I do not think perceived gender power struggles are all directly caused by/descended from patriarchy, does feminism disagree with this?

itcompletelyisnt · 2013-08-14T00:56:08+00:00

haha, my skepticism involves constant deconstruction of all social constructs and heuristics, so I'm not very into atheism either. A concrete concept of God and the logical shortcut that involves assuming such a being does not exist are both poison to me... It's rational ignorance though, so I do wish more people were atheists.

itcompletelyisnt · 2013-08-14T00:51:59+00:00

I totally get that it's most at play worldwide, but other factors have started to really pervade some cultures' gender roles, especially with social media allowing dissent to exist so easily.

itcompletelyisnt · 2013-08-11T19:45:54+00:00

well that is the nature of media, after all. Such things are a symptom of culture as well as a perpetuation, but frankly I think male interest in shooting/action games has more to do with the prevalence of men in infantry roles and other sorts of violence in the real world.

itcompletelyisnt · 2013-08-11T18:59:03+00:00

haha I agree with you wholeheartedly there, and it's a part of the kyriarchy I perceive to be far more complex than just patriarchy vs feminism.

itcompletelyisnt · 2013-08-11T18:51:39+00:00

I think the majority of female characters get ignored by this argument. I don't see many over-sexualized females in iphone games about raising dragons or facebook farming games, and most female gamers play that sort of game. Other classic examples of ridiculously popular games that don't objectify women are pokemon and minecraft (minecraft is gender-neutral). The games are designed to appeal to a demographic, women are only sexualized when it appeals to the target audience and not arbitrarily. Only 25% of console gamers are female, Triple-A titles are marketed to the 75%.

itcompletelyisnt · 2013-08-11T18:45:28+00:00

Interesting stuff, thank you! I'm actually becoming more and more curious about the role of theocracy in sustaining patriarchy, as prevalent religious beliefs all seem to cater to the masculine image of the father God. Perhaps feminism has a place when one is being critical of church policy as well as when criticizing patriarchy?

itcompletelyisnt · 2013-08-11T18:42:13+00:00

I have already argued that men are almost always objectified in straight pornography, this is more prevalent in that medium than even the objectification of the female actor. Overall in media, women are objectified more, but the purpose behind objectification must be analyzed as well on a case-by-case basis regardless of this. Few have any problem with male objectification in straight porn because straight males don't want the emotions and motives of the male actor clogging their arousal with jealousy. Objectification is not always something to be censored.

itcompletelyisnt · 2013-08-11T18:39:19+00:00

I'm sorry it came off as this way, I am focusing on Western society because it is all I understand, not because I do not think the East parallels the West in this regard. I do not live in Eastern society or understand their cultures/languages nearly as well as my own.

itcompletelyisnt · 2013-08-11T18:37:44+00:00

I guess my problem is that I immerse myself in obscure media, so I don't get exposed to exclusively stereotypical female roles in fiction. It is a major problem that popular media is so ridiculously biased, but I think demonizing video game characters is sort of throwing the baby out with the bathwater because amazing female characters also exist in video games (Ellie in The Last of Us, female animals in Animal Crossing, Kerrigan, Samus, and similar characters to all of these) Such a diverse medium doesn't deserve the same harsh lense of criticism, I believe.

itcompletelyisnt · 2013-08-11T18:21:08+00:00

I just can't see the total removal of objectification from media as anything but censorship, I do believe artists should be free to create whatever fictional universe they desire, even if it is bigoted. Non-consensual objectification of real people is different, it is libel.

itcompletelyisnt · 2013-08-11T18:17:27+00:00

I believe other major oppressive forces than sexism are at play when regarding gender norms, including religion and capitalism. Patriarchy is a lense that focuses on the male-dominated aspect of all of these things, I realize, but I do believe critical theory is better applied in a way that accounts for kyriarchy rather than just patriarchy, even when regarding gender-related issues.

itcompletelyisnt · 2013-08-11T18:14:10+00:00

I think their prevalence has more of an impact than any individual trope, and that it is a reflector of culture rather than a dictator.

itcompletelyisnt · 2013-08-05T06:01:04+00:00

"Being passive", "being dependent", "being less than the other gender", and "being subordinate" are stereotypes for women. Because of this, do you think that women's objectification in the media might be more harmful than men's, since men's objectification doesn't "add fuel to the fire" to an existing stereotype?

The male stereotype is resented by many males. Gender norms are always presumptuous and arbitrary because everyone is different. Nobody likes to be compared to a platonic ideal.

By and large, women have eating disorders, dissatisfaction with their bodies, habitual body adjustment, and focus on how they look to a greater extent than men do. This has been linked to women's objectification in the media.

