Feminism in decline

[Prussia-Steinbach]

Not to mention abortion would be possible in barber shops.

If men needed to take birth control, you could get it out of a candy machine at Wal-Mart.

[Tahar Joblis]

Not to mention abortion would be possible in barber shops.

If men needed to take birth control, you could get it out of a candy machine at Wal-Mart.

In an environment where all involuntary legal consequences from reproduction fall on men, there is, in fact, demand for male birth control.

In fact, numbered among the few people arrayed against the male birth control pill for political reasons are, in fact, a few feminists. Because women aren't all entirely comfortable with letting men control reproduction better.

[Gauthier]

If men needed to take birth control, you could get it out of a candy machine at Wal-Mart.

In an environment where all involuntary legal consequences from reproduction fall on men, there is, in fact, demand for male birth control.

In fact, numbered among the few people arrayed against the male birth control pill for political reasons are, in fact, a few feminists. Because women aren't all entirely comfortable with letting men control reproduction better.

Oh yes, the Republican Congressmen trying to limit female access to birth control are all feminists.

[Geilinor]

Why?
Patriarchy said men are powerful warriors and we are weak servants.

Exactly. "100% of people killed in wars would be women" wat lol

There's a reason calling someone a "girl" is an insult. Why people need to "man up."

Those are gender stereotypes, not necessarily symptoms of a "patriarchy".

[Des-Bal]

Exactly. "100% of people killed in wars would be women" wat lol

There's a reason calling someone a "girl" is an insult. Why people need to "man up."

The problem is you're assuming that gender roles are natural and could not possibly be another way. Let's imagine patriarchy is real, that men rule society and that all gender roles and stereotypes are defined by men. Why the actual fuck would they decide that their lives were worthless? If I was a patriarch I'd have women fight all the wars and I'd say that it was to protect family lines by preserving male heirs.

[Des-Bal]

Oh yes, the Republican Congressmen trying to limit female access to birth control are all feminists.

Yep, that's what he said and you're not propping up strawmen at all.

[Prussia-Steinbach]

Exactly. "100% of people killed in wars would be women" wat lol

There's a reason calling someone a "girl" is an insult. Why people need to "man up."

Those are gender stereotypes, not necessarily symptoms of a "patriarchy".

...the patriarchy is literally the reason for those gender stereotypes. Male = tough, unfeeling, warrior, head of household. Female = weak, emotional, caring, homemaker, etc.

In a matriarchy, it would obviously be different. Ideally, everyone could decide their roles for themselves, with no societal pressure - or reject them completely.

[Nilla Wayfarers]

Those are gender stereotypes, not necessarily symptoms of a "patriarchy".

...the patriarchy is literally the reason for those gender stereotypes. Male = tough, unfeeling, warrior, head of household. Female = weak, emotional, caring, homemaker, etc.

In a matriarchy, it would obviously be different. Ideally, everyone could decide their roles for themselves, with no societal pressure - or reject them completely.

Except in a matriarchy, it wouldn't be opposite, the roles would just be reversed. You're thinking of an ideal society in which each gender is equal. Those don't exist, unfortunately, so there's no name for them.

[Russels Orbiting Teapot]

In a matriarchy, it would obviously be different. Ideally, everyone could decide their roles for themselves, with no societal pressure - or reject them completely.

Why do you assume that matriarchy would be the same as idealized anarchy? Why do you assume that women being in charge would just eliminate all of our gender role problems? Are we men just rough, slavering beasts, and women are just better at being people than us? Should we all kill ourselves for the good of the only people who are decent enough to matter?

[Prussia-Steinbach]

Why do you assume that matriarchy would be the same as idealized anarchy?

...I don't. What the fuck?

Why do you assume that women being in charge would just eliminate all of our gender role problems? Are we men just rough, slavering beasts, and women are just better at being people than us? Should we all kill ourselves for the good of the only people who are decent enough to matter?

...what in God's name? I think we have a misunderstanding here. Matriarchy and the ideal are completely different. Matriarchy would be the converse of patriarchy. The ideal would be no societal pressure. Separate things...

[Prussia-Steinbach]

I am male, by the way. Cisgender, heterosexual, six foot, blond haired, blue eyed, white male.

[Russels Orbiting Teapot]

I am male, by the way. Cisgender, heterosexual, six foot, blond haired, blue eyed, white male.

I'm fully aware. That doesn't stop you from idealizing women. In fact, it encourages you.

...what in God's name? I think we have a misunderstanding here. Matriarchy and the ideal are completely different. Matriarchy would be the converse of patriarchy. The ideal would be no societal pressure. Separate things...

Matriarchy means 'rule by mothers'. What has led to to the conclusions that mothers would abolish societal pressure.

[Prussia-Steinbach]

Matriarchy means 'rule by mothers'. What has led to to the conclusions that mothers would abolish societal pressure.

...I... have not arrived... at that conclusion?

You are really severely misunderstanding me.

[Russels Orbiting Teapot]

Matriarchy means 'rule by mothers'. What has led to to the conclusions that mothers would abolish societal pressure.

...I... have not arrived... at that conclusion?

You are really severely misunderstanding me.

Let's start over, then.

What is Matriarchy? How is it structured?

What would a matriarchal society look like?

How would this structure lead to these results?

[Galloism]

Why do you assume that matriarchy would be the same as idealized anarchy?

...I don't. What the fuck?

Why do you assume that women being in charge would just eliminate all of our gender role problems? Are we men just rough, slavering beasts, and women are just better at being people than us? Should we all kill ourselves for the good of the only people who are decent enough to matter?

