"Society's Bias Against Motherhood Is Creating a New Problem"

[Lark]

I think what's happening is that women wait longer to have children, to pursue career and other goals. As a result, when they do want to have children, they are not as fertile as they were in their twenties and so end up having to spend quite a bit of time, effort, and money trying to have children. So, the time spent working hard earlier on in their younger adulthood to become successful and established in jobs or careers, is the same thing that seems to have kept them from making a decision earlier that would not be as risky. Now, as they try to get pregnant so they can raise a family, that want is compromised by a bio time table they can't control. Fact is women don't have the same opportunity as men to be able to have kids going into their 60s, 70s+. And if they do have kids, their jobs are sometimes inflexible and put them in positions of constant compromise where they are having to make regular decisions to choose one at the expense of the other.

Everyone has to make choices and the work-life balance is extremely hard to strike, especially in some walks of life or careers were there is a culture of prioritising work and being a workaholic rather than prioritising family. The Nic Cage movie The Family Man was entirely about this.

I dont think that women are unfairly discriminated against in this respect, I think there are countires which perform better in terms of maternity and paternity leave than others but those same countries do not have a history of those things being abused or misused to the point were the abuse or possibility of abuse result in political pressure for those sorts of things to be withdrawn or for their becoming ineligible for anyone.

The whole waiting "too long" idea has been dealt with well in a TED talk entitled the twenties are not the new thirties or something along those lines.

 

[Gaze]

Everyone has to make choices and the work-life balance is extremely hard to strike, especially in some walks of life or careers were there is a culture of prioritising work and being a workaholic rather than prioritising family. The Nic Cage movie The Family Man was entirely about this.

I dont think that women are unfairly discriminated against in this respect, I think there are countires which perform better in terms of maternity and paternity leave than others but those same countries do not have a history of those things being abused or misused to the point were the abuse or possibility of abuse result in political pressure for those sorts of things to be withdrawn or for their becoming ineligible for anyone.

The whole waiting "too long" idea has been dealt with well in a TED talk entitled the twenties are not the new thirties or something along those lines.

The problem is not that we know it, regardless of being made aware in a TED Talk or otherwise. The problem is that we still believe or buy into the narrative that it's better to wait, because we will have more money, independence, stability, maturity, etc. so we accept the reasoning because it seems to make sense that waiting is better because we will have better monetary and social support later on. We often forget that the availability of options for choices are just as relevant as the choice itself. Having more later doesn't mean the opportunities will be available later on. Women are discriminated against in this respect. It's not all in their minds, so to speak. Regardless of maternity or paternity leave options being available, our world still believes that a women's primary reason for being is motherhood or family care. Once she has children, she's told this should be her priority. For men, that's still not necessarily the case. Men clearly have their own struggles to handle as fathers in managing the professional and family expectations but they are still more likely allowed to be just men, while a woman becomes mostly a mother once she has child. I think that difference in perception is still dominant in our culture even if it's not as strongly enforced as it used to be.

 

[muir]

I read a newspaper article recently that said that women are burdened with more of the house chores than men

I thought about that and came to the conclusion that men often do more physical work than women which would mean they are probabaly more physically tired in the evening

For example in a couple where both partners work an 8 hour day but the woman sits at a desk all day while the man is a builder who builds houses and is on his feet all day lifting heavy things then should they both then do the same amount of house chores?

For those that say 'yes' to that question what about the role both of those people play in wider society

Building houses is vital work for society

Many men do vital physical work for example farming, building, repairs, supplying water and energy

Is their contribution taken into account by feminists? Do feminists recongise that men take an unequal physical burden in the providing of the essentials of life for society?

Or would feminists prefer just to sweep stuff like that under the carpet?

Perhaps we should swap around and women can do the physical work AND half of the house chores...sound good?

 

[ZenCat]

Rather than label the problem patriarchy which gives the impression that it's a male vs. female thing, I think people are more likely to get involved and work with others to address this more favorably if seen from the perspective of equal rights and fairness.

To clarify, I'm using the word "patriarchy" not as an insult to males or as a male vs female thing. I'm using it as the descriptor of a system that is in place throughout the world, and has been in place for a very, very long time. The International Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences states that "patriarchy is nearly universally prevalent". http://www.encyclopedia.com/topic/Patriarchy.aspx

In order to effect positive changes to a system, I think it is valuable to first understand the system, and not recoil from it - or the word that has been assigned to describe it - without first taking the time to understand it and see where and how it can be positively changed - by both men and women - to improve the lives of both. If not in our own generation, than for future ones.

 

[muir]

To clarify, I'm using the word "patriarchy" not as an insult to males or as a male vs female thing. I'm using it as the descriptor of a system that is in place throughout the world, and has been in place for a very, very long time. The International Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences states that "patriarchy is nearly universally prevalent". http://www.encyclopedia.com/topic/Patriarchy.aspx

In order to effect positive changes to a system, I think it is valuable to first understand the system, and not recoil from it - or the word that has been assigned to describe it - without first taking the time to understand it and see where and how it can be positively changed - by both men and women - to improve the lives of both. If not in our own generation, than for future ones.

Thats great...i also most definately agree that to effect positive change we first need to unerstand the system and i think i could reasonably say that i have put a lot of effort into doing that

So....what is the patriarchy?

Who are the patriarchs?

But as an aside using the word 'patriarchy' will instantly put many men on the defencive cos it sounds like you're talking about men in general

if you're not talking about men...who are you talking about?

have you ever seen the film ''all the presidents men'' about the two journalists who exposed nixons involvment in watergate?

Their source on the inside advised them to ''follow the money'' to find out who was doing what

So when we fiollow the money in the world...what do we find out?

 

[Gaze]

To clarify, I'm using the word "patriarchy" not as an insult to males or as a male vs female thing. I'm using it as the descriptor of a system that is in place throughout the world, and has been in place for a very, very long time. The International Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences states that "patriarchy is nearly universally prevalent". http://www.encyclopedia.com/topic/Patriarchy.aspx

In order to effect positive changes to a system, I think it is valuable to first understand the system, and not recoil from it - or the word that has been assigned to describe it - without first taking the time to understand it and see where and how it can be positively changed - by both men and women - to improve the lives of both. If not in our own generation, than for future ones.

Thing is, language matters. And the language we use can often divide rather than unite. So, when the word patriarchy is brought up, it suggests that the fight is still about a male vs. female system of doing things which is problematic. Reusing these terms is making people think the issue is always going to come down to gender mostly or only, and ignore the other aspects of the problem which are obscured by spending so much time emphasizing gender at the expense of everything else. This is why I was suggesting that patriarchy may not be a good word to move the discussion along, because it implies a one-sided view of male=victor, female=victim. Regardless of it's intended meaning as a systematic way of thinking prevalent throughout the world, it still implies that gender division. Despite it's meaning, it's the use and impression of the word that people are more likely to think about and respond to.

 

[ZenCat]

So....what is the patriarchy?

Who are the patriarchs?

Click the link I posted, muir. It is a description of Patriarchy from the International Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences, which was first published in 1968 and contains seventeen volumes and thousands of entries written by scholars around the world. So, not just my opinion of what the patriarchy is, but what of thousands of scholars around the world agree that it is.

 

[ZenCat]

What would be a better - and equally accurate - word to use?

 

[muir]

Thing is, language matters. And the language we use can often divide rather than unite. So, when the word patriarchy is brought up, it suggests that the fight is still about a male vs. female system of doing things which is problematic. Reusing these terms is making people think the issue is always going to come down to gender mostly or only, and ignore the other aspects of the problem which are obscured by spending so much time emphasizing gender at the expense of everything else. This is why I was suggesting that patriarchy may not be a good word to move the discussion along, because it implies a one-sided view of male=victor, female=victim. Regardless of it's intended meaning as a systematic way of thinking prevalent throughout the world, it still implies that gender division. Despite it's meaning, it's the use and impression of the word that people are more likely to think about and respond to.

You're absolutely right...that is the effect of the word and that effect is exactly the effect the creators of the word 'patriarchy' were trying to create

They wanted to break down the fabric of society by destroying the nuclear family and by turning women againt men and it worked

Many women now seem to blame men for all their problems whether historic or current but history tells another story; history tells a story of men being enslaved alongside women

 

[muir]

What would be a better - and equally accurate - word to use?