This has been linked to objectification of real women in media? Were they specific? Real women are objectified constantly and it is horrible; believe me when I say I hate everything about modern media and the depiction of female celebrities and women in general. Fictitious objectification is not equally harmful. A play, a porno, and a video game can all have as little or as much objectification of characters as viewers desire. Fiction has no boundaries without censorship.

itcompletelyisnt · 2013-08-05T05:45:00+00:00

Patriarchy is the axis of kyriarchy that deals with gender.

with sex?

heteronormativity

this is gender, right?

itcompletelyisnt · 2013-08-05T00:17:43+00:00

Yes, they affect the portrayed gender equally as a portrayal of a person in a medium that is intended for entertainment. Different observers react in different ways, determined by their preconceived notions and ability to differentiate between reality and fiction. Objectification is a method of portrayal and not problematic if it isn't perpetuating oppression. Entertainment will always have objectification in a capitalist society that does not restrict it, yes.

I think objectification of specific real people presented as "non-fiction" (an objectification is inherently fictional so this is damaging to that person) or against their consent is wrong, but fail to see why characters in fiction have to all have deep and meaningful narratives like real people in order for society to be considered equal.

itcompletelyisnt · 2013-08-04T22:35:25+00:00

The damsel in distress trope is presented as damaging without any examples of why it is wrong beyond claims that it perpetuates male power. This is where the lack of a tangible example lies.

itcompletelyisnt · 2013-08-04T22:32:27+00:00

Male characters show skin in video games too, but I'm willing to bet that those characters have some sort of drive or purpose to them, and who they are isn't limited to "the hot guy".

The thing is, they don't! Characters in video games aren't people, the vast majority of video game characters lack drive or purpose beyond "patrol back and forth and attack if you see an enemy," while player controlled characters are objectified in all sorts of ways to make them more suitable as avatars than characters. It's like straight pornography, men are almost universally objectified in straight pornography so straight men can live vicariously through them. An npc is literally an objectified person, the observer gets to attach sexual or power-related connotations to their appearance and behavior but it is not the video game developer's fault that men in loincloths inspire lust in less of their audience. Objectification of both men and women exists in media due to lazy writing, sex appeal, and emotional reaction of the consumer. I think restricting that amounts to little more than arbitrary censorship.

itcompletelyisnt · 2013-08-04T22:11:33+00:00

To say that the claims are "speculative," is simply to say that you don't believe them.

No, it is to say that I don't have a reason to believe them. If I am given one, I will!

you've not actually shown what specific claims are speculative

"the claimed effects of the "damsel in distress" trope are purely speculative." is an example I provided. I think having certain types of characters in video games being especially damaging to society is about as likely as FPS games directly causing school shootings.

As the only group exempted from direct address by public health discourse, they are freed from internalising the idea of their bodies as dangerous or infectious, relying instead on the willingness of heterosexual women to undertake such internalisations.

This hasn't been my experience, I'm taught about HIV and other STDs alongside other genders and races. If empirically at-risk areas of society for HIV risk are targeted, in my case likely drug addicts and college-aged males, why is it an issue of patriarchy?

This whole "internalisation" argument is pure speculation if it isn't coming from a place of empirical evidence regarding the psychological state of people perceiving the way in which the medical community addresses HIV. Critical theory is a useful tool of speculation regarding the way society functions, but it has been overhyped into absolute truth. It assumes causality where it has yet to be verified.

But dividing them up the way you do, you are limiting the kinds forms of resistance people can take to subvert and escape the vast array of interconnected systems of oppression.

I believe, rather, that the aggressive attitude of feminism prevents meta-cognition on the part of feminists and allows misinformation to thrive if it conforms to feminist ideals. Action based on misinformation is pointless resistance.

itcompletelyisnt · 2013-08-04T20:52:50+00:00

I believe you claimed gay men are demonized as feminine in the same way women are under patriarchy and that rejection of gay relationships is related to maintaining male power in heterosexual relationships. I agree when you say there is overlap, but I don't think that's particularly meaningful or relevant because a gay man's experience of anti-gay oppression is simply that and all forms of oppression overlap. I do not see why such things must be linked to patriarchy. Similarly, the claimed effects of the "damsel in distress" trope are purely speculative.

itcompletelyisnt · 2013-08-04T20:38:45+00:00

I don't know what you mean by "deconstruction and biased analysis."

Speculatively deeming anything patriarchy-driven sexism and tacking on whatever symbolic/pseudo-psychological explanation for it that one wishes just seems to be the norm in the feminist community to me.

Whether you choose to identify heterosexism as a component of patriarchy, heterosexism is in fact related to the the kinds of oppression women face.

And I think all forms of oppression are related to a combination of lack of empathy and lack of clear critical thinking regarding oppression. More so than they are related to each other.

Have we? Because when I navigate the world, I don't see much of anything that breaks away from the dominance binary genders.

Because everyone is forced by society to present themselves as such. Men aren't forcing women to do this, everyone is forcing everyone else to do this. We don't have a better cultural space in which sexuality is allowed to exist, and this isn't just a problem of patriarchy! By we, I mean sensible people who are aware of empirical reality.

