A Discussion On Patriarchy, Oppression And Feminism

A Discussion On Patriarchy, Oppression And Feminism

Analyzing patriarchy through Rita Gross, Bell Hooks and Deniz Kandiyoti.
2615
views

Patriarchy, by definition, refers to “a social system in which power is held by men, through cultural norms and customs that favor men and withhold opportunity from women.”

This interpretation suggests that men are more socially privileged than women, which directly limits female opportunities. While accurate in particular contexts, this is certainly not the only or even the most accurate meaning of patriarchy.

In fact, if we define patriarchy literally (as Rita Gross does in her work "Feminism and Religion") it comes to mean “rule by fathers.” Gross furthers her argument, telling us, “Men monopolize or dominate all the roles and pursuits that society most values and rewards…furthermore, men literally ruled over women, setting the rules and limits by which and within they were expected to operate. Women who did not conform, and many who did, could be subjected to another form of male dominance — physical violence.”

This portrayal of patriarchy is perhaps amongst the more prevalent representations that arise when we think of the word. However common, this does not mean it goes without being problematic. Men having power over women (ruling over women, to be exact) suggests that in all “patriarchal societies” everywhere, all men dominate all women all the time. All women can be subjected to violence at the hands of men. While we could choose to remain ignorant and accept this depiction, it’s simply not fully accurate. Patriarchy is by no means “black and white” — it has layers, and these layers must be acknowledged.

When we discuss patriarchy, we cannot solely consider our current time period, social class, economic system, culture or political structure. Patriarchy bears different meanings for different people — for example, while patriarchy may take the form of only male presidents in American culture and politics, it can also take the form of subordination of young brides in Islamic culture (as detailed by Deniz Kandiyoti in her work “Islam and Patriarchy: A Comparative Perspective.”) Kandiyoti discusses the life cycle of women in Islamic culture, describing the hardships that they face as young brides and the eventual power they hold as matriarchs over their sons and daughters-in-law. She states, “The cyclical nature of women’s power and their anticipation of inheriting the authority of senior women encourages a through internalization of this form of patriarchy by the women themselves.”

In essence, this suggests that women are more willing to endure whatever painstaking oppression that they must as young brides in expectation of the power they’ll hold as elder matriarchs. Kandiyoti’s example is a clear representation of why the term “patriarchy” itself is problematic in nature; here specifically, we’re introduced to a side of “patriarchy” where it isn’t men that are holding power over women, but rather older women who are enforcing power over younger women. These women actually look forward to getting older in order to assert their dominance in the role they fill. They anticipate the day when they’ll be able to oppress other women. Some may believe that women deserve this power since it puts them on an equal playing field as men, giving them power over women. However, the problem here is not that men have power over women, it’s that women are put in a position where their oppression is required (whether that be by men or by fellow women).

The solution is not to simply put women in the position of men, allowing them to fill male gender roles — this still classifies as patriarchy in itself. The actual problem to overcome, which Gross touches upon, is the gender roles. Further, oppression and sexism are amongst the problems that must be demolished. This is where feminism comes into play.

Contrary to popular opinion, feminism is not concerned with women hating men or trying to “be like men.” What feminism is interested in is “ending sexism, sexist exploitation, and oppression,” as Bell Hooks tells us. Hooks’ definition does not mention that the sexism that is to be ended is only female sexism. Gender roles are sexist against both sexes, male and female. If there’s hope to end patriarchy, then these discriminatory gender roles are what need to be removed. We need not concern ourselves with who should hold power and who shouldn’t; what we do need to concern ourselves with is who should not face oppression. The answer to this is simple: everyone. Everyone deserves to remain unoppressed, regardless if this oppression is coming from men or women.

Hooks tells us that a consequence of the socialization from birth to accept sexist thought and action is that “females can be just as sexist as men.” This idea supports Kandiyoti’s account of the elder Islamic women who reign over their sons and daughters-in-law. These women, as described by Kandiyoti, are “just as sexist as men.” This, too, however can be problematic because it assumes that all men are sexist, which is absolutely not the case. Of course, there will be men that are not sexist, there will be women that are, and vice versa. In this way, Hooks’ argument is disrupted, not by Kandiyoti’s example, but by the subliminal gender role implied by her statement. Men are socialized into the position of being sexist despite the fact that they do not all fit this post and that it’s not solely men who are discriminatory against the opposite sex. The next step, then, is the break the links between sexual identity and social roles that we’re all so accustomed to.

It’s important to realize that “patriarchy” takes up different meanings in different contexts — its definition is not set in stone. What is patriarchal in one culture, social realm, political structure, economic system, age, or time period may or may not match what’s patriarchal amongst another. Though there are parallels to be drawn between patriarchies in these different relations, major differences still operate between them. All men do not have (and have not had) power over all women all of the time. All women are not subordinated by all men everywhere. There is grey in this discussion — and a lot of it. What can be attributed to all versions of patriarchy is oppression, particularly the oppression of women. To end patriarchy is to end oppression, not to end “male domination.”

