It seems that even at the moment that I cast my suspicions, namely that Western patriarchy is essentially a pathological group structure, I also at that moment, underestimate the degree to which this statement holds water.
If one's ideology is not really pathological then anger or disappointment might be the most logical result of it being thought otherwise. But a patriarch who is in fact really pathological will not take kindly to being labelled as he is. You will get so much more than open anger or other expressions of regret from him. So one must walk with greater caution in labelling what is in fact pathological correctly.
And there is always also the danger of using one of patriarchy's most potent weapons against it. Keep in mind that women per se (that is before they speak, act or do anything whatsoever) have been labelled by the patriarchy as insane/disordered. This label is linked to the idea that they do not have male body parts, and thus cannot be "normal" (wherein "normal" is that which conforms to existing patriarchal ideals -- a vicious circle).
Women are wrongly regarded as disordered before they even have anything to say, and when they do say, "patriarchy is pathological" (that is, they give verbal expression to the contents of their everyday experience), it is a conditioned reflex of every hardline patriarch to turn around and say: "But you're the woman of the group. So, it's not me -- it's you!"
Due to the very minimal amount of effort that a patriarch puts into any kind of thinking, he will feel vindicated in expressing these views as well. (He thinks that the genteel inward sensation that taking the path of least resistance is a sign that the gods are smiling on him.)
If one's ideology is not really pathological then anger or disappointment might be the most logical result of it being thought otherwise. But a patriarch who is in fact really pathological will not take kindly to being labelled as he is. You will get so much more than open anger or other expressions of regret from him. So one must walk with greater caution in labelling what is in fact pathological correctly.
And there is always also the danger of using one of patriarchy's most potent weapons against it. Keep in mind that women per se (that is before they speak, act or do anything whatsoever) have been labelled by the patriarchy as insane/disordered. This label is linked to the idea that they do not have male body parts, and thus cannot be "normal" (wherein "normal" is that which conforms to existing patriarchal ideals -- a vicious circle).
Women are wrongly regarded as disordered before they even have anything to say, and when they do say, "patriarchy is pathological" (that is, they give verbal expression to the contents of their everyday experience), it is a conditioned reflex of every hardline patriarch to turn around and say: "But you're the woman of the group. So, it's not me -- it's you!"
Due to the very minimal amount of effort that a patriarch puts into any kind of thinking, he will feel vindicated in expressing these views as well. (He thinks that the genteel inward sensation that taking the path of least resistance is a sign that the gods are smiling on him.)
No comments:
Post a Comment