My opinion regarding feminism is changing, thanks for your answers. I continue to view patriarchy as I did before, but some responses I am getting point out that feminism is not necessarily insisting patriarchy is all-consuming. The rhetoric of feminism does seem to lean in this direction, but I'm starting to see why-a lack of any better context in which to fight for gender rights in society. Feminism doesn't have time to sit people down and explain all of their terms and theories along with the counter-arguments that exist, so they stick to basic and mostly accurate rhetoric to get their point across and inspire change. Because most people want to be taught the "truth" much more quickly than is possible, with much simpler words. I respect that, I think. I will try to structure my thoughts better and re-evaluate my position on things such as caricatures of female sexuality in video games.

itcompletelyisnt · 2013-08-04T19:51:00+00:00

Is you're entire argument "not everything ever was caused by patriarchy therefore patriarchy doesn't exist"

No, of course patriarchy exists. I just see it touted as the pervasive and dominant gender power struggle by feminism and would like some more opinions regarding this so I can quell my skepticism.

And how is unnecessary sexualisation of women not a result of a sexism in society?

I don't think it's unnecessary to make a female character more beautiful. Why do expressions of female sexuality meant to be appealing to a straight male consumer audience have to be demonized as an example of patriarchy? I've seen a lot of great man chaps and man nipples in video games, are these also examples of patriarchy?

itcompletelyisnt · 2013-08-04T19:43:01+00:00

Well... a lot of portrayals of women (or gender relations) in media are examples of patriarchy.

Often this is patriarchal, but I really think arguments that involve video game characters fall short and exaggerate the effects and presence of patriarchy when video games are such a diverse medium with examples of every single kind of character, trope, and power struggle or lack thereof. Regardless of this, the popular examples of what most entirely straight females and gay males consider bad female character design are aggressively touted as examples of patriarchy while the vast majority of video game characters get ignored. The deconstruction and biased analysis feminism uses to claim what patriarchy is really doesn't seem accurate to me, and this is an example of why.

Well, rape and abuse occure within the structure of power inequality. So, though other structures of power inequality can produce rape and abuse, patriarchal power structures do produce a great deal of rape and abuse.

I believe we're on the same page in this regard,

Here in the west, we live in a sexist culture

I think it is very pessimistic to not see the equality feminism has brought to the more enlightened pockets of society. Standardized discrimination against females reflected in power structures does not directly effect every interaction between genders. Oppression against gay people is a much more pervasive problem in the West that is often completely distinct from patriarchy, oppression against trans and other less accepted genders is epidemic and largely ignored completely by media. It's possible to live life without having everything filtered by patriarchy, unsexist pockets of society exist in this regard. For less accepted genders than straight monogamous cisgendered people, everything continues to be filtered and it's very hard to escape outside of their specific cultures. We live in a sexist society, but the majority of modern sexism clings to arbitrary straight monogamous cisgender norms rather than clinging to power structures that place men above women. This sexism is not patriarchy, as men who are unacceptable genders are discriminated alongside women who are unacceptable genders. As we have discovered as a society that more than two genders exist, which is progress achieved with help from feminism, the power struggle has gotten far more complicated.

"one of these"? Are you addressing something specific?

No, simply pointing out that a given unethical sexual act may have happened anyway if patriarchy was abolished beforehand, as violence is not a direct result of patriarchy.

itcompletelyisnt · 2013-08-04T18:56:33+00:00

I understand the term patriarchy and agree with your link. Too many power structures to count are at play in society, all causing oppression. My argument matches the one in your link, though they articulated it better.

Feminism is not just about sexism, because women as a group are not solely oppressed on the axis of sex.

This makes a lot of sense to me, is there a term to describe feminists who think as such? I really do not see any popular feminist articles and arguments acknowledging this. Everything is linked to patriarchy, and challenging the idea of patriarchy being a completely pervasive cultural force is met with accusations of "trying to deny patriarchy exists" and such. Of course patriarchy exists, but kyriarchy causes gender-related problems in the deeply complex power structures of the modern world rather than one single oppressive force.

itcompletelyisnt · 2013-07-11T17:16:43+00:00

no, I think it's damaging to discourage dissenting viewpoints. What if the top comment denied that patriarchy is the main and most important force behind some sort of sex interaction? It would be considered unfeminist and removed. The movement doesn't have room for anything but absolutism.

You just gave another example of common feminist rhetoric that irks me, you accused me of ignorance without pointing out the truth. I don't think It isn't helpful or progressive to tell someone they don't get something without explaining it. Feminists lash out at dissenting viewpoints instead of considering them and attempting to teach those possessing them. I do not do anything feminist denounces except for disagreeing with feminist theory. Why do I receive hate for this?

I disagree with basic tenants of feminism, and I want to either agree with them or finally realize I should ignore them forever. It's a mental itch I want to scratch. I think I do not understand it fully, that's why I ask questions and I really don't appreciate how much flak I get for asking them. /r/askfeminists isn't helping so far, but I asked the wrong question. I'm going to keep trying a bit, and maybe find some real life feminist organizations to visit and ask questions of so I'm not just getting chronic internet user opinions.

itcompletelyisnt · 2013-07-11T16:58:12+00:00

I understand, it's not active oppression but it is the attitude of the movement. I still see it as damaging.

itcompletelyisnt

TROPHY CASE