Conservatve columnists and their notions.

Starchild,

Patriarchy does not neccesarily apply only to the political system; it also can be the social system:

pa·tri·ar·chy ( P ) Pronunciation Key (ptr-ärk)
n. pl. pa·tri·ar·chies In both senses also called patriarchate.
  1.. A social system in which the father is the head of the family and men have authority over women and children.
  2.. A family, community, or society based on this system or governed by men.
patriarchy

n : a form of social organization in which a male is the family head and title is traced through the male line [syn: patriarchate]

Rich

(Attachment pron.jpg is missing)

(Attachment amacr.gif is missing)

(Attachment prime.gif is missing)

(Attachment emacr.gif is missing)

(Attachment lprime.gif is missing)

Richard,

  I was not assuming patriarchy only applies to the legal system, but thanks for pointing out that distinction.

  In any society where men have authority over women socially or in families as a matter of course, I would strongly question whether that arrangement is truly consensual. And if it's not consensual, then it amounts to rule. I doubt such a rule could be maintained without men having more political power or rights, hence my question to Derek.

Yours in liberty,
        <<< starchild >>>

Starchild,

Patriarchy does not neccesarily apply only to the political system; it also can be the social system:

pa·tri·ar·chy <image.tiff> ( P ) Pronunciation Key (p<image.tiff><image.tiff>tr<image.tiff>-är<image.tiff>k<image.tiff>)
n. pl. pa·tri·ar·chies In both senses also called patriarchate.

1. A social system in which the father is the head of the family and men have authority over women and children.
2. A family, community, or society based on this system or governed by men.

patriarchy

n : a form of social organization in which a male is the family head and title is traced through the male line [syn: patriarchate]

Rich

From: Starchild
To: lpsf-discuss@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Friday, February 10, 2006 7:20 PM
Subject: [lpsf-discuss] Re: Conservatve columnists and their notions.

Derek,

Assuming your marriage is a consensual arrangement, I wouldn't call it patriarchy even if you are the one making most of the decisions. Patriarchy, I believe, means *rule* by men, and *rule* means nonconsensual government. You don't think men should be legally granted more political power or rights than women, do you?

Yours in liberty,
<<< starchild >>>

Oh. My family runs well as a patriarchy. Just don't tell my wife I said that.

It leads to a situation with a lot of unemployed matriarchs.

Allen Rice
--- In lpsf-discuss@yahoogroups.com, Derek Jensen <derekj72@...>
wrote:
>
> What's wrong with patriarchy?
>
> >
> > >Christendom is in the early phase of counter-attack against
humanism,
> > >culturally speaking
> >
> > Indeed it is!
> >
> > Free speech & press, freedom of religion, separation of religion
from
> > government and all the other values that the cartoon controversy
are all
> > about have been resisted tooth and nail by christianity over the
last
> > several hundred years.
> >
> > That we have as much freedom as we do is in large part due to
the efforts
> > of, yes, humanists, over the last 400 years who were willing to
demand
> > these
> > freedoms in the face of overwhelming and very often violent
opposition and
> > repression on the part of "Christendom". That they did so even
without
> > hope
> > for divine reward is something that deserves our jaw-dropped
respect and
> > admiration.
> >
> > I for one do not wish to be ruled according to anyone's gawd-
given holy
> > book
> > and its self-appointed prophets.
> >
> > For example, I was at a book reading the other night on "How the
> > Pro-Choice
> > Movement Saved America" And frankly I was shocked at what the
pro-life
> > movement is up to. The latest technique is to introduce laws
into state
> > legislatures to ban abortion-inducing pills and other such
devices, in
> > anticipation of the forthcoming overturn of Roe v. Wade. But --
and
> > here's
> > the kicker -- they are apparently intentionally using the fact
that most
> > politicians are scientifically illiterate to lobby to get the
bills to
> > prohibit "abortifacients and contraceptives" as if they were the
same
> > thing.
> >
> > Also in the legislative pipeline: giving pharmacists and other
employees
> > of
> > firms that sell contraceptives "ethical choice" to not fill
prescriptions
> > for contraceptives, and apparently this right is being extended
to whole
> > companies and even to cashiers etc who take an "ethical stand."
Of course
> > the countervailing ethical choice for men and women to prevent
pregnancy
> > apparently counts for nothing with these theocrats.
> >
> > All this is going on despite the fact that an ovewhelming
majority of
> > Americans -- including those who oppose abortion -- want
contraceptives to
> > remain freely available. And this is all going on despite the
> > demonstrated
> > fact that the greatest reductions in abortions have occured in
states
> > where
> > contraception and sex education widely available.
> >
> > People are giving money to these pro-life organizations thinking
they are
> > helping to reduce abortions. In fact they are funding a stealth
campaign
> > to
> > reimpose patriarchy, invade our privacy, and gain control of the
bodies of
> > both men and women according to religious dictates all in the
name of
> > turning the clock back as far as possible to 'the good old days
before
> > those
> > humanists came along and messed up America's gawdly christian
heritage'
> >
> > -DG
> >
> > Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
>
> --
> View my blog at http://derekj72.blogspot.com
>

