Will matriarchy replace patriarchy?

Originally posted by DanMachine: ↑

>But I’m not going to justify that I think you and Ben are expressing ideas that are out of date and place worked into boxes defined by very specific gender roles.
You've just assumed what I mean. Did you just mansplain what I think to me?
What idea have I expressed? Let's go back.

1) people should cooperate
2) people have different capacities
3) people have different preferences

Some of this difference may be distributed by gender, and, if that is the case, so what?

> as for your own views about pay. If it’s easier to agree with you I will because I’m quite honestly stuffed if I can see the point of debating.
My views about pay are that

1) we have moved away from merit based selection in a lot of areas
1a) partially we have driven this through playing on social desire to change governance structures to include women, that's a separate issue.
2) peoples choices in life affect their earning capacity
3) some jobs pay more then others and women may not choose them (eg, under sea welder).

I haven't really engaged with you on this at all, I was more pointing out how biases are applied to statistical modelling in general, that's all.

I would say that I think pay outcomes really come down to how well you play the game, and certainly it's generally the case that the women I know who get paid well tend to have gamed their way into positions (ie - they've worked the system intelligently to their own benefit) whereas the men I know who get paid a lot tend towards just really smashing themselves hard (ie, their perspective on how to get ahead is kind of archaic - work hard not smart).

And note, please note, I am not saying "men work harder than women and are therefore more deserving of money". I'm saying men and women interpret the rules of the game differently and, frankly, women seem to be better at playing the "workplace culture 21st century" game better than men.

(We could have another whole discussion about useless make-work jobs and a total lack of actual productivity lol)

>so let me simply add that of course you are superior.
I have not at any point in time tried to argue that, nor do I think that. Wtf would you say that to me for? I am genuinely trying to discuss this with you in good faith.

My original point was that the biggest problem women face as they gain social status (ie, "if matriarchy replaces patriarchy") is the lack of eligible male partners.

Women PREFER men with higher status than them. This is just an objective fact. It is not a complaint. It is not an indictment of female character.
And so, as women gain social status, consequently, the number of male partners with higher status - and thus acceptable to them- shrinks. This is just material reality.

Women cannot be "at the top" and also have men "higher than them".

This may have social consequences, yes? What might they be? This is the point of this discussion.

I'm not trying to trap you into some admission that men are better than women, or that you have to "clean toilets" (wtf???)
I'm trying to have an intellectual discussion with you (I'm treating you as an equal here... )
It's not a discussion about you or me. It's about the potential outcomes of reordering societies. Why would you take it personally????

Expand

i acknowledge that you were engaging somewhat on the issue and certainly not on the person but over the course of the thread when everyone else sensibly opted out I’m responding not just to you but others.

there is more than one “conversation” happening at the same time

a couple of micro details
mansplaining is not trying to tell you what you think but explaining what one already knows or does not need explaining.

I was expressing my view of the general run of your arguments. I know what you were saying but you’ve also linked it to a generalised view of women. My objection is not whether that may hold in a statistical sense but whether it creates a box that all women are meant to live within.

you keep asking/suggesting that women can’t have both higher status men and higher status themselves. the problem with that is that you may not be talking about the same cohort. Because the views on this are quite likely to reflect the bell shaped curve (guessing) it also fails to consider the possibility that gender based norms and judgments and social pressure to behave that way leaves much less leeway for individual needs and interests.

might you go back to your original study - I think you drew a conclusion that may or may not have been demonstrated by the study. You comment as if it is women making the choice. Yet it is equally likely that there is something else in play - like mens choices. Maybe income is a compensation for being less well educated so there is an evening out of factors that might get in the way of a good connection. Maybe men don’t want women who are smarter, better educated or earn more than them so the more traditional practices remain in play - it thus being availability not preference

Yue Qian: For the most part, the tendency for women to marry up in income was greater among couples who shared the same education level: When compared with couples in which the wife had less education than the husband, the tendency for women to marry up in income was 54 percent higher among couples in which both spouses had a high school education, 31 percent higher among couples in which both spouses had some college education, and 23 percent higher among couples in which both spouses had a college degree or above

importance on the financial prospects of a potential spouse over time, some studies have suggested that they may value women’s high status only up to the point when women’s status exceeds their own status. Thus, men may hesitate to form marital relationships with women who have both more education and higher incomes than they do

the author quite specifically said she didn’t explore reasons. It is you who has made the conclusions.

women are also not entering into relationships as easily because they don’t want the traditional roles. I’d suggest that the study may point that way as well.

my commentary about toilets or whatever is as much that along with the gender roles and expectations you do reference in various ways come handmaiden expectations. I have neither the time nor energy to extract the data around consequences and woman’s attitudes on this but essentially women who work continue to pick up more of the domestic work.

as for my throw away - it’s simply the logical extension and thus a sarcastic response to your ongoing position that women want to have status but want men with more status. So I’m trying really hard to imagine what it would be like to care that much.

no it’s not about you or me. But at the same time it is personal. I’ve never fitted the gender box particularly well so it diesnt suit me at all well to have a world defined by those boxes as if opening them up might somehow bring the world or society undone

letting women navigate the change and work out for themselves what works seems more sensible to me. Part of navigating it is dealing with the fact that many men don’t like the idea - it disturbs their universe but others seem a great deal less perturbed by it and realise that true cooperation may involve loosening their views on gender roles as well.