That's the million dollar question!

Most of my posts here are geared towards determining exactly that!

because to understand that is to understand where it all comes from

 

[sprinkles]

Thing is, language matters. And the language we use can often divide rather than unite. So, when the word patriarchy is brought up, it suggests that the fight is still about a male vs. female system of doing things which is problematic. Reusing these terms is making people think the issue is always going to come down to gender mostly or only, and ignore the other aspects of the problem which are obscured by spending so much time emphasizing gender at the expense of everything else. This is why I was suggesting that patriarchy may not be a good word to move the discussion along, because it implies a one-sided view of male=victor, female=victim. Regardless of it's intended meaning as a systematic way of thinking prevalent throughout the world, it still implies that gender division. Despite it's meaning, it's the use and impression of the word that people are more likely to think about and respond to.

I'm sorry but I don't think that confusion is legitimate. I think it is mainly perpetuated by people who simply want to be difficult.

Patriarchy is more about who happens to be in power than it is about gender in general. I mean nobody is confused about what an oligarchy is, are they? If people can understand that word, I believe they can manage to correctly understand patriarchy - understand the fact that it does not actually mean "all men are scum" - and the reason many don't seem to understand it seems to be that they just want to be difficult and willfully stupid.

 

[muir]

To clarify, I'm using the word "patriarchy" not as an insult to males or as a male vs female thing. I'm using it as the descriptor of a system that is in place throughout the world, and has been in place for a very, very long time. The International Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences states that "patriarchy is nearly universally prevalent". http://www.encyclopedia.com/topic/Patriarchy.aspx

In order to effect positive changes to a system, I think it is valuable to first understand the system, and not recoil from it - or the word that has been assigned to describe it - without first taking the time to understand it and see where and how it can be positively changed - by both men and women - to improve the lives of both. If not in our own generation, than for future ones.

I think the fact that article comes from the 60's during the marxist hijaking of female emancipation is very telling

patriarchy....patriarch...patri-arch

Arch-on...archon

 

[Gaze]

I'm sorry but I don't think that confusion is legitimate. I think it is mainly perpetuated by people who simply want to be difficult.

Patriarchy is more about who happens to be in power than it is about gender in general. I mean nobody is confused about what an oligarchy is, are they? If people can understand that word, I believe they can manage to correctly understand patriarchy - understand the fact that it does not actually mean "all men are scum" - and the reason many don't seem to understand it seems to be that they just want to be difficult and willfully stupid.

It's not always about what a word means but the way it is used. If over a period of time, a word has particular connotations that evolve beyond it's original or intended meaning, people will come to identify the word with the associations that people have created from the most constant and persistent use of a word.

 

[sprinkles]

It's not always about what a word means but the way it is used. If over a period of time, a word has particular connotations that evolve beyond it's original or intended meaning, people will come to identify the word with the associations that people have created from the most constant and persistent use of a word.

Yeah I understand that. The thing is that what the word describes actually exists, so what are we supposed to do now that the correct word has been misappropriated, but the thing it was meant to describe is still a thing?

How do we talk about it in cases when that really is the issue? Do we come up with a new word to describe the same thing or do we just ignore it because we're not allowed to talk about it because people are too sensitive?

 

[ZenCat]

“Fear of a name increases fear of the thing itself.” ~ J.K. Rowling

 

[Lark]

The problem is not that we know it, regardless of being made aware in a TED Talk or otherwise. The problem is that we still believe or buy into the narrative that it's better to wait, because we will have more money, independence, stability, maturity, etc. so we accept the reasoning because it seems to make sense that waiting is better because we will have better monetary and social support later on. We often forget that the availability of options for choices are just as relevant as the choice itself. Having more later doesn't mean the opportunities will be available later on. Women are discriminated against in this respect. It's not all in their minds, so to speak. Regardless of maternity or paternity leave options being available, our world still believes that a women's primary reason for being is motherhood or family care. Once she has children, she's told this should be her priority. For men, that's still not necessarily the case. Men clearly have their own struggles to handle as fathers in managing the professional and family expectations but they are still more likely allowed to be just men, while a woman becomes mostly a mother once she has child. I think that difference in perception is still dominant in our culture even if it's not as strongly enforced as it used to be.

