Athos
Well-Known Member
I hope someone will start a thread on this topic, to discuss some of these issues. I'd do it myself, but too busy at the moment.
Transgender is it just me that is totally perplexed?
- Thread starter The Flying Pig
- Start date
- Status
I hope someone will start a thread on this topic, to discuss some of these issues. I'd do it myself, but too busy at the moment.
19force8
For the avoidance of faith
But that wasn't what I wanted to say and why would I want to avoid an argument, this is the internet. Also, telling me what it's fine for me to want to say is not the least bit arrogant is it?Wow, you are a tiny bit arrogant aren't you. I did an anthropology degree in what was probably the most feminist department at the time so, you know, you're not the first person i've come across interested in the subject.
If you just wanted to say that patriarchy is basically about controlling women's reproductive capacity so as to be sure of the line of inheritance that'd have been fine. And you'd get no argument that pre-settled agriculture there was less stuff to inherit so less rigid control of women's bodies necessary.
As a Marxist I don't agree that male dominance was the eternal rule for relations between the sexes. Simply going by your argument that patriarchy existed because of the need to ensure inheritance of wealth. Then in hunter gatherer societies what was their to inherit? Everything they owned had to be carried with them, they made everything themselves from the rocks, animals and plants that surrounded them. They did so as and when they needed to, they didn't accumulate vast hoards of baskets, furs, food or knives. If one person accumulated twice as much stuff as another they'd be weighed down carrying it around. Why bother when you have the skills to create what you need when and where you need it?
Not only that, many of these groups would have been matrilineal because it was simpler to identify the mother of a child.
But we have numerous examples of societies where neither sex was dominant, why is it so important to find one where women are the sexist bastards in charge?
Ironically, if you've read Leacock you'll know that while missionaries bemoaned the way native American men were ruled by their women, if you strip such value judgements from their descriptions the tribes look remarkably like equal societies.
It's the Marxist view of a time when we weren't subject to the imperatives of class society (sexism, racism, homophobia, etc) that gives me hope we can overcome the muck of ages. As Engels put it in The Origin of the Family, Private Property and the State:
Not bad for an old, white, cis man. We don't even have to wait for the revolution to see aspects of his vision coming true around us.
littlebabyjesus
one of Maxwell's demons
Matrilineal does not necessarily mean matriarchal.
Humans spread right across the world in pre-agricultural times, and the 'hunter' bit of hunter-gathering took many forms. We should expect diversity in cultural forms given that diversity in environment. Pre-agriculture was not one thing.
Regarding various bold claims re hunter-gatherer sexual equality, there is evidence from the groups we know of that in at least some of them at least, certain kinds of hunting were male activities - persistence hunting by the San for instance - and that the status of hunters was disproportionate to the actual importance of the hunted meat to survival - the 'gathering' bit was the grunt work, but the meat brought status to the man or men bringing it, and indeed it is hypothesised that this formed an important signifier of male fitness, a sexual virtue signal.
Despite your howls, I think reference to bonobos is still relevant here, given that here is an example of something close to genuine equality within a group in which there is significant sexual dimorphism. The specific conditions in which this has evolved bear several important points of difference from the vast majority of early modern human societies.
Humans spread right across the world in pre-agricultural times, and the 'hunter' bit of hunter-gathering took many forms. We should expect diversity in cultural forms given that diversity in environment. Pre-agriculture was not one thing.
Regarding various bold claims re hunter-gatherer sexual equality, there is evidence from the groups we know of that in at least some of them at least, certain kinds of hunting were male activities - persistence hunting by the San for instance - and that the status of hunters was disproportionate to the actual importance of the hunted meat to survival - the 'gathering' bit was the grunt work, but the meat brought status to the man or men bringing it, and indeed it is hypothesised that this formed an important signifier of male fitness, a sexual virtue signal.
