Hender: Welcome, friends and fellow feminists. I would like to begin this dialogue on patriarchy, perhaps one of the most salient concepts in feminist discourse, by setting the context and foregrounding preliminary concepts. I am aware that each of us here may subscribe to different strands of feminism (e.g. liberal, Marxist/socialist, radical, black, third wave) and consequently may have differing understandings of patriarchy’s nature and its centrality to women’s oppression, but I think we can all agree with defining ‘patriarchy’ as a general category of male dominance, and specifically as a system of unequal power relations that privileges men in all aspects of life (socioeconomic, cultural, political) while disadvantaging women and gender/sexual …show more content…
She however does not agree with the radical feminist conception of patriarchy as omnipresent, universal, ahistorical and unchanging. In her book Theorising Patriarchy, Walby claims that patriarchy is not historically constant, and proceeds to trace this change in patriarchy’s nature from ‘private’ patriarchy in the nineteenth century to ‘public’ patriarchy in the twentienth century. Private patriarchy is based upon household production where the patriarch controlled women individually and directly in the private sphere of the home (since women were excluded from employment during that time), while public patriarchy evolved with men exploiting women collectively by subjugating them in the public sphere (i.e. via unfair employment conditions). She also puts forward six key structures where patriarchal relations are at work, restricting women and maintaining male domination: paid work, household labor, cultural institutions, heterosexual relationships, (male) violence against women, and state activities (Walby, …show more content…
Structural problems get intensified when race, gender, and class oppressions intersect, making it more difficult for women of color to escape their abusers and access appropriate medical and sexual/reproductive healthcare. The principle of intersectionality recognizes that these multiple oppressions are not endured individually, but rather as a single, compounded experience. Identity politics, like those practiced by radical feminists, are inclined to remained silent on intra-group differences (race, class, sexuality), to the detriment of some of its members, in this case black or poor
In the world of sociology and the studies of human interaction, the term intersectionality has been defined as, “the idea that various biological, social, and cultural categories – including gender, race, class, and ethnicity – interact and contribute towards systematic social inequality” (“Definition of Intersectionality – Sociology”). However, as Dr. White defined the term on the Spring 2014 Final Writing Assignment sheet, these categories that make up one’s identity can “intersect or interact in ways that can either advantage or disadvantage the person’s well-being and development” (White). In regards to the text, David M. Newman’s Identities & Inequalities: Exploring the Intersections of Race, Class, Gender, and Sexuality, Newman progressively explores the concept of intersectionality throughout the entirety of the text, but he does not ever actually define the term itself. Although an exact, clear-cut definition of the term “intersectionality” has not been officially established, the concept of the term is fairly simple to understand. Every person has different social identities that they carry to their name. Intersectionality is simply an analysis of how those different identities play off of each other and how they affect the person they are describing.
Patriarchy is generally defined as “a form of social organisation in which the father or eldest male is the head of the family and descent is reckoned through the male line” (Oxford Dictionary, 2006) and therefore it is traditionally referred to within the family context. In her discussion on sexual contracts, Pateman takes the definition of patriarchy to a deeper level by looking at the term patriarchy from various socio-political and economic aspects against a three century context. By way of general definition, Pateman (p.19) defines patriarchy as a “form of political power” which no longer plays a prominent role in “modern political thought”, and quoting Elsenstein (p.22) states that it is no longer plausible in advanced industrial societies. However, the political language still infers from traditional perceptions of patriarchy. Pateman (p.22) holds that sexual male gender domination loses its strength when reference to such a power reduces itself to mere language. Indeed, Pateman, (p.21) making reference to Locke’s work raises the discussion of whether patriarchy goes beyond the concept of family, and questions whether patriarchy can be separated from the social and political. She holds that Locke’s ability to separate the two when discussing patriarchy was possible in the sexual contract, especially since the female gender was perceived as incapable of officially contributing to the political world (Jessica N. Grounds, n.d., p.275). Pateman (p.27) dismisses the role of politics based on blood ties since families can consist of adoptions (Maine) and therefore family members subordinated themselves to the head of the family.
