You are viewing a single comment's thread:
RE: Eating Your Cake and Having It Via Feminism 😂
Hmmmm - I am going to counter you here, which I have before and you haven't responded haha. THe problem is the idea that “provision is a man's patriarchal role, while housekeeping is the woman's patriarchal role.”
Um - yep. That's the patriachy. Feminism is about questioning the bargain where 'men provide, women do housework'.
If they've decided together he'll provide money and she'll do the domestics, fine - if it's freely agreed. Not 'I give her money and she doesn't 'fetch'. That's not equality - that's a a transaction based on gender roles.
You've forgot that money isn't the only contribution here - people can contribute in other ways. If they don't, that's a relationship issue, not a failure of feminism.
Feminism doesn't say women have to reject the benefits that come from a relatiaonship with a man, but have the freedom to negotiate it rather than 'what, dude, I give her all this stuff and she doesn't 'fetch'* - a massively patriachal attitude. If she doesn't want to do that, fine - that's something he then has the freedom himself to go 'well, that's not the kind of relationship I was after - I wanted a sex slave and a cook'.
If you're honestly going to use the language of equality, you can't ask 'what's the women's patriachal role that she MUST perform', but 'what agreement has this couple made that's fair to both of them'.
There's a million ways that two adults can organise a relationship and a household. Maybe for him it's 50/50 financially and domestically. Maybe she's entered the relationship for love, not to pick up his socks.
What is funny about this piece is you start with the argument that feminism is about equality then you go into definiting equality as “he performs his patriarchal role, therefore she must perform hers.” 😂
That's just patriarchy with an invoice attached. Lmao.
More information - Support - Reports - Discord
Support engagement with a delegation to topcomment:
50HP - 100HP - 250HP - 500HP - 750HP - 1000HP - 1500HP
Oooh, I'm really sorry if there was any counter I didn't reply, I actually love to be countered and to see someone else try to apply logic to my opinions. Gotta actually be logical, though 😃. I'll go and try to find any of such unreplied comment.
But then, in this comment of yours we agree on a lot of stuff.
You said feminism is about questioning the bargain. And I agree, I said so in the post you may have missed it. I said:
In the post I also said:
That is clearly a bargain, because I'm not only saying her response to him carrying out his patriarchal role is that she has to carry out hers, I'm saying she also has the option to aim for about half of provision and half of housekeeping and the guy is to also do same. That is, they both provide and they both do the chores.
You said:
"people can contribute in other ways. If they don't, that's a relationship issue, not a failure of feminism."
And I never blamed feminism in the entire post, I instead used the post as a chance to defend feminism. Look what I said:
Then you're making it about "what, dude, I give her all this stuff and she doesn't 'fetch" but I made it about she takes all these stuff and she doesn't want to give anything in return whether by way of fetching or if she doesn't like fetching renegotiating something that is more fair to both of them since she's supposed to be a feminist and feminism is about equality and fairness, not sitting back and letting one person carry a bigger burden than you do while saying nothing about fairness until it is your turn to contribute.
"he performs his patriarchal role, therefore she must perform hers" is just half the story. The full story is that she must perform hers or renegotiate something more balance. SHE MUST AIM FOR BALANCE.
Aiming for balance is a must if you are supposed to be someone interested in equality and fairness. You can't say you don't blame someone who is interested in equality and fairness for sitting back and watching their partner do most of the stuff. Her feminism is supposed to kick in immediately she notices it going on for a while like "hey, you're doing a lot while I do almost nothing, it is not fair I have to stop you right there".
Remember, he's not only performing his patriarchal role of his own accord, she's letting him perform it. If you're in a relationship with someone and they're doing something regularly and you say nothing about it but rather sit back and enjoy it then they're not just doing it, you're letting them do it. You're complicit.
If she's letting him perform it without stopping him or renegotiating then it means she has to perform hers. That's the only way it can be fair. If she's against patriarchy there's no way she should be comfortable letting a man perform his patriarchal role while she only speaks up when asked to perform hers and her speaking up is not in order to renegotiate or stop him from doing more but simply to stop herself from doing her part. That is just selfishness and hypocrisy. A complete lack of interest in the fairness that feminism is all about.
So, while reading the post, I think you just missed the extra stuff I added to
"he performs his patriarchal role, therefore she must perform hers"