prehistory/early civilization/mythology

nomadthethird

more issues than Time mag
Of course it could be something as simple as written language forming a concomitant part of a societal organisation revolving around centralised authority - which is inextricable from some form of hierarchy, and the most primitive social dichotomy is between the sexes.

And the most primitive way to exert authority over someone is by (threat of) brute force.

And men are generally bigger and stronger than women.

Yeah, but a lot of the earliest societies were matriarchal. It's really just Judeo-Christianity-Islam (mostly Christianity and Islam) that introduced patriarchy and monotheism (Judaism is NOT monotheistic, it just put its god above the others in the region), and along with it the masculine/feminine binary. Before then, and in other global regions, female deities were being worshipped.

It's funny, isn't it, that for most of human history [edit: but especially in western societies] we've spent all kinds of energy and cultural resources on socially controlling female sexuality, not male sexuality?
 
Last edited:

Mr. Tea

Let's Talk About Ceps
I think there have been patriarchal societies outside of the J-C-I complex, y'know. China, Japan...?

Also, I think Judaism is monotheistic now, but yes, they acknowledged other gods (henotheism, I think it's called) in the (distant) past.
 
Last edited:

nomadthethird

more issues than Time mag
I think there have been patriarchal societies outside of the J-C-I complex, y'know.

Foot-binding in Imperial China, anyone?

But foot-binding in China is not evidence that they were under the influence of a patriarchal monotheism. [Although this is how people usually interpret this who can only look at it through the lens of Western binaries.]

While Asian cultures/societies have their own problems when it comes to women's rights, their forms of social and sexual repression have nothing to do with the divine right of teh mens handed down from He-Man Ceiling Cat.
 
Last edited:

nomadthethird

more issues than Time mag
In fact, footbinding in China is a form of extreme fetishism--fetishism being something Asian societies are uniquely progressive about-- which is simply NOT ALLOWED under Christianity, unless T&A counts as a fetish (and many would agree that it does.)

Oh yeah, and crucifixes/cruciforms/crosses.
 
Last edited:

nomadthethird

more issues than Time mag
Jesus was really just a Dvaitadvaita Hindu anyway, which its followers claim is 3000-5000 years old. It's kind of funny how he repackaged Eastern mysticism for the consumption of the Roman empire.

(This one's for Zhao.)
 

Mr. Tea

Let's Talk About Ceps
But foot-binding in China is not evidence that they were under the influence of a patriarchal monotheism. [Although this is how people usually interpret this who can only look at it through the lens of Western binaries.]

While Asian cultures/societies have their own problems when it comes to women's rights, their forms of social and sexual repression have nothing to do with the divine right of teh mens handed down from He-Man Ceiling Cat.

Sure, AFAIK it doesn't have a religious element. Sorry, I must have missed that bit in what you were saying - was looking at the patriarchy bit rather than monotheism.

Edit: I have to say, I can't really see what's so 'progressive' about gradually fucking up a young girl's feet until she can no longer walk. :confused: There's a distinct tang of Orientalism in the air from where I'm sitting...

Edit edit: the Catholic obsession with the Virgin - and her various possible antecedents (Isis, Diana...) - is a fascinating topic in its (her) own right, of course.
 
Last edited:

nomadthethird

more issues than Time mag
Sure, AFAIK it doesn't have a religious element. Sorry, I must have missed that bit in what you were saying - was looking at the patriarchy bit rather than monotheism.

Edit: I have to say, I can't really see what's so 'progressive' about gradually fucking up a young girl's feet until she can no longer walk. :confused: There's a distinct tang of Orientalism in the air from where I'm sitting...

Edit edit: the Catholic obsession with the Virgin - and her various possible antecedents (Isis, Diana...) - is a fascinating topic in its (her) own right, of course.

There's nothing progressive about footbinding specifically, that's obviously problematic, for very obvious reasons, but how different is binding feet until they are deformed from, say, a corset, which binds torsos until they are deformed? The difference is in degree, rather than in kind.

