Another case of misogynistic homicidal maniacs:
Well, those were twelve-year-old girls attacking another twelve-year-old girl, so it probably doesn’t qualify. That’s because it doesn’t fit into the predefined set of problems that oppress the minds of progressive women, except maybe . . . maybe it was the fault of patriarchal oppression that the girls thought they had to appease a mythical supernatural guy they had never seen. No, I don’t think so. I blame the internetz.
Sure, I don’t like the idealization of patriarchy, but that isn’t because patriarchy itself has to be a bad thing. Nor is it because some progressive people go crazy obsessing over all the devious ways the idea of patriarchy oppresses them, such as by causing natural anatomy and hormonal depression. The successes of patriarchy, including examples of maintaining order and sustaining procreation, don’t oppress me either.
What I don’t like about patriarchy is its inherently unstable idealism and its glorification of stupidity. It is an unstable idealism because it rests on the claim that women instinctively select the most intellectually, technologically, and morally competent person to have sex with, and that the best such person naturally triumphs over all other people with testicles, leading to a well-ordered, peaceable, and moral society. Seriously, there is no justification for the belief that women instinctively select for competency, or that when they do it deliberately, that they themselves are competent to determine competency. Women are also not competent at civilizing men, except to the extent that they are able to neuter them.
Alternatively, it is possible that women don’t select for competency, but rather that the men who are most competent at killing everyone else, coincidentally, are the most competent intellectually, technologically, and morally. I don’t think there is any evidence for that either.
Once that idealism is set in place as law or custom, though, then the most arrogant, animalistic, manipulative, intimidating guys get license for anything, with no accountability. But, supposedly, in a truly patriarchal society, all men would be ethically accountable to other men, right?
In fact, that never happens in any sense of universal ethics. It doesn’t happen in prisons, in all-male militaries, in police forces, in all-male religious orders, in male-dominated churches, in male-dominated religious communities, in male-dominated tribal communities, in biker gangs, in street gangs, in social fraternities, in college fraternities, in all-male sports teams, in male-dominated corporations, or in male-dominated tech communities. In all of those cases, when ethical standards are consistently and severely enforced by an internal patriarchal structure, the ethical principles are narrow, the discipline is internally focused, and the group always closes ranks against outside scrutiny to protect itself. Sociologically, it is absolutely necessary for that to be true in order to maintain cohesion and hierarchy. In other words, the group will not continue to be an effective group unless it polices itself in that way. But, as a result, there is no accountability in any broader sense, nor is there any kind of individual responsibility apart from loyalty to the group.
Outside of a rigidly controlled patriarchal structure, there is absolutely no accountability for a wannabe patriarch, or even for an actual patriarch. Every patriarchally inclined idiot is free to do whatever he wants to anyone, until some other patriarchally inclined person decides to stop him, since the mere possession of testicles and an arrogant attitude entitles him to take whatever he wants. What about “God”, you say? Well, for the testosterone-enhanced, there is no god except the nearest guy who is slightly more intimidating.
The end result of a corrupt idealism implemented blindly as social custom is a self-justifying indifference to life, as well as a lack of respect towards anyone who does not fulfill one of the specified roles in patriarchal life, such as patriarch, potential patriarch, patriarchal mate, potential mate, or loyal bootlicker. Specifically, illegitimate children have no place in the structure, since illegitimate children don’t matter. For all the whining and crying about the tragedy of abortion in the last 40 years in the US, patriarchal societies have never been much concerned about it, since they routinely killed illegitimate children, rival heirs, enemy children, slave children, unnecessary children, weak children, stupid children, rebellious children, and basically anyone who made Big Daddy angry for any reason. Because such children didn’t serve a purpose, and there is no universal life-affirming ethic inherent to patriarchy.