...what in God's name? I think we have a misunderstanding here. Matriarchy and the ideal are completely different. Matriarchy would be the converse of patriarchy. The ideal would be no societal pressure. Separate things...

I think you mean different social pressures, not lack of social pressure.

[Prussia-Steinbach]

...I... have not arrived... at that conclusion?

You are really severely misunderstanding me.

Let's start over, then.

What is Matriarchy? How is it structured?

What would a matriarchal society look like?

How would this structure lead to these results?

....

I think our misunderstanding is that you think I am advocating matriarchy... for some reason... I was only presenting matriarchy as the converse of patriarchy.

I support neither. I do not want matriarchy. I do not want rule by mothers. I do not want patriarchy. I do not want rule by fathers. I want equality. The ideal. I want no societal pressures as to gender roles.

[Prussia-Steinbach]

...I don't. What the fuck?

...what in God's name? I think we have a misunderstanding here. Matriarchy and the ideal are completely different. Matriarchy would be the converse of patriarchy. The ideal would be no societal pressure. Separate things...

I think you mean different social pressures, not lack of social pressure.

Regarding gender? No. I want pressure to be completely lacking.

[Galloism]

I think you mean different social pressures, not lack of social pressure.

Regarding gender? No. I want pressure to be completely lacking.

Oh I see what you were trying to say now.

The way you just slammed those two disjointed thoughts right next to each other, without proper paragraphing or a contrasting adjective or adverb, made it seem like you were saying a matriarchy would have no gender roles.

[Prussia-Steinbach]

Regarding gender? No. I want pressure to be completely lacking.

Oh I see what you were trying to say now.

The way you just slammed those two disjointed thoughts right next to each other, without proper paragraphing or a contrasting adjective or adverb, made it seem like you were saying a matriarchy would have no gender roles.

I see that now. My apologies...

*retreats into corner with sign reading "Yes, My Feelings Are A Bit Hurt" hanging above*

[Russels Orbiting Teapot]

I think our misunderstanding is that you think I am advocating matriarchy... for some reason... I was only presenting matriarchy as the converse of patriarchy.

I support neither. I do not want matriarchy. I do not want rule by mothers. I do not want patriarchy. I do not want rule by fathers. I want equality. The ideal. I want no societal pressures as to gender roles.

Ok, after a careful re-reading of your initial post I think I see our miscommunication here.

In a matriarchy, it would obviously be different. Ideally, everyone could decide their roles for themselves, with no societal pressure - or reject them completely.

I took "Ideally" in this paragraph to mean "Ideally in a matriarchy", rather than 'in an ideal society, as opposed to either a matriarchy or patriarchy', as you apparently intended it. Sorry, I'm used to people treating Matriarchy as a concept they can hang all of the good things in society on, while patriarchy is the source of nearly every social Ill, which basically boils down to 'men bad women good'.

[Galloism]

Oh I see what you were trying to say now.

The way you just slammed those two disjointed thoughts right next to each other, without proper paragraphing or a contrasting adjective or adverb, made it seem like you were saying a matriarchy would have no gender roles.

I see that now. My apologies...

*retreats into corner with sign reading "Yes, My Feelings Are A Bit Hurt" hanging above*

That's all right. Sometimes things make more sense in our heads.

Known emphasis and pausing, and all that.

[Prussia-Steinbach]

Yeah. Sorry, I was just kind of typing things out as my brain came up with them, then the confusion started spiralling.

*shrugs*

[Tahar Joblis]

In an environment where all involuntary legal consequences from reproduction fall on men, there is, in fact, demand for male birth control.

In fact, numbered among the few people arrayed against the male birth control pill for political reasons are, in fact, a few feminists. Because women aren't all entirely comfortable with letting men control reproduction better.

Oh yes, the Republican Congressmen trying to limit female access to birth control are all feminists.

You aren't really reading, are you?

They will, by the way, similarly be interested in "limiting access" to male birth control pills once they come out. If they continue to try to block birth control pills at all. But right now, that's a hypothetical future as far as Republicans are concerned, and they'll start reacting once they see it.

Now, right now, your typical feminist will speak in favor of a male birth control pill. But if men start using it, it takes much of the power over reproduction out of women's hands. I expect that as with child custody laws, feminists will find reasons - as in the above - to oppose the actual use of the pill and lobby for restrictions.

[Divitaen]

Oh yes, the Republican Congressmen trying to limit female access to birth control are all feminists.

You aren't really reading, are you?

They will, by the way, similarly be interested in "limiting access" to male birth control pills once they come out. If they continue to try to block birth control pills at all. But right now, that's a hypothetical future as far as Republicans are concerned, and they'll start reacting once they see it.

Now, right now, your typical feminist will speak in favor of a male birth control pill. But if men start using it, it takes much of the power over reproduction out of women's hands. I expect that as with child custody laws, feminists will find reasons - as in the above - to oppose the actual use of the pill and lobby for restrictions.

Umm wait, I'm kind of confused. It sounds like an interesting point you are making there. Why would a feminist wish to limit male access to male contraception pills? It seems that they should be in favour of bodily sovereignty and autonomy, in the same way as we feminists support principles of reproductive sovereignty for women. How does the male pill contravene women's reproductive health?

[MERIZoC]

Yeah. Sorry, I was just kind of typing things out as my brain came up with them, then the confusion started spiralling.

*shrugs*

*hugs Pruss*

I understood you.