[Ludi]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Last_Historian', 'O')ne thing we need to bear in mind is that if we get The Collapse, the structure of the family will change from the atomized, nuclear "post-industrial" families we have today, to more traditional, patriarchal arrangements

[culicomorpha]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Ludi', 'P')eople would do much better to chuck the "traditional patriarchal" family arrangement and build their own extended families of non-blood-related individuals working together for mutual support (aka "neo-tribalism)". I keep hoping people won't feel compelled to return to some "traditional ideal" which has few if any benefits. But I guess if people insist on being idiots, there's not much we can do about it.

[Ludi]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('culicomorpha', 'I') don't see a return to patriarchy at all. I'm not sure where that's coming from

[culicomorpha]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Ludi', 'P')erhaps the scared white men will "take back what's rightfully theirs" by force, if necessary, because it is "the right way to live." That would be extremely unfortunate. But you see plenty of folks right here on this board who seem to want it. How you gonna put the women back in the kitchen once they been on the town?

[SeaGypsy]

Most modern men would not have the slightest idea how to lead a 'traditional patriarchal family'. Nor would most know about how power structures really work in societies with this structure. Trying to replicate something from history without direct experience of what it is and how it functions is not likely to work. In a 'neo-tribal' situation it becomes more about personalities than gender roles. There are men who are most usefull in the kitchen and women who are most usefull at the business end of a mattock. Every voice will be heard. I really think the men who pine for a return to traditional patriarchy are deluded as to the existence of such a thing other than as a perversion of the industrial revolution with little grounding in reality.

[Novus]

The days of the West are indeed numbered and when the smoke clears and the dust settles those who inhabit the land will most likely not even be us. Europe will be overrun with Muslims and America will be overrun with Mexicans. These are strong patriarchal cultures which will out breed whatever remains of liberalism is left as the first act of the post Western world. The good news is most of us won't be alive to see it. The bad news is we won't be alive because we will all be dead and not of old age either.

[SeaGypsy]

Currently only Anguilla (52%), Lesotho (52%), Philippines (55%), Saint Lucia (52%), have a majority of female legislaters, senior officials and managers.
Source: http://unstats.un.org/unsd/demographic/ ... /tab5d.htm

[Ludi]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Novus', 'T')he days of the West are indeed numbered and when the smoke clears and the dust settles those who inhabit the land will most likely not even be us. Europe will be overrun with Muslims and America will be overrun with Mexicans.

[Tanada]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('SeaGypsy', 'C')urrently only Anguilla (52%), Lesotho (52%), Philippines (55%), Saint Lucia (52%), have a majority of female legislaters, senior officials and managers.
Source: link

[SeaGypsy]

I am married to a very traditional Filipina who has no interest in leaving the Philippines. The country has really got a dialogue based powersharing system. It is not really matriarchal or patriarchal. Women are certainly in charge at home especially of finances, this has become the basis of power spread into business and politics. In my family I have the final say in major decision making; but if I run against my wife's grain I had better have damn good arguments for doing so. Women tend to think more seriously than men in this culture. The men work and bring home the money, then are generally happy to let the women decide what to do with it. The problem with patriarchy is when men over assert and thereby ignore the wishes and wellbeing of women. The problem with post feminist democracy as practiced increasingly in the west is that it is no longer about sharing power and responsibilty but in competing for it. This is why Germaine Greer used the title "The female Eunuch" because both genders have become nuetered in the post industrial system. The baby has been thrown out with the bathwater.

[Ludi]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('SeaGypsy', ' ')The problem with post feminist democracy as practiced increasingly in the west is that it is no longer about sharing power and responsibilty but in competing for it.

[culicomorpha]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('SeaGypsy', 'M')ost modern men would not have the slightest idea how to lead a 'traditional patriarchal family'. Nor would most know about how power structures really work in societies with this structure. Trying to replicate something from history without direct experience of what it is and how it functions is not likely to work. In a 'neo-tribal' situation it becomes more about personalities than gender roles. There are men who are most usefull in the kitchen and women who are most usefull at the business end of a mattock. Every voice will be heard. I really think the men who pine for a return to traditional patriarchy are deluded as to the existence of such a thing other than as a perversion of the industrial revolution with little grounding in reality.