Hunnicutt illustrated that the concept of patriarchy is a useful tool in the theory of feminism. She also made use the concept of patriarchy to show how it can be employed to explain violence against women in society. Hunnicutt’s article presents an alternative way to understand violence against women by employing patriarchy as a core theoretical concept. Hunnicutt believed that in the society, women are typically oppressed and men also have been historically dominant over them, and most times it results to violence against these women. Hunnicutt stated that the theories of violence against women mostly focus on male power but via situating that power within a patriarchal order. This article is important to the topic of feminism because for its theoretical background to help ground my
Our topic was on the social and psychological dynamics of sexuality and gender in the patriarchal system, so we related this to Chapter 4 in Dude You’re a Fag: Compulsive Heterosexuality, Masculinity and Dominance. We use many examples from the book which relate to many relief examples occurring all over in today’s society, as well as including a discussion of how certain feminists are trying to pin point and make changes to this issue. Masculinity is constructed in ways that marginalize femininity, emphasizing how men often use women as "props" to signify a masculine identity and reproduce masculine forms of superiority. Subordination of women to men is prevalent in large parts of the world. We come across experiences where women are not only treated like less than but are also subject to discrimination, humiliation, exploitation, oppression, control and violence.
In the household codes of the New Testament the traditional patriarchal social order is reaffirmed, not simply for secular society, but for Christian community. The concept that children are to obey their parents, wives their husbands and slaves their masters is restated in no fewer than five places in the New Testament: Ephesians, Colossians, 1 Timothy, Titus, and 1 Peter. Conversely all subjugated persons can be viewed as relations of wives to husbands, children to father, and servants to masters. Patriarchalism refers to the total structure of society in all theses types of relations of domination and subjugation; sons to father, wives to husband, and slaves to masters. Also, there is delegated domination and subjugation within the paternal
Intersectionality is a term used to describe a situation whereby an individual has multiple identities and as result, the person feels that he or she doesn’t belong to one community or another. Because of the many conflicts in an individual’s identities, he or she could be a victim of multiple threats of discrimination (Williams, 2017). The discrimination could be a result of race, gender, age, health and ethnicity among others. To give an example, a black transgender woman could be discriminated in the workplace because of being black and also because she is transgender. From an intersectionality perspective, the woman faces multiple threats of discrimination because of the overlapping identities of gender and race and therefore the transwoman faces a bigger struggle (Barber, 2017). Transwomen of color will most likely encounter prejudices in the form of homophobia, racism or sexism in many dimensions of their life. The perspective of intersectionality is not only applicable to women but it can also be applied to males. For example, a gay Latino man could be discriminated based on race because he is an immigrant into
Our culture has created a social system that allows the driving forces of patriarchy to flourish. Although many people may not be purposefully attempting to continue this system of patriarchy, we each play a role in its survival. For many the problem is not that they are promoting patriarchy but that they are not challenging the system. In Johnson’s article “Patriarchy”, he is not examining whether a patriarchal system exists in our culture but what factors are driving this system to continue. The articles analyzed demonstrate Johnson’s theory of patriarchy by exemplifying his three facets of the patriarchal system and by recognizing the notion of the path of least resistance.
Catharine MacKinnon, in her book Feminism Unmodified, takes a unique approach to the problem of gender inequality in America. She claims that pornography defines the way in which America’s patriarchal society perpetuates male dominance, and attacks traditional liberal methods that defend pornography on the basis of the first amendment’s right to free speech. According to MacKinnon, pornography is not an example of speech but rather an act. She proposes that this act discriminates against women as a class, and therefore violates their civil rights and should be outlawed. MacKinnon’s critics may think her argument is excessively radical, and contemporary society may not embrace the changes she suggests. However, even if she is deliberately provocative Catharine MacKinnon’s message is worthwhile: The American male power structure dominates women and must be changed. Establishing sexual equity in this power structure would be a major step in the struggle for gender equality within American communities.
Among the many subjects covered in this book are the three classes of oppression: gender, race and class in addition to the ways in which they intersect. As well as the importance of the movement being all-inclusive, advocating the idea that feminism is in fact for everybody. The author also touches upon education, parenting and violence. She begins her book with her key argument, stating that feminist theory and the movement are mainly led by high class white women who disregarded the circumstances of underprivileged non-white women.
