Judge questions why ‘only the boy’ is charged in underage sex case - Polidicks

[QUOTE=Cloak Raider;44943128]right, I totally understand that, but this was already a concept within society. Gender roles being societal is something that already existed BEFORE the patriarchy thing came about, so I don't see it as adding anything[/QUOTE] Well, patriarchy is simply the name people give to societies that are men-dominant and also expect men to be. Matriarchal societies (which may have existed at some point; I recall reading about the Achaean society in Ancient Greece being matriarchal before the Dorian invasions) have the same problem but reversed: the belief that women are dominant and powerful and that they should be. The patriarchy thing is a way to denote specifically that part of our society, or rather that expectancy and those presumptions of our society. The word Patriarchy just narrows down which problem of society we're talking about.

[QUOTE=deltasquid;44943185]Well, patriarchy is simply the name people give to societies that are men-dominant and also expect men to be. Matriarchal societies (which may have existed at some point; I recall reading about the Achaean society in Ancient Greece being matriarchal before the Dorian invasions) have the same problem but reversed: the belief that women are dominant and powerful and that they should be. The patriarchy thing is a way to denote specifically that part of our society, or rather that expectancy and those presumptions of our society. The word Patriarchy just narrows down which problem of society we're talking about.[/QUOTE] There's a number of matriarchal societies still in existance today. You'll generally find them in places where it's traditional the daughter that inherits as opposed to the son. Keep in mind, there's a lot of societies which combine elements of both fairly often. Western society in itself isn't a patriarchy anymore either. It merely has cultural vestiges of it which do still keep many elements alive.

[QUOTE=deltasquid;44943185]Well, patriarchy is simply the name people give to societies that are men-dominant and also expect men to be. Matriarchal societies (which may have existed at some point; I recall reading about the Achaean society in Ancient Greece being matriarchal before the Dorian invasions) have the same problem but reversed: the belief that women are dominant and powerful and that they should be. The patriarchy thing is a way to denote specifically that part of our society, or rather that expectancy and those presumptions of our society. The word Patriarchy just narrows down which problem of society we're talking about.[/QUOTE] Right, but as you and wraithcat have already said, a patriarchal society is a term that already existed. I particularly dislike the term patriarchy because it doesn't add anything new, and all it does is give people the entirely wrong impression of what you're trying to make. basically 'the patriarchy' is one of the reasons why the majority of facepunch and the public don't take feminism seriously as I said, my problems with the term are entirely language based.

[QUOTE=itisjuly;44941464]Why do you call it patriarchy? That term is totally wrong in this context. Society causes expectations. Society is shaped by both men and women. And it is definitely not patriarchy that holds the idea that men can't be raped.[/QUOTE] The people who come up with these words are shit at naming things, is all. (see also: "rape culture")

[QUOTE=wraithcat;44943208]There's a number of matriarchal societies still in existance today. You'll generally find them in places where it's traditional the daughter that inherits as opposed to the son.[/QUOTE] Sorry, I don't know all that much about societies outside of Europe, really. I know that there are still Matriarchal influences around the Mediterranean though, when you consider the Italian/Spanish "Angry mom yelling and throwing slippers around while dad hides somewhere" stereotype.

[QUOTE=Cloak Raider;44943228]basically 'the patriarchy' is one of the reasons why the majority of facepunch and the public don't take feminism seriously[/QUOTE] it's their responsibility to not have a kneejerk reaction to the term because all they've heard was strawman arguments about it up until now

[QUOTE=MaxOfS2D;44943247]it's their responsibility to not have a kneejerk reaction to the term because all they've heard was strawman arguments about it up until now[/QUOTE] the problem is with the word as well calling it "THE patriarchy" makes it sound like an entity. as soon as you use 'the' it sounds like an entity

[QUOTE=MaxOfS2D;44943247]it's their responsibility to not have a kneejerk reaction to the term because all they've heard was strawman arguments about it up until now[/QUOTE] To be completely honest. A lot of stuff is really badly named. Feminism itself = egalitarianism (as opposed to a movement trying to establish a matriarchy) Rape culture = objectification (as opposed to well forced sexual relations) the patriarchy = male aspect preference (as opposed to direct leadership) Just to grab a few examples EDIT In part because it also tends to attract fringe members from both sides and becomes a lot more of a battlefield.

[QUOTE=wraithcat;44943361]To be completely honest. A lot of stuff is really badly named. Feminism itself = egalitarianism (as opposed to a movement trying to establish a matriarchy) Rape culture = objectification (as opposed to well forced sexual relations) the patriarchy = male aspect preference (as opposed to direct leadership) Just to grab a few examples[/QUOTE] Well, Feminism is excusable because feminism doesn't seek to change ALL inequalities, just those between man and women. Egalitarianism would also encompass LGBT, racial issues... Which are not necessarily on feminism's agenda.

[QUOTE=deltasquid;44943385]Well, Feminism is excusable because feminism doesn't seek to change ALL inequalities, just those between man and women. Egalitarianism would also encompass LGBT, racial issues... Which are not necessarily on feminism's agenda.[/QUOTE] Actually, "feminism" has changed scope to include all gender related issues now (LGBT and so on). It's still named "feminism" because it was originally to better women's position, then they just expanded to include everything else but kept the name for historical reasons.

[QUOTE=MaxOfS2D;44943247]it's their responsibility to not have a kneejerk reaction to the term because all they've heard was strawman arguments about it up until now[/QUOTE] Or not to take a facet of conflict theory as fact in a world where it has been continuously falsified and revised.

I think 16 is a good age of consent, it's when you can start driving and pick up bitches with your nan.

[QUOTE=Badballer;44958287]I think 16 is a good age of consent, it's when you can start driving and pick up bitches with your nan.[/QUOTE] The driving age varies almost as much as the age of consent. For example you can get a restricted license at 14 in South Dakota whereas in the District of Columbia you can't get a full license until you're 21. In most countries the driving age is considerably higher than the age of consent.

[QUOTE=booster;44934378]18 as age of consent just leads to unnecessary problems like this. 16 seems like a "reasonable" age.[/QUOTE] Its like 12 or 13 in Mexico.

[QUOTE=lavacano;44953216]Actually, "feminism" has changed scope to include all gender related issues now (LGBT and so on). It's still named "feminism" because it was originally to better women's position, then they just expanded to include everything else but kept the name for historical reasons.[/QUOTE] Womyn pure womyn, men can't be raped/abused, etc. Feminism has too many schisms to narrow down. Separating the man hating feminists from the equality feminists should involve a new name that doesn't imply a focus on one gender.

[QUOTE=Rangergxi;44961208]Womyn pure womyn, men can't be raped/abused, etc. Feminism has too many schisms to narrow down. Separating the man hating feminists from the equality feminists should involve a new name that doesn't imply a focus on one gender.[/QUOTE] You mean like egalitarians? But changing to that would mean that the MRA won! WE CAN´T LET THE MRA WIN PAL!

[QUOTE=Impact1986;44961636]You mean like egalitarians? But changing to that would mean that the MRA won! WE CAN´T LET THE MRA WIN PAL![/QUOTE] That would be great but it does kind of have socialist implications.