[When women used to wear corsets everyday, the deformity was actually quite noticeable and marked. The situation then was comparable to the one we're seeing now with breast implants. Implants have changed male expectations regarding breasts, so that what's considered "normal" sized breasts is actually much larger than what you'd see occuring in nature without surgical intervention. When women wore corsets, as it became the norm to see women represented with deformedly narrow rib cages and waists, women were pressured to wear corsets, or the normal/natural women would look freaky.]

There is also a marked difference where the patriarchal context of torso-binding is concerned; being so steeped in "naturalized" heteronorms e.g. the masculine/feminine binary, many Westerners are precluded from being able to see their own fetishism at work (as in the case of a corset, or a high heel, or trousers on men, etc.). Whereas in most Asian societies fetishism is central to sexuality, heterosexual norms, and avowedly so. Fewer Asian people have a problem admitting that their sexuality is fetishistic than Euros/Americans do. See what I mean?
 
Last edited:

nomadthethird

more issues than Time mag
Women wear bras now--you could say it "deforms" breasts to a certain degree. But it's a fetish, and let's face it, most of us prefer them. I do.

The idea that there's some sort of deeper, more "authentic" way to experience or engage in sexual activities, one where there is no (cultural, object-al, subjective, economic, etc.) mediation, but just "real" feelings that aren't tainted by the outside world, is a very strange and you might say uniquely Christian notion. You're right when you identify this as the place where the purity myth comes from... and of course, who is on the suffering end of that one more often than not?
 

nomadthethird

more issues than Time mag
I wonder what you make of this statement from Baudrillard:

I disagree with it, but I do understand where he's coming from. I think the sentiment behind the statement applies well to second wave feminism, where the point is that females are only "free" if they become just like men, if sexual difference is denied and negated altogether, and if a strategy of gender apartheid, where the only legitimate option they believe open to feminists is disengagment with the gender other (sex segregation) and denial of the validity of every existing form of sexual expression, is adopted.

I think there's no problem with looking for rights where you can find them. How else does society progress toward an abstract goal or ideal of justice-freedom? Black people would still be slaves in the U.S. if they hadn't been legally freed. They still have a long way to go, of course. But I don't buy into the anti-civic engagement arguments, I think they're completely bogus and lame, and run counter to their own logic/examples 9 times out of 10. If someone has a plan for total transformation of society that makes some kind of sense, I'm open to listening. Until then, the only other option available to us is to change what's here now.
 
Last edited:

Mr. Tea

Let's Talk About Ceps
I was thinking about corsets (no, not in that way) while I typed that post about foot-binding - yes, both fetishistic, both severely detrimental to health, and I certainly didn't imply that one was AOK while the other was a terrible scourge. Victorian Britain was, after all, pretty much the archetypal patriarchal society. Although symbolically - if not practically - led by a woman, oddly enough.

Edit: "Fewer Asian people have a problem admitting that their sexuality is fetishistic than Euros/Americans do. See what I mean?"

Yes, I do see. That's interesting. Have you come to this conclusion from talking to Asian people about what turns them on, or from a more second-hand source?
 
Last edited:

nomadthethird

more issues than Time mag
I was thinking about corsets (no, not in that way) while I typed that post about foot-binding - yes, both fetishistic, both severely detrimental to health, and I certainly didn't imply that one was AOK while the other was a terrible scourge. Victorian Britain was, after all, pretty much the archetypal patriarchal society. Although symbolically - if not practically - led by a woman, oddly enough.

Edit: "Fewer Asian people have a problem admitting that their sexuality is fetishistic than Euros/Americans do. See what I mean?"

Yes, I do see. That's interesting. Have you come to this conclusion from talking to Asian people about what turns them on, or from a more second-hand source?

It's not really my observation. It's been observed many times before by anthropologists, sociologists, and others.
 
Top