Modern mainstream academia claims it is. Here is a recent discussion with turtletom, a fairly typical gender studies student/graduate, on same, brought out of the "free speech" thread:

I'm curious where posters here fall on the divide. Is the West an "oppressive patriarchy", or "a world largely of free association and female empowerment where men do better on some metrics and women better on others"?

I think the West is very far to the latter and far enough from an "oppressive patriarchy" that such a description is transparently absurd.

I think the entire civilized world pretty much independently developed similar cultural norms that were very pro adaptive for the technology and social structures of the day.

And things have changed to the point where there is a legitimate discussion whether such norms are pro adaptive or ethical anymore.

I find using loaded language like “patriarchy” non ironically indicates a poor understanding of human nature, history and cultural anