this post was submitted on 02 Dec 2023
352 points (90.0% liked)
[Outdated, please look at pinned post] Casual Conversation
6591 readers
1 users here now
Share a story, ask a question, or start a conversation about (almost) anything you desire. Maybe you'll make some friends in the process.
RULES
- Be respectful: no harassment, hate speech, bigotry, and/or trolling
- Encourage conversation in your post
- Avoid controversial topics such as politics or societal debates
- Keep it clean and SFW: No illegal content or anything gross and inappropriate
- No solicitation such as ads, promotional content, spam, surveys etc.
- Respect privacy: Donβt ask for or share any personal information
Related discussion-focused communities
- !actual_discussion@lemmy.ca
- !askmenover30@lemm.ee
- !dads@feddit.uk
- !letstalkaboutgames@feddit.uk
- !movies@lemm.ee
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
You may already know about this but your description of sexism as akin to racism made me want to mention intersectionality. It's an analytical framework used to describe social relations as it pertains to privilege and discrimination. There's a good reason you felt that way. Many feminist theorists pose that most/all forms of oppression (racism, homophobia, transphobia, classism, etc.) are modeled after misogyny, which is considered to be the original form of oppression
Could you possibly give a brief synopsis of why they think misogyny is the base model rather than (eg) racism? Considering many countries afford rights to different races before women (eg black men could vote in the US before women) it does make sense, but I'm curious about the basic theory.
Patriarchal society developed before the concepts of race we use today. Much of how society was shaped stemmed from the tribes and clans of the pre modern era.
How pre modern are we talking? Because it seems like homo sapiens vs neanderthal would've had more cross cultural discrimination than men and women within the same species.
Because cultures made up exclusively of one race were still misogynistic. And because there's actual physical differences between the sexes that are used to wrongly justify discriminating against women.
A monoculture being misogynistic doesn't really show that the base model is misogyny. It seems like you'd have to have a culture with mixed races early on that discriminated against women before other races to decisively prove the point.
Your previous comment:
I assumed you understood your own point that you made, so I'm not sure what you're asking for now.
Others have already answered your question but I thought I'd leave you with an article about it in case you want more information. There's a lot more to be said on this than a few comments and the odd article but it's a good enough place to start
Thank you for your comment. I've heard of intersectionality but didn't quite understood the idea behind it, as it was only in passing mentioned.
Now watching a talk by KimberlΓ© Crenshaw
I'd go a step further: all is modeled after power. If you feel* you have more power it's because the other part is "less than you", not because you both have different strengths.
*Feel, not that it's real.
Everything I wrote is about ways systems exercise coercive/domineering/oppressive power. They're not modeled after power, they're a consequence of heirarchies and the inherent power imbalances that are necessary for hierarchical power structures to maintain their existence