Cover Image Credit: Odyssey

Popular Right Now

Your Wait time At Theme Parks Is Not Unfair, You're Just Impatient

Your perceived wait time is always going to be longer than your actual wait time if you can't take a minute to focus on something other than yourself.

26369
views

Toy Story Land at Disney's Hollywood Studios "unboxed" on June 30, 2018. My friend and I decided to brave the crowds on opening day. We got to the park around 7 AM only to find out that the park opened around 6 AM. Upon some more scrolling through multiple Disney Annual Passholder Facebook groups, we discovered that people were waiting outside the park as early as 1 AM.

We knew we'd be waiting in line for the bulk of the Toy Story Land unboxing day. There were four main lines in the new land: the line to enter the land; the line for Slinky Dog Dash, the new roller coaster; the line for Alien Spinning Saucers, the easier of the new rides in the land; Toy Story Mania, the (now old news) arcade-type ride; and the new quick-service restaurant, Woody's Lunchbox (complete with grilled cheese and "grown-up drinks").

Because we were so early, we did not have to wait in line to get into the land. We decided to ride Alien Spinning Saucers first. The posted wait time was 150 minutes, but my friend timed the line and we only waited for 50 minutes. Next, we tried to find the line for Slinky Dog Dash. After receiving conflicting answers, the runaround, and even an, "I don't know, good luck," from multiple Cast Members, we exited the land to find the beginning of the Slinky line. We were then told that there was only one line to enter the park that eventually broke off into the Slinky line. We were not about to wait to get back into the area we just left, so we got a Fastpass for Toy Story Mania that we didn't plan on using in order to be let into the land sooner. We still had to wait for our time, so we decided to get the exclusive Little Green Man alien popcorn bin—this took an entire hour. We then used our Fastpass to enter the land, found the Slinky line, and proceeded to wait for two and a half hours only for the ride to shut down due to rain. But we've come this far and rain was not about to stop us. We waited an hour, still in line and under a covered area, for the rain to stop. Then, we waited another hour and a half to get on the ride from there once it reopened (mainly because they prioritized people who missed their Fastpass time due to the rain). After that, we used the mobile order feature on the My Disney Experience app to skip part of the line at Woody's Lunchbox.

Did you know that there is actually a psychological science to waiting? In the hospitality industry, this science is the difference between "perceived wait" and "actual wait." A perceived wait is how long you feel like you are waiting, while the actual wait is, of course, the real and factual time you wait. There are eight things that affect the perceived wait time: unoccupied time feels longer than occupied time, pre-process waits feel longer than in-process waits, anxiety makes waits feel longer, uncertain waits are longer than certain waits, unexplained waits are longer than explained waits, unfair waits are longer than equitable waits, people will wait longer for more valuable service and solo waiting feels longer than group waiting.

Our perceived wait time for Alien Spinning Saucers was short because we expected it to be longer. Our wait for the popcorn seemed longer because it was unoccupied and unexplained. Our wait for the rain to stop so the ride could reopen seemed shorter because it was explained. Our wait between the ride reopening and getting on the coaster seemed longer because it felt unfair for Disney to let so many Fastpass holders through while more people waited through the rain. Our entire wait for Slinky Dog Dash seemed longer because we were not told the wait time in the beginning. Our wait for our food after placing a mobile order seemed shorter because it was an in-process wait. We also didn't mind wait long wait times for any of these experiences because they were new and we placed more value on them than other rides or restaurants at Disney. The people who arrived at 1 AM just added five hours to their perceived wait

Some non-theme park examples of this science of waiting in the hospitality industry would be waiting at a restaurant, movie theater, hotel, performance or even grocery store. When I went to see "Jurassic World: Fallen Kingdom," the power went out in the theater right as we arrived. Not only did we have to wait for it to come back and for them to reset the projectors, I had to wait in a bit of anxiety because the power outage spooked me. It was only a 30-minute wait but felt so much longer. At the quick-service restaurant where I work, we track the time from when the guest places their order to the time they receive their food. Guests in the drive-thru will complain about 10 or more minute waits, when our screens tell us they have only been waiting four or five minutes. Their actual wait was the four or five minutes that we track because this is when they first request our service, but their perceived wait begins the moment they pull into the parking lot and join the line because this is when they begin interacting with our business. While in line, they are experiencing pre-process wait times; after placing the order, they experience in-process wait times.

Establishments in the hospitality industry do what they can to cut down on guests' wait times. For example, theme parks offer services like Disney's Fastpass or Universal's Express pass in order to cut down the time waiting in lines so guests have more time to buy food and merchandise. Stores like Target or Wal-Mart offer self-checkout to give guests that in-process wait time. Movie theaters allow you to check in and get tickets on a mobile app and some quick-service restaurants let you place mobile or online orders. So why do people still get so bent out of shape about being forced to wait?