Intersectionality was one of the greatest concepts this course shed light on, intersectionality is can be broadly defined as the coming together of various social groups to work together to fight against forms of oppression. In the conceptual frameworks portion of the book Readings for Diversity and Social Justice, they talk about the importance of privileged identities and disadvantaged identities coming together to work towards solving a particular issue. While before taking this course I was somewhat aware of the various forms of oppression, I never gave much thought to how I could help combat forms of oppression that I did not necessarily experience with my own identity.
Patriarchy creates a social division. It is often used to describe the power between a male and a woman. This idea is important in Radical Feminism. Seen as the root of female oppression, Radical Feminists recognize that patriarchy is everywhere. Radical feminist came about because they were not happy with the course of action taken by the first wave of feminists. Radical feminists wanted a revolution, not just reform; they wanted to do things their way as opposed to following “the system”. So they came up with their own theories that fit their way of thinking and often were at odds with the reformer feminists...
This theory focuses on using multiple factors to conceptualize systems of oppression. Patricia Collins, in her article, “Towards A New Vision” mentions to the reader it is important that we realize race, class, and gender are interlocking categories of analysis that together cultivate profound differences in our personal biographies (Collins,1989). Meaning, it is important to take into account an individual’s identity is more than just being female/male or black/white. Intersectionality allows for multiple factors to be analyzed at a time rather than just analyze dichotomous factors. For example, within intersectionality individuals are allowed to analyze the life of a Hispanic women, living in a low class neighborhood, who has a means of low education. Collins states, “we must re-conceptualize race, class, and gender in order to create new categories of connection and questions how can we transcend these barriers created by our experience with race, class, and gender oppression.” However, intersectionality brings forth many problems in terms of social
Multiracial feminism recognizes the need for coalition politics. The autonomous women of color feminist organizations share similar goals, and they realize there is strength in numbers. While creating autonomous groups allows Blacks, Latinas, Native American, and Asian women to focus solely on the oppressions they individually face, they are aware that they share problems with racism, sexism, and classism. Most minority groups are targeted by the government and live in low income households. Along with receiving support from other minority groups they also receive support from militant antiracist white feminists as well. An idea multiracial feminism expanded on was the phrase “Personal is Political”, which means issues that seem personal (abortion, abuse, employment, etc.) are actually political issues (Thompson, 59). Multiracial feminism made the point to expand on that phrase and according to Anne Braden, expand it to “The Personal is Political and The Political is Personal” (Thompson, 59). This expansion of the phrase is important to the antiracist white supporters of women of color. It lets them know that racism, and oppression only women of color face does not mean white women cannot be aware of it and speak out against it. It made the point that a person does not need to directly experience the oppression in order to know it is not right. This allows an
Feminists believe that education is an agent of secondary socialization that helps to enforce patriarchy. Cultural transmission has made known the way culture and precisely expectations of the genders can be transmitted from one generation to another. While Sylvia Walby’s ‘‘triple system theory’’ argues that experiences of ethnicity and class complicate what it means to be a female so we have to combine patriarchy with capitalism and
Women’s subordination within the labour market is seen by Marxist feminists as suiting the needs of capitalism as women are considered a ‘reserve army of labour’ as they are a more disposable part of the workforce. According to Beechey (1986) women are a cheap ‘reserve army of labour’ that are brought in during economic booms but then thrown out during slumps. Women are often not members of trade unions and are prepared to work for less money as their wage could be a second income. This benefits capitalism as a group of unemployed people looking for work creates competition and exploitation. Employers are given an advantage which allows them to reduce wages and increase the rate of exploitation. Benston (1972) supports this as women are used to benefitting the operation of the capitalist economy by carrying out unprepared work in the home. This proves that patriarchy dominates women which leads to women’s subordination. Hartmann (1981) believes that patriarchy and the economy both play a crucial role in explaining and understanding gender inequality. Historically, men have controlled women especially by control of labour power. This can come through legislation that operates economically to the benefit of men, for example Maternity and Paternity Rights. This proves that patriarchy and economics together explains gender inequality. However, Walby (1986) argues that women staying at home can actually harm capitalism because if women were to compete for jobs with men this would lower wages and increase profits. Women who earn also have superior spending power which would boost the economy and benefit