is no genuine taking into account that the two genders are different.
Let me say that again, they are different. They don’t just have different formulas, they have different kinds of numbers. Before any man tries to tell any woman what to do, he needs to find that Rosetta Stone of male and female languages and translate. Thousands of years of failing to do that has resulted in a world based on disgusting hierarchies.
The Oklahoma Daily is pleased to provide you the opportunity to share your thoughts about this article. We encourage lively debate on the issues of the day, but we ask you refrain from using profanity or other offensive speech, engaging in personal attacks or name-calling, posting advertising, or straying from the topic at hand. To comment, you must be a registered user of OUDaily.com. Thanks for taking the time to offer your thoughts.
You must be logged in to leave a comment. Log in | Register
Chris_Robertson 2 years, 1 month ago
@Mattg
Hahaha! Awesome. Man-date it is then. Look me up on facebook under OU graduate student.
Regards, Chris Robertson
zbdy 2 years, 1 month ago
you've got to love letters majors. why not just write a marxist screed and get it over with? that's all you're advocating in so many unnecessary words. and i've got some bad news for you: as technology becomes increasingly sophisticated and crucial for everyday life, our society moves closer to becoming a technocracy. and who will the technocrats be? men. why? just look at any engineering program. where are the women? science is overwhelmingly dominated by men; this is an objective fact. this isn't some mere anomaly either: mathematical and scientific thought is inherently a masculine activity. exceptions are largely irrelevant, and only validate this truth. so while women such as yourself waste your time writing little polemics about how crucial it is to overthrow the patriarchal structure, you fail to realize that you're in fact moving yourself farther from this goal. how ironic that your leisurely liberal arts education makes you feel somehow "empowered" by enabling you to write these articles, while the one thing that is actually relevant to power in today's society is largely abandoned by women.
TheTroll 2 years, 1 month ago
Stick to bringing me sandwiches!
brandeis 2 years, 1 month ago
This was sure a roundabout way to say 'I don't really mean matriarchy.' Modern feminism's main hangup is this mystification of the idealized feminine essence. Oh, I'm not just a woman, I'm a living instance of the life energy of the mother Gaia, and I represent her force and the egos of all my female predecessors. Sounds more like Dune than scholarship.
Capitalism will not be ended by anything having to do specifically with women. Capitalism is generated by class interests that engage exploitation, and it does not seem to me like capitalism is feeding on the blood if innocent wealthy women here. The greatest divide among people is class, not gender, and it will always come first. To focus ones energy on creating a society that is not really a matriarchy but rather gender-equal is a little bizarre as it presumes that once we all agree on some byzantine calculus that ascribes us 'worth' based on our 'roles', then class elitism will fall apart. I mean what is that? Where does that come from?
But to give you a cool picture of a society that calls itself matriarchal, review the Jews. Their inheritance is matrilineal, their women are considered morally superior, women have different but very important roles; it is, in fact, the mother of the house who leads prayer on the Sabbath day.
Still gotta be a virgin when you get married though. Can't get everything you want. When you say 'different but equal roles' you have to admit you're betting on picking and choosing the parameters of those roles, which is utterly ridiculous unless you're planning on colonizing your own planet.
SupremecyofNature 2 years, 1 month ago
Hierarchy is natural, whether the given population is patriarchal or matriarchal. From animals to bacteria to viruses, competition is fundamental to life. Let’s not forget that we are animals too, and thus follow this most fundamental natural law. Patriarchies do in fact recognize each part of the system, but go a step further and utilize their logic (whether justified or not) to prioritize, hence the hierarchy. Most feminist/matriarchal missions in the past have been spearheaded by monotheistic religions and principles, specifically Christianity. And that is where your proposal falls on its face. These religions, while promoting egalitarian unity and love, are inherently patriarchal. It boils down to feminine idealism, which is flabby and weak in reality, versus male pragmatism, unapologetic and strong. It is also practical. Whether you call it exploitation or competition, denying these FACTS will get you nowhere at best and annihilated at worst. For people grounded in reality, the second that weak idealism starts to control actions is typically when a pragmatist comes around and squashes them. Just look at bill O’Reilly. He is totally insane but his strength and pragmatism allows him to dominate a discussion because he doesn’t fall to idealistic notions of peace and unity. He is very much an animal, embracing his own true human nature.
zdl 2 years, 1 month ago
No halfway decent, rational human being opposes equal pay, equal rights and equal education for women. Those are goals, but matriarchal takeover is fantasy. How exactly would the "elite male" ever consent to this revolt? Sure, it's nice to sit back and relax and engage your inner feminist spirit, but writing articles like these only incites laughter, not progress. Perceiving the world solely through feminism's myopia only makes you another ideologue, lemmings that will soon fall off the cliff along with their grand formulations. The world isn't fair and problems don't have an easy fix.
Chris_Robertson 2 years, 1 month ago
"Complete egalitarianism is antipodal to capitalism, which survives by exploitation."
I'm sorry, but in what reality has an "egalitarian" society ever existed without the pretense of coercion, force, and exploitation? Even in places where collectivism was practiced without dictatorship, like the Israeli Kibbutzim, are moving towards pro-market systems of organization. Global capitalism has been a boon to women in third world countries by helping them become entrepreneurs and work themselves out of poverty.