On Toy Story Land unboxing day, I witnessed a woman make a small scene about being forced to wait to exit the new land. Cast Members were regulating the flow of traffic in and out of the land due to the large crowd and the line that was in place to enter the land. Those exiting the land needed to wait while those entering moved forward from the line. Looking from the outside of the situation as I was, this all makes sense. However, the woman I saw may have felt that her wait was unfair or unexplained. She switched between her hands on her hips and her arms crossed, communicated with her body language that she was not happy. Her face was in a nasty scowl at those entering the land and the Cast Members in the area. She kept shaking her head at those in her group and when allowed to proceed out of the land, I could tell she was making snide comments about the wait.

At work, we sometimes run a double drive-thru in which team members with iPads will take orders outside and a sequencer will direct cars so that they stay in the correct order moving toward the window. In my experience as the sequencer, I will inform the drivers which car to follow, they will acknowledge me and then still proceed to dart in front of other cars just so they make it to the window maybe a whole minute sooner. Not only is this rude, but it puts this car and the cars around them at risk of receiving the wrong food because they are now out of order. We catch these instances more often than not, but it still adds stress and makes the other guests upset. Perhaps these guests feel like their wait is also unfair or unexplained, but if they look at the situation from the outside or from the restaurant's perspective, they would understand why they need to follow the blue Toyota.

The truth of the matter is that your perceived wait time is always going to be longer than your actual wait time if you can't take a minute to focus on something other than yourself. We all want instant gratification, I get it. But in reality, we have to wait for some things. It takes time to prepare a meal. It takes time to experience a ride at a theme park that everyone else wants to go on. It takes time to ring up groceries. It takes patience to live in this world.

So next time you find yourself waiting, take a minute to remember the difference between perceived and actual wait times. Think about the eight aspects of waiting that affect your perceived wait. Do what you can to realize why you are waiting or keep yourself occupied in this wait. Don't be impatient. That's no way to live your life.

Cover Image Credit:

Aranxa Esteve

Related Content

Connect with a generation
of new voices.

We are students, thinkers, influencers, and communities sharing our ideas with the world. Join our platform to create and discover content that actually matters to you.

Learn more Start Creating

How The Democratic Party basically Handed Donald Trump The Presidency

The rise of Donald Trump was propelled in part by the far left's efforts to undermine him.

63
views

Donald Trump's victory in the 2016 Presidential Election was a shock to many across the country, myself included. It seemed impossible that someone so unapologetically crass, rude, and idiotic could even hope to achieve the position of the most powerful person in the world (have I mentioned that he literally admitted to sexually assaulting women?). I mean sure, it certainly didn't help that Hillary Clinton was probably the worst candidate that the Democratic Party could have run against him... actually she was definitely the worst, but she still should have won. As she tries to explain in her new book, what happened?

In order for a bigoted, fear-mongering, and an arguably uneducated man like Donald Trump to become president, there needs to be a perfect storm. We've already established that Hillary was a bad candidate on the Democratic side, but none of the other Republican candidates were very good either. Their best guy other than Trump was Ted Cruz, a man who can be described as unsettling on his best days. There was also a large number of people that resonated with Trump. Granted, they were mostly uneducated, blue-collar, religious, second amendment nuts, but Trump's "forgotten man" schtick stuck with them, as these were people who felt like they were being left behind. I would argue that they were and should have been, but that's beside the point.

However, the one thing that I think influenced Donald Trump's meteoric rise to the presidency the most were the ridiculous ways that some of his opponents would try to undermine his legitimacy as a candidate. As someone who identifies as a Democrat myself (not as my gender, but as my political affiliation), I certainly was not a fan of Donald Trump. I think that his election has brought us one step closer to the dystopian future laid out in the cinematic masterpiece that is Idiocracy, but it's not like my party didn't have opportunities to bring him down a peg. It's also not like we didn't completely fail in doing so.

Every time Donald Trump would say something that could be construed as racist, xenophobic, or sexist, Democrats would pounce on it and use it as proof that he was all of these things. This is a good method, but many Democrats got too overzealous in using it, calling him these things even when what he said was probably not racist, or even not racist at all. The baseless attacks vastly outnumbered the legitimate ones, and Trump supporters used it as a way to rally around their guy and to validate the ideas of "fake news" and their "us against the world" mentality.

The day the Donald Trump won the election, in my opinion at least, was the day that Hillary Clinton called Trump supporters a "basket of deplorables." Are you kidding me?! You're going to take tens of millions of American voters, essentially call them racist, sexist idiots, and flat-out dismiss them? All she did was verify to the Trump supporter all the things that he already believed: that he was being disrespected, left behind, and forgotten about by the democratic party. Regardless, how do you think people are going to vote if you just insult their intelligence and character for months on end? That's not the way to build bridges; it only creates the divisiveness that Trump thrives in.

This is why people think of Democrats as elitist: because Democrats act really elitist. If you always act like you know better than everyone else and sit in your ivory tower expecting everyone to realize how stupid they are, you're not going to win elections. In fact, you'll do so bad in elections that you'll lose to an unqualified, idiotic, racist Cheeto that wears a toupee that looks like it was made from hairs scooped out of the bathroom sink. Anyway, that's why Trump won the election: because Hillary and the Democrats had their heads so far up their asses that they couldn't smell his spray tan coming.

Cover Image Credit:

upload.wikimedia.org

Related Content

Facebook Comments