My previous post provided a couple of examples of patriarchal behavior in domestic situations, both recently and about 100 years ago. The similarities were far more striking than the differences.
On a related note, here is actress Rachel Weisz' take on overcoming one aspect of the patriarchy, the notion that a man's wife belongs to him and that she should behave accordingly.
Weisz, despite being married to Daniel Craig, an actor who has now stared five times as one of the quintessential alpha males, James Bond, has apparently become a "queer icon" as a result of a number of film roles.
It's sort of like the notion: "you are what you wear."
These films, according to a profile in the 2019 "Greats" issue of T, the New York Times Style Magazine, have depicted Weisz "as someone with the clout to create the kinds of female roles that are rarely seen: women in intense, erotic relationships with other women, without apology or explanation."
Well, actually, Weisz does have an explanation. Later in the same article, she is quoted as saying: "There's something that happens in a scene when a woman is across from another woman. It sounds really pompous, but you are free from this history of ownership -- I mean that. It is really liberating."
In other words, free from the patriarchy.
Showing posts with label patriarchy. Show all posts
Showing posts with label patriarchy. Show all posts
Saturday, May 2, 2020
Portraits of the Patriarchy
In this post, I will present two depictions of patriarchal behavior, the first written very recently and the second written about 100 years earlier.
The Jan. 26, 2020 issue of The New York Times Magazine contained an article about a new book by a woman who transitioned to a man, relating what the author learned about masculinity from his father and grandfather.
The Jan. 26, 2020 issue of The New York Times Magazine contained an article about a new book by a woman who transitioned to a man, relating what the author learned about masculinity from his father and grandfather.
Tuesday, January 8, 2019
What is to Come: The Matriarchy
Well, Ok, this is another post that is not about fiction -- unfortunately.
Since the election of Donald Trump as President, many commentators have said that even when he is gone, U.S. politics will never be the same again.
And recently we have had some evidence that they are correct.
I'm thinking here of Rashida Tlaib, recently elected to the U.S. Congress after previously serving in the Michigan state legislature. The other day, in public remarks, she referred to Trump as a "motherfucker." In the view of New York Times opinion columnist Michelle Goldberg, Tlaib's use of such terminology was perfectly justified -- for a variety of reasons -- (even though either Goldberg herself or her editors declined to print that word in her column).
Back in the 1980s and 90s, when I was covering various Congressional issues as a reporter, one of he most irascible members of the House of Representatives was David Obey, a Wisconsin Democrat. Very liberal, he had little use for many if not most conservative members of Congress and who knows in what terms he may have referred to them in private. But in public, Obey was careful to say that he held such and such a member of Congress "in minimum high regard." Translated, that meant Obey considered him a total scoundrel, or worse.
Those were back in the bad old days when "the patriarchy" pretty much reigned supreme and especially in Washington DC.
Well those days are over, it seems, with Democratic voters returning a flood of women to Congress. So much for toxic masculinity. In its place, we can apparently look forward to equally toxic femininity.
Who is to blame? Well, the name Trump will undoubtedly come to the lips of many. He broke all the rules of civility in public life and most importantly, deliberately and without apology, arguably thus thrusting open the floodgates for all that is apparently to come.
But I'm afraid it's really back to Pogo declaring "we have met the enemy and he is us."
We the people collectively elected Donald Trump even though he failed to win a majority of the popular vote, and even though we knew exactly who he was and how he operated based on his conduct during the primaries and the run-up to the general election.
Yes, things have changed. Welcome to the world of Rashida Tlaib and the impending "matriarchy."
Since the election of Donald Trump as President, many commentators have said that even when he is gone, U.S. politics will never be the same again.
And recently we have had some evidence that they are correct.
I'm thinking here of Rashida Tlaib, recently elected to the U.S. Congress after previously serving in the Michigan state legislature. The other day, in public remarks, she referred to Trump as a "motherfucker." In the view of New York Times opinion columnist Michelle Goldberg, Tlaib's use of such terminology was perfectly justified -- for a variety of reasons -- (even though either Goldberg herself or her editors declined to print that word in her column).
Back in the 1980s and 90s, when I was covering various Congressional issues as a reporter, one of he most irascible members of the House of Representatives was David Obey, a Wisconsin Democrat. Very liberal, he had little use for many if not most conservative members of Congress and who knows in what terms he may have referred to them in private. But in public, Obey was careful to say that he held such and such a member of Congress "in minimum high regard." Translated, that meant Obey considered him a total scoundrel, or worse.
Those were back in the bad old days when "the patriarchy" pretty much reigned supreme and especially in Washington DC.
Well those days are over, it seems, with Democratic voters returning a flood of women to Congress. So much for toxic masculinity. In its place, we can apparently look forward to equally toxic femininity.
Who is to blame? Well, the name Trump will undoubtedly come to the lips of many. He broke all the rules of civility in public life and most importantly, deliberately and without apology, arguably thus thrusting open the floodgates for all that is apparently to come.
But I'm afraid it's really back to Pogo declaring "we have met the enemy and he is us."
We the people collectively elected Donald Trump even though he failed to win a majority of the popular vote, and even though we knew exactly who he was and how he operated based on his conduct during the primaries and the run-up to the general election.
Yes, things have changed. Welcome to the world of Rashida Tlaib and the impending "matriarchy."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)