Pages

Sunday, February 23, 2020

The Great Cosmic Custody Battle

One of the most vexing questions about the origin of patriarchy is how did men take over in the first place, if Women are the superior gender and were already in power to begin with in the last Matriarchal age?  And the question is not merely academic, as the answer will at least partially inform us on how to prevent men from taking over again in the future.  History may not always repeat itself exactly, of course, but it does rhyme nonetheless.

Some theorists would say that was because Women were too lenient with men and allowed them too much freedom ("give them an inch, and they take a mile") while others say the opposite, that Women were too harsh and strict and did not allow men enough freedom, so they rebelled ("forbidden fruit" or "reactance theory").  (Note also the parallels with today's discourse about teenagers and young adults, as this foreshadows the rest of this article.)  Still others, such as Riane Eisler and many others in the Goddess Movement, put forth the Kurgan theory, namely that a few patriarchal cultures formed in central Asia and the Arabian peninsula, and violently conquered their peaceful Matriarchal neighbors and eventually the world.  These cultures, called Kurgans, were semi-literate or illiterate nomadic sheepherders who really had no culture of their own, but they did have superior weapons technology, and aggression was rewarded in their culture.  This theory orginated from anthropologist Marija Gimbutas, and makes a great deal of sense.  But it does not fully explain how those cultures came to be patriarchal in the first place, except for the fact that aggression is wittingly or unwittingly rewarded in nomadic pastoral societies, and men are generally more aggressive and competitive than Women.

I generally favor the Kurgan theory myself, but then when Googling the title of Robert Jensen's most recent book "The End of Patriarchy", I inadvertently discovered a similarly-titled book by Claudio Naranjo, titled, "The End of Patriarchy: And the Dawning of a Tri-une Society", which led me to a new theory on the matter.  And while I don't agree with everything that Naranjo says, he does make some good points nonetheless.  He posits that young people were the ones in charge in the Paleolithic age, then Women were in charge in the Neolithic age, and then men took over in the Bronze Age and remained in power since.  And as the title implies, he looks forward to the end of patriarchy and the beginning of a new, "tri-une" society that combines the best of all three past ages, with women, men, and children all being equally valued members of society.  While I agree with him for the most part, I do think that he sells the idea of Matriarchy a bit too short and often mischaracterizes what it really is, and I also think that the best way that his tri-une society or something like it can be created is with Women in charge.

But one thing is certain.  Adultism (i.e. the systemic oppression and subjugation of young people) can theoretically exist without patriarchy, but patriarchy cannot exist without adultism.  To wit, men would never have been able to disempower women as much as they did if young people had not been thoroughly disempowered first by adults of both primary genders (even if done more so by men).  Kind of like how the rich would never have been able to torpedo the middle class as they did from Reagan onward if the middle class hadn't also helped the rich by throwing the poor under the bus.  That is my latest insight after coming across the work of Naranjo.  After all, it took thousands of years to remove Women from power and subjugate them, and it looks like adultism was one of men's secret weapons to accomplish this nefarious and perfidious act.

Thus patriarchy should really be called "adulto-patriarchy", and any self-proclaimed feminist movement that is not on board with the youth-rights movement as well is indeed a major intersectionality fail.  Much like how brocialists and manarchists are towards Women, and how White Feminists (TM) are towards people of color.  The entire edifice of kyriarchy must come down at once, as piecemeal approaches are ultimately doomed to fail.

Without youth rights, children and young people are essentially treated as "un-persons", and what results is what I call the Great Cosmic Custody Battle between the toxic authoritarians on both sides of patriarchy vs. reverse patriarchy.  And as long as that battle continues, so too will patriarchy, oligarchy, and tyranny.

So let's finally smash the adulto-patriarchy, yesterday!  What better time than now?

2 comments:

  1. THERE ARE MANY TO ME ESOTERIC TERMS, I THINK YOU CAN FIGURE WHAT THEY ARE. I NEVER HEARD THEM BEFORE. WE NEED SOME DEFINITIONS HERE - I CAN'T BE THE ONLY ONE WHO DOESN'T GET THEM. OTHER THAN THAT, GREAT.

    ReplyDelete
  2. DEFINITIONS:

    Reactance Theory: an unpleasant motivational arousal to offers, persons, rules, or regulations that threaten or eliminate specific behavioral freedoms. Reactance occurs when a person feels that someone or something is taking away their choices or limiting the range of alternatives.

    Kurgans: Patriarchal tribes from Central Asia that became the Aryans or Indo-Europeans (sometimes some tribes from the Arabian Peninsula are included too) and violently conquered the previously Matriarchal societies of the Old World that prevailed for millennia before.

    Adultism: The systematic oppression and subjugation of children and young people by adults. (A form of ageism)

    Adulto-patriarchy: the intersection of adultism and patriarchy, which both reinforce each other.

    Brocialists and Manarchists: self-proclaimed male leftists, socialists and anarchists who in reality are fake, sexist, misogynistic, and/or uninterested in feminism and Women's concerns. Similar to "fauxgressive" men who pretend to be "woke".

    Kyriarchy: a social system or set of connecting social systems built around domination, oppression, and submission. Includes patriarchy, racism, classism, ableism, heterosexism, ageism/adultism, and all other intersectional oppressions that reinforce each other.

    Intersectionality: a theoretical framework for understanding how aspects of one's social and political identities (gender, race, class, sexuality, ability, etc.) might combine to create unique modes of discrimination. It aims to broaden the agenda of the first waves of feminism, which largely focused on the experiences of white, middle class women.

    ReplyDelete