The feminist insistence that men and women are the same is accompanied by a fierce aversion to feminine physical vulnerability like pregnancy or caring for young children. It is an impossible fiction but feminists are willing to make enormous sacrifices to pretend it is true. Like sending women to war, when they are not even safe from their fellow soldiers, but admitting that would shatter the illusion. I believe that women are incredibly capable, but not that women must function as men to be worthy. And I oppose with my whole heart the bargain of relinquishing feminine capabilities, like the ability to bring new life into the world, so as to rate higher on a scale designed to measure masculine accomplishment. I know I haven’t addressed your main point of having it both ways. If a woman is a wonderful thing called a woman, and not a poor imitation of a man, then being physically weaker than a man isn’t a defect.
To explain the discrepancy, perhaps it’s that Second Wave feminism would have a woman walk to her car herself, but Third Wave feminism believes that a woman should be empowered to be escorted to her car. Just guessing.
So much of the problem is how you define it. I would certainly be willing to say that patriarchy is alive, and well, and will remain so because it’s intrinsic to the human condition. But not if you force me to allow feminists to define what patriarchy actually is.
The feminist insistence that men and women are the same is accompanied by a fierce aversion to feminine physical vulnerability like pregnancy or caring for young children. It is an impossible fiction but feminists are willing to make enormous sacrifices to pretend it is true. Like sending women to war, when they are not even safe from their fellow soldiers, but admitting that would shatter the illusion. I believe that women are incredibly capable, but not that women must function as men to be worthy. And I oppose with my whole heart the bargain of relinquishing feminine capabilities, like the ability to bring new life into the world, so as to rate higher on a scale designed to measure masculine accomplishment. I know I haven’t addressed your main point of having it both ways. If a woman is a wonderful thing called a woman, and not a poor imitation of a man, then being physically weaker than a man isn’t a defect.
To explain the discrepancy, perhaps it’s that Second Wave feminism would have a woman walk to her car herself, but Third Wave feminism believes that a woman should be empowered to be escorted to her car. Just guessing.
Von - I suggest the whole patriarchy concept is a myth. Curious for your reactions.
https://open.substack.com/pub/joelelorentzen/p/patriarchy-schmatriarchy?r=1p5p1m&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web
So much of the problem is how you define it. I would certainly be willing to say that patriarchy is alive, and well, and will remain so because it’s intrinsic to the human condition. But not if you force me to allow feminists to define what patriarchy actually is.