You damn your own argument by citing pre-modern, undeveloped societies with some degree of matriarchal organization. Pre-industrial, pre-modern life was "nasty, brutish, and short," and is nothing to aspire to or look to as an example of how society should be organized. Regardless of your politics, it is naive to look around you and deny the incredible standard of living and political equality that we enjoy in our modern age thanks to capitalism and democracy.
Regards, Chris Robertson
William 2 years, 1 month ago
Feminism is a good and important thing. But it is this sexist, self-glorifying, prideful, belligerent feminism that I can't understand.
The elitism and hierarchies of the world cannot be attributed to manhood. They are attributed to poor qualities that all humans share equally. If you want to be a true soldier against sexism, be willing to admit that fact.
You have literally had the audacity to state that because men are responsible for patriarchy, and because corrupted societies have been patriarchal, that men are responsible for corrupted societies. That is inconsequential and just downright dumb.
Sexism happens when someone, often blind to their own double-dealing ego, has a mental block of ANY KIND that only leads to degradation of the opposite sex.
You have done so here, and with an overly justifying banner of feminism you have exalted your own sex above the other. You are doing exactly what women gathered under feminism in the first place to fight against.
I don't think that by lowering yourself to the level of a misogynist male you are going to achieve the equality we are looking for.
Think about the hypocrisy in your thinking. This imperfect society does indeed put you in a harder place as a woman, but don't be taken by militant, uncontrolled thought if you wish not to perpetuate the very problems that give feminism a reason to exist.
thegerman41 2 years, 1 month ago
Make your own damn sandwiches..
KM656 2 years, 1 month ago
One more column by this freshman, demonstrating her stupidity.
mattg 2 years, 1 month ago
Chris Robertson with intelligent comments again! Can we go on a man-date sometime?
Zbdy, you are half-correct. Technocracy has always existed in a global sense; the Conquistadores had guns and beat the Native Americans, Romans had aqueducts and were able to produce enough food to sustain a large city-state full of artisans, etc. However, calling this a male activity is absurd. I will not even bother to refute your argument regarding men doing math while women are artsy; neither of us have conclusive evidence, because it doesn't exist.
Engineering is "design and building for the purpose of making people's lives better." Consider design: that is a creative, "artsy" activity. Yes, you have to be able to do math, but that's why calculators were invented; math ceases to be an issue once you grasp an elementary conception of it. So women clearly have a place in engineering, even under your framework. Should Brooke give up her letters major, and become an engineer? Yes, she might actually learn things about reality that the College of Arts and Sciences will never be able to teach her. She might actually be a part of the solution to equal rights, rather than a mere annoyance and a bit of laughter. She might advance the human condition, instead of insulting it. She seems like she'd be a great engineer, especially with her motivation to represent women. Of course, hopefully she'll realize, after spending time outside of the groupthink cocoon that is the liberal arts program, that life isn't a middle school dance, with boys on one side and girls on the other.
tl;dr: you fought for Stalin, I fought for freedom.
zbdy 2 years, 1 month ago
mattg: I disagree with your claim that "neither of us have conclusive evidence, because it doesn't exist". There is more than enough empirical evidence which shows that contemporary math and science are very much male dominated. Look up some research on the issue. Given that this is a fact, I am merely saying that women will do better for themselves by "feminizing technology", if you will, rather than becoming letters majors and advocating nebulous theories like "matriarchal global takeover" with no actual solutions or insights beyond "Hey dudes the world sucks and is patriarchal therefore patriarchy causes the world to suck, let's have matriarchy instead." Again, technology is a significant key to power in the modern world, and if it is left abandoned by women then I see little hope of women being able to make a real difference in reducing the inequality.
mattg 2 years, 1 month ago
My apologies, zbdy. I thought that the gist of your comment was that women can't succeed in science whatsoever, due to a lack of mental facility. That there are not many females in the sciences and engineering is empirically true, but they do not lack the ability because of their x chromosomes. I've just heard that way too many times, so I jumped to refute it instead of reading your comment closely. But still, a key difference exists in that you say that the key to power is to be a scientist, and she says that the key to power is to not try and hold power over another (correct me if I'm wrong). I say that one of those is not moral and that the other is not feasible, and the only thing you can do is try to help your fellow man or woman in whatever way you can. The best way to accomplish this is not by writing pointless manifestos, but by engineering solutions to the world's problems. You can't fix governments or human nature, but you can get drinkable water to rural Africa, or an efficent power grid, or effective retrovirals. And the elimination of want and suffering through engineering solutions will do more for equality and freedom than any political leader ever will. Remember, the Renaissance didn't start because of politicians, but because of scientific progress in agriculture.
Chris, Your lack of differentiation between "date" and "man-date" is disturbing my narrow-minded heteronormative worldview. Please stop before I thump my bible at you and make you drink lots of alcohol and sleep with random women or whatever it is I'm supposed to do as a racist frat guy (I forgot, but I promise to go check and see if I left my bigotry manual in the pocket of my other frat gear).
Chris_Robertson 2 years, 1 month ago
@Mattg
Only if you bring me flowers. ;)
Regards, Chris Robertson
PhilDirt 2 years ago
I don't know about all that matriarchal mumbo-jumbo, but I do know that this chick is hot!