Yahoo! Groups Links

--
View my blog at http://derekj72.blogspot.com

SPONSORED LINKS

<image.tiff>

<image.tiff>

YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS

+ Visit your group "lpsf-discuss" on the web.

+ To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
lpsf-discuss-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

+ Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.

<image.tiff>

SPONSORED LINKS

<image.tiff>

<image.tiff>

YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS

+ Visit your group "lpsf-discuss" on the web.

+ To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
lpsf-discuss-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

+ Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.

<image.tiff>

Starchild:

I think it is explained more by psychological differences by sex. Men
mostly have a stronger psychological will-to-power, which is
independent of any political structure.

Related questions: Why are pimps so easily able to control their
prostitutes? Why are there seemingly no women pimps? (I'm talking of
the arrangements where the prostitutes give 100 pct of their earnings
to the pimps, not a heidi fleiss situation)

Biological diferences in the sexes must account for a large portion of this.

Derek,

  I agree that men appear to have a stronger psychological (or biological, if you will) will-to-power, at least in terms of power as we are discussing it (political power and similar authority). But just because men are on average more power-driven, it does not necessarily follow that society ought to simply let biological matters play themselves out in social reality by entrusting them with more power. Indeed I think a good rule of thumb is that the more someone wants power, the less he (or she) ought to be entrusted with.

Yours in liberty,
        <<< starchild >>>

Starchild:

I think it is explained more by psychological differences by sex. Men
mostly have a stronger psychological will-to-power, which is
independent of any political structure.

Related questions: Why are pimps so easily able to control their
prostitutes? Why are there seemingly no women pimps? (I'm talking of
the arrangements where the prostitutes give 100 pct of their earnings
to the pimps, not a heidi fleiss situation)

Biological diferences in the sexes must account for a large portion of this.

