Wednesday, October 21, 2015

Evidence that the patriarchy is a real thing?! (Response)

I watched this video and I wanted to respond to it. She claims that the patriarchy exists in American society, and she tries to use social science methodology to back that up.  She spends about the first 10 minutes explaining why she made this video, her credentials, and about the social science process in general, to set up for her argument. This really got my hopes up that she would provide a lot of logic, and use statistics to back up her claims. I was disappointed. She first defined patriarchy as such: 

Obviously she wasn't advocating the first definition, where we live in tribes and clans, and power stays with the father, and is passed down to the eldest son. Although, this is the definition of patriarchy I find most accurate; the kind found in the Old Testament.
She said that we live in a social system in which power is held and controlled by men, to favor men, and withhold opportunities from women. She then sets up the following proof:

 I come from the world of math proofs, so this is a little different for me. Yet, there seems to be a disconnect of logic here. She claims that in order for our society to not be patriarchal, we'd need to have close to a 50/50 ration of male and female politicians. She further claims that if this assertion doesn't hold, then we must live in a patriarchal society.

I found this approach overly simplistic and inaccurate. Which is sad, because she seemed so sure that this was the most airtight solid argument ever made.

  1. How does more male politicians prove that we live in a patriarchal society? There in no line drawn between those two dots.
  2. Women have an equal opportunity to run for office.
  3. Our politicians aren't given their power by virtue of being male. They're elected. Who elects them? A population that is made up of 50% women. Women have an equal opportunity vote.
  4. In a patriarchal society, would men relinquish their power? Probably not. So her admitting that there are female politicians at all seems to contradict herself.
  5. Her assertion also seems to imply that gender is the only variable on election day. Of course, that's not case. There's other factors that voters consider when electing a politician, such as their viewpoints on social and political issues, their public relations, their outward character, etc...
  6. The US has two major presidential candidates who are women... A Democrat and a Republican! Carly Fiorina, is one of the top four Republican primary contenders! She's doing better than most of her fellow men contenders. This wouldn't happen in a society that didn't value women, and that didn't empower them with equal opportunity.
Personally, I vote for candidates who seem competent, honest, brave, and who represent my ideas. I've voted for a black woman Congress for the past two elections. But, it sickens me, that in today's world, that that matters. That anybody cares about WHAT I voted for.  WHO I voted for should be more important. Identity politics are a sham. I voted for my Congresswoman because she has integrity, and she supports many of the values that I do. I voted for her because she isn't afraid to stand up for what is right.

Whatever respect I have for this lady has been lost in her comments section of her video. YouTuber Justicar left her a brilliant response, which pretty much expressing my sentiments better than I could express them. Her immediate response was so profoundly stupid, that it makes me wonder how some University gives PhDs to people who so blatantly ignore the facts.

No comments:

Post a Comment