How many men in your immediate social circle have told you this or said anything to that effect? Is it a view which your dad, brother, cousin would express?

Its not my view, its not the view of any men I know, none of my friends, none of my family would express those opinions or hold them in private. I suspect that maybe one or two would have opinions about the possibility of men being trapped into paternity suits or losing paternity or unplanned pregnancies but ultimately every one of them would say that its an irrevocable responsibility regardless of gender.

The paramountcy of the child idea is one I'm fine with, I'm a social worker though and see on a regular basis how much lip service it receives, of even those who say they take it seriously its hard to see how they put it into practice sometimes.

I dont think its about maturity or anything like that, there's still plenty of accidential pregnancies in tha hood, so its probably professionals we are talking about here and I'd say that most of the time the reasons professionals would give are more about real evaluations of their wealth, which might be coming up short when it comes to looking after themselves let alone kids.

 

[Gaze]

How do we talk about it in cases when that really is the issue? Do we come up with a new word to describe the same thing or do we just ignore it because we're not allowed to talk about it because people are too sensitive?

This doesn't mean we shouldn't work to address the issue if it is gender stereotypical dominance and sexism. However, if we keep sticking to using words which signify a particular gender as the origin of the problem, as a word such as patre which means father indicates, then there's no end to the creation of new systems of domination such as "feminarchy" (http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Feminarchy), a system of power that privileges domination by women throughout history. The problem I am trying to address is the tendency to see the problem as located in a particular group such as one gender rather than a system of belief which can be present in any gender. Women are just as capable of demonstrating unrestrained dominance and control which is not fair. They are not always and only victims. It just happens that in our particular world, they have been more the victims than victors because of the devaluing of particular differences in women vs. men.

 

[Gaze]

How many men in your immediate social circle have told you this or said anything to that effect? Is it a view which your dad, brother, cousin would express?

Its not my view, its not the view of any men I know, none of my friends, none of my family would express those opinions or hold them in private. I suspect that maybe one or two would have opinions about the possibility of men being trapped into paternity suits or losing paternity or unplanned pregnancies but ultimately every one of them would say that its an irrevocable responsibility regardless of gender.

The paramountcy of the child idea is one I'm fine with, I'm a social worker though and see on a regular basis how much lip service it receives, of even those who say they take it seriously its hard to see how they put it into practice sometimes.

I dont think its about maturity or anything like that, there's still plenty of accidential pregnancies in tha hood, so its probably professionals we are talking about here and I'd say that most of the time the reasons professionals would give are more about real evaluations of their wealth, which might be coming up short when it comes to looking after themselves let alone kids.

wow, so because I expressed this view, I am supposedly oppressed by the men in my life? Really?

 

[muir]

If men and women are physically different then how can they be compared side by side?

Do we put women against men in the olympics?

But we're putting them against each other in life

if women are the ones with the wombs and the baby feeding mammaries then surely they once again are facing different life circumstances to men so how can they be compared again in life?

What game are women trying to play here? They seem to want to win something...what are they trying to win? Who is their opponent they are trying to beat?

Are there some things men are better at then women and visa versa?

if so then is it sensible to compare women against men the whole time?

How do you compare if men and women are often doing different jobs?

Also how do we value the jobs people do? Do we pay the most money to the people who are doing the most vital work?

Are the people who do the hardest work being paid the most?

The highest earners...are they feeding people? Are they giving them clean water? Are they putting a roof over peoples heads or clothes on their back or providing energy needs?

What are these high earners doing that's so important?

I think the whole way we behave as a society needs a re-think

 

[muir]

“Fear of a name increases fear of the thing itself.” ~ J.K. Rowling

J.K rowling...isn't she that person who's being paid lots of money to make the occult cool to kids?

yup pretty sure she's the one helping to normalise the occult.....wow...look how well you get rewarded for that

If you want to make lots of money just find a way to publically normalise the occult...certain people will throw money at you

Ssssslitherin....draco......order of the phoenix....hmmm

Its funny the occult stuff that comes out of edinburgh...you'd be amazed how many occult groups have a presence in edinburgh