> Richard,
>
> I was not assuming patriarchy only applies to the legal system, but
> thanks for pointing out that distinction.
>
> In any society where men have authority over women socially or in
> families as a matter of course, I would strongly question whether that
> arrangement is truly consensual. And if it's not consensual, then it
> amounts to rule. I doubt such a rule could be maintained without men
> having more political power or rights, hence my question to Derek.
>
> Yours in liberty,
> <<< starchild >>>
>
> > Starchild,
> >
> > Patriarchy does not neccesarily apply only to the political system; it
> > also can be the social system:
> >
> > pa·tri·ar·chy <image.tiff> ( P ) Pronunciation
> > Key (p<image.tiff><image.tiff>tr<image.tiff>-
> > är<image.tiff>k<image.tiff>)
> > n. pl. pa·tri·ar·chies In both senses also called patriarchate.
> >
> > 1. A social system in which the father is the head of the family and
> > men have authority over women and children.
> > 2. A family, community, or society based on this system or governed by
> > men.
> >
> > patriarchy
> >
> > n : a form of social organization in which a male is the family head
> > and title is traced through the male line [syn: patriarchate]
> >
> > Rich
> >
> > From: Starchild
> > To: lpsf-discuss@yahoogroups.com
> > Sent: Friday, February 10, 2006 7:20 PM
> > Subject: [lpsf-discuss] Re: Conservatve columnists and their notions.
> >
> > Derek,
> >
> > Assuming your marriage is a consensual arrangement, I wouldn't call it
> > patriarchy even if you are the one making most of the decisions.
> > Patriarchy, I believe, means *rule* by men, and *rule* means
> > nonconsensual government. You don't think men should be legally
> > granted more political power or rights than women, do you?
> >
> > Yours in liberty,
> > <<< starchild >>>
> >
> > Oh. My family runs well as a patriarchy. Just don't tell my wife I
> > said that.
> >
> > It leads to a situation with a lot of unemployed matriarchs.
> >
> > Allen Rice
> > --- In lpsf-discuss@yahoogroups.com, Derek Jensen <derekj72@...>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > What's wrong with patriarchy?
> > >
> > > >
> > > > >Christendom is in the early phase of counter-attack against
> > humanism,
> > > > >culturally speaking
> > > >
> > > > Indeed it is!
> > > >
> > > > Free speech & press, freedom of religion, separation of religion
> > from
> > > > government and all the other values that the cartoon controversy
> > are all
> > > > about have been resisted tooth and nail by christianity over the
> > last
> > > > several hundred years.
> > > >
> > > > That we have as much freedom as we do is in large part due to
> > the efforts
> > > > of, yes, humanists, over the last 400 years who were willing to
> > demand
> > > > these
> > > > freedoms in the face of overwhelming and very often violent
> > opposition and
> > > > repression on the part of "Christendom". That they did so even
> > without
> > > > hope
> > > > for divine reward is something that deserves our jaw-dropped
> > respect and
> > > > admiration.
> > > >
> > > > I for one do not wish to be ruled according to anyone's gawd-
> > given holy
> > > > book
> > > > and its self-appointed prophets.
> > > >
> > > > For example, I was at a book reading the other night on "How the
> > > > Pro-Choice
> > > > Movement Saved America" And frankly I was shocked at what the
> > pro-life
> > > > movement is up to. The latest technique is to introduce laws
> > into state
> > > > legislatures to ban abortion-inducing pills and other such
> > devices, in
> > > > anticipation of the forthcoming overturn of Roe v. Wade. But --
> > and
> > > > here's
> > > > the kicker -- they are apparently intentionally using the fact
> > that most
> > > > politicians are scientifically illiterate to lobby to get the
> > bills to
> > > > prohibit "abortifacients and contraceptives" as if they were the
> > same
> > > > thing.
> > > >
> > > > Also in the legislative pipeline: giving pharmacists and other
> > employees
> > > > of
> > > > firms that sell contraceptives "ethical choice" to not fill
> > prescriptions
> > > > for contraceptives, and apparently this right is being extended
> > to whole
> > > > companies and even to cashiers etc who take an "ethical stand."
> > Of course
> > > > the countervailing ethical choice for men and women to prevent
> > pregnancy
> > > > apparently counts for nothing with these theocrats.
> > > >
> > > > All this is going on despite the fact that an ovewhelming
> > majority of
> > > > Americans -- including those who oppose abortion -- want
> > contraceptives to
> > > > remain freely available. And this is all going on despite the
> > > > demonstrated
> > > > fact that the greatest reductions in abortions have occured in
> > states
> > > > where
> > > > contraception and sex education widely available.
> > > >
> > > > People are giving money to these pro-life organizations thinking
> > they are
> > > > helping to reduce abortions. In fact they are funding a stealth
> > campaign
> > > > to
> > > > reimpose patriarchy, invade our privacy, and gain control of the
> > bodies of
> > > > both men and women according to religious dictates all in the
> > name of
> > > > turning the clock back as far as possible to 'the good old days
> > before
> > > > those
> > > > humanists came along and messed up America's gawdly christian
> > heritage'
> > > >
> > > > -DG
> > > >
> > > > Yahoo! Groups Links
> > > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > View my blog at http://derekj72.blogspot.com
> > >
> >
> > Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> > --
> > View my blog at http://derekj72.blogspot.com
> >
> > SPONSORED LINKS
> >
> > <image.tiff>
> >
> > <image.tiff>
> >
> > YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
> >
> > + Visit your group "lpsf-discuss" on the web.
> >
> > + To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> > lpsf-discuss-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
> >
> > + Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
> >
> > <image.tiff>
> >
> > SPONSORED LINKS
> <image.tiff>
> >
> <image.tiff>
> >
> > YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
> >
> > + Visit your group "lpsf-discuss" on the web.
> >
> > + To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> > lpsf-discuss-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
> >
> > + Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
> >
> <image.tiff>
> >
>

--
View my blog at http://derekj72.blogspot.com

SPONSORED LINKS

<image.tiff>

<image.tiff>

YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS

+ Visit your group "lpsf-discuss" on the web.

+ To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
lpsf-discuss-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

+ Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.

<image.tiff>

To be more specific, I think society ought to actively discourage situations like the pimp-prostitute dynamic you mention where the prostitute is giving the pimp 100% of her earnings, even when they do not recognizably involve initiation of force. I'm not saying this is part of the libertarian political program, but libertarianism doesn't offer to guarantee every desirable outcome. Even in a purely libertarian society there would still be a need for social activism.

    <<< starchild >>>

Agreed on all points