[Last_Historian]

I'm not saying the return to patriarchy will happen immediately. It's just that this form of family will "evolve" (or re-evolve) as the dominant form of social organization over time. After all, there's a reason why patriarchy was the dominant family system since the Neolithic Revolution in practically all pre-industrial societies in the world?

Anyhow, some of you may be interested in reading this classic essay by Phillip Longman, The Return of Patriarchy.

[SeaGypsy]

Interesting article there LH. Patriarchy is a word I tend to apply post modern scrutiny to. I agree with the basic supposition alluded to in the article, more so with your simple way of putting it that this ancient system will re-evolve; but I am not sure most people even know what it means. Patriarchy has earned itself a bad name, due in part to what your writer terms as 'male tyranny'. The way the article starts out as one written by a man for men, about the 'irritation' of women; is telling. I believe that men and women have always had some specialised skills; a man has not yet given birth and is never likely to by natural means. Women have rarely, if ever, instigated war or genocide. Children are best raised by 2 strong parents, rather than a dominant father and supplicant mother. Conflict is minimised by seeking of consensus between men and women. My family is very traditional in roles. I have never used my veto to override the position of my wife. I do have a veto nonetheless. This entitles me to question her ideas no end, sometimes they fade away under scrutiny; I still have not used my veto. She is entitled to raise any idea or point she sees fit to. She can push it for as long as she feels to; she is not burdened by the ultimate decision/ yeah or neah. Is this traditional patriarchy? I feel most definitely that it is. Do I feel an imbalance in power goes with it? No I certainly do not. Do I think this is the way human beings evolved to cooperate? Yes I do.

[Ludi]

So men and women who behave in an egalitarian manner but the man has the ultimate veto power which he never uses is a patriarchy?

"Main Entry: pa·tri·ar·chy
Pronunciation: \-ˌär-kē\
Function: noun
Inflected Form(s): plural pa·tri·ar·chies Date: 1632
1 : social organization marked by the supremacy of the father in the clan or family, the legal dependence of wives and children, and the reckoning of descent and inheritance in the male line; broadly : control by men of a disproportionately large share of power
2 : a society or institution organized according to the principles or practices of patriarchy"
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/patriarchy

[mos6507]

I don't know why this thread is getting so bogged down in sexual politics. There has been a lot of discussion along these lines lately and I can only classify this sort of thing as just a subtle form of scapegoating. This is all a distraction, just like the cheap class warfare threads. It's not productive.

[Ludi]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Last_Historian', ' ')After all, there's a reason why patriarchy was the dominant family system since the Neolithic Revolution in practically all pre-industrial societies in the world?

[Ludi]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('mos6507', 'I') don't know why this thread is getting so bogged down in sexual politics. There has been a lot of discussion along these lines lately and I can only classify this sort of thing as just a subtle form of scapegoating. This is all a distraction, just like the cheap class warfare threads. It's not productive.

[SeaGypsy]

Probably because the mere mention of the word is quite provocative. It is open to endless semantic interpretations on both sides. I am not sure it is wise to suggest gender based power platforms in a dialogue about the future. My ravings herein have been personal reflections on how I, as a quite selfish male, work my own family situation in relation to personal politics. I don't think this translates well into broader politics. It is fairly obvious to those who stick around here for a while that the whole site is quite heavily male slanted. Yet some of the most thoughtfull posters are women. As a somewhat enlightened male I feel I should support the questioning of gender based power language which comes up from time to time. Call me a snag if you like Mos. By the way, I only recall one other thread recently getting into gender politics, the Lipstick one. It is productive to discuss these issues if it makes women feel part of the site and invites more women in. Ignoring gender as an issue altogether is not always possible.

[mos6507]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Ludi', 'I') think discussing social organization is important. You don't.