Despite your howls, I think reference to bonobos is still relevant here, given that here is an example of something close to genuine equality within a group in which there is significant sexual dimorphism. The specific conditions in which this has evolved bear several important points of difference from the vast majority of early modern human societies.
bimble
floofy
I'll try to get back to you 19force8 but to be honest your heavy reliance on Leacock and her very skewed presentation of native american societies makes me think you're not really interested in the realities or wider evidence more just in some romantic notion that supports your idealistic view.
And yeah, matrilineal does not have anything to do with it unless you think orthodox jews are an egalitarian or matriarchal society ffs.
And yeah, matrilineal does not have anything to do with it unless you think orthodox jews are an egalitarian or matriarchal society ffs.
Wtf has that got to do with here you shit stirring cunt?
And what does 'started making a racist joke' even mean? Either I made a racist joke or I didn't.
belboid
Exasperated, not angry.
You know full well sunshine. The one you were told off for by one of the big boys at the time. And it is clear what it has to do with this thread. You oppose all liberation politics as a distraction from your notion of class (although, ironically, your view of class is wholly based on ID politics. But that really is a different issue).
I don't, as I've pointed out on this very thread numerous times. I oppose identity when it transcends class. Like the EDL who pretend everyone 'English' have a common interest based on that identity.
19force8
For the avoidance of faith
I wasn't suggesting matrilineal = matriarchal. Rather that if a society was matrilineal it kind of knocks a hole in the argument about an eternal patriarchy being about inheritance.
It wasn't me suggesting that all human societies were the same thing, ie where men have ruled women for all time, patriarchy. Yes humans are endlessly playful and hunter gatherers having had more time on their hands than most managed to invent some truly wonderful social structures. For instance the K'ung developed elaborate rituals to avoid the kind of boastfulness and status seeking you describe for the San.
I should also make the point that the equality I'm talking about doesn't mean everyone's the same. In any human group some will be stronger, faster, smarter, more comely, better singers, dancers, storytellers, psychologists, etc, etc. All or none of which can lead to higher status, but higher status doesn't make you a king. For that you need the structural inequality of a class society.
Give me a break on the Bonobo thing, it was very late and the trains were shot. Also I did edit to say I'd overreacted a tad and saw the positive point you were making. And we both seem to be agreed that there are important differences with the human condition. [E2A] Howls/Bonobo, just got it
I'm slow this morning.
Last edited:
Aaaaaah, here now. How about the time when you asked me as an Irish person why I was bothered/voted about Brexit? Or as an Irish person I should support the IRA?
It's ok; I get the jokes now.
A bit of banter between fellow Irish people.What's with all this cross thread shit now?
Mate, you took a dump all over a thread about National Action by wanting to make it about Irish republicanism.
Mate, you took a dump all over a thread about National Action by wanting to make it about Irish republicanism.
Forget about it; I was just bollocking about. Mea culpa.
This thread is far too mixed up without me dredging up past shite.
19force8
For the avoidance of faith
It isn't me that has a romantic, idealistic view of history. I'm a materialist not an idealist (Historical materialism - Wikipedia). I don't argue that because a thing exists today (racism, sexism, etc) it must have existed for all time despite the evidence.
Engels wrote over 140 years ago, Leacock fifty, so of course there are going to be flaws, especially as both were polemical works. Even so they're quite short and accessible and the fundamental insights they contain are still true today. ie that preclass societies weren't all about patriarchy, kidnap and rape.
After the Ice is much longer and harder to get into, but gives a clear view of how materially poor prehistoric society was.
The Creation of Inequality is a tour de force drawing on around 500 anthropological and archaeological studies to give the first convincing account of how humans moved from classless to class societies.
And yeah, I'm hardly going to be talking up views I disagree with am I? This is the internet, not a dissertation.
Matrilineality is relevant as I've already said:
I wasn't suggesting matrilineal = matriarchal. Rather that if a society was matrilineal it kind of knocks a hole in the argument about an eternal patriarchy being all about inheritance.
Jonti
what the dormouse said
That's not my impression from the thread. I think people have lamented the confusions bedevilling ID politics, rather than condemning ID politics as such.
When people talk about toxic ID politics, it is the present practice of the art which they are condemning. But the topic itself is worthy of careful thought, as shown by the calls for a thread devoted to it.
Last edited:
littlebabyjesus
one of Maxwell's demons
Fair enough. But male domination of a society is not dependent in any way on patrilinearity. I think you make good points about the rise of the particular form of male domination that we see now, important aspects of which are clearly due to the factors you outline. But I also think it overstates the case to extrapolate back from that and say anything stronger than that male domination through a property-based class structure didn't exist then. Doesn't mean other forms of male domination didn't exist.
I used to very much like the idea you're putting forward, btw, of a pre-capitalist 'primitive communism'. I just don't think it really stands up - I see no particular compelling reason for it to be true.
Last edited:
Jonti
what the dormouse said
Fwiw, just a quick aside that I read bimble's use of "idealistic" to mean starry-eyed, rather than as a philosophical term.
Sea Star
have you ever explored your dark side?
this thread is mixed up because it was clearly intended as an attack on trans people and was never supposed to be anything else. So if it's fucked up then good.
Easy targets is easy targets. This climate it's trans people. It will be another grouping in the future.
19force8
For the avoidance of faith
Yeah, but it's almost a compulsory response for Marxists.
The real reason we're such hard headed materialists is we spend so much of our time banging our heads against brick walls.
Last edited:
Sea Star
have you ever explored your dark side?
I see some binary trans people and early transitioners trying to separate themselves from the rest of us now - so I guess we'll just split infinitely and keep kicking those we see as inferior. this is how the world works.
19force8
For the avoidance of faith
Good points. I'd say similar about the absence of compelling reasons on the other side. We could go on for years.
But that would be a bit off topic. I was responding to a bit of cod-Marxist analysis of transphobia and pointing to the existence/acceptance of two-spirit people in some societies and got sidetracked.
19force8
For the avoidance of faith
I hope not. Unity is always a work in progress.I see some binary trans people and early transitioners trying to separate themselves from the rest of us now - so I guess we'll just split infinitely and keep kicking those we see as inferior. this is how the world works.
Sea Star
have you ever explored your dark side?
Everything I do is done with trying to keep all trans people united in mind. Absolute inclusion. Some say it's too much but who I am I to judge anyone elses identity? I got blocked on Twitter by India Willoughby so I think it got noticed. She's too busy telling trans women who "look male" that they should stick to using the men's toilets.
and genuinely reinforcing toxic stereotypes of femininity.But that's one of the criticisms of identity politics in that identities can compete and conflict with one another and (I think) Butchers pointed out earlier that a strand of feminism has been out-identitied (?) by trans in this instance. Another example is the growing hostility towards 'white' feminism from poc activists (and their allies).
Sea Star
have you ever explored your dark side?
And so say all of us
I think this had been requested before. A kind of "safe place" of sorts where discussions are a little more rational and less heated. Boards.ie (Irish site) has one and it's reasonably moderated compared to the sheer ignorance elsewhere on that site. Not to ghettoise ourseleves but just somewhere to shoot the breeze without one or two of the usaual suspects weighing in.
No doubt there will be accusations of id-pol or whatevet the fuck it's called but hey.
Sea Star
have you ever explored your dark side?
yeah - no doubt. Sometimes it's just nice to get beyond having to constantly defend your own identity.
And it doesn't all have to be political either.
And maybe, might actually be fun...?
For me I think it'll give trans people a better chance of finding allies and being supportive, and being supported, rather than constantly having to deflect shit, which is something I see to a certain extent happening to cis LGB people on here too.
Athos
Well-Known Member
I don't think the problems with this thread are a product of it being in the wrong forum. Not do I think it should have gone in an LGBT+ thread had one existed; it's very much politics and current affairs.
Always room for crossover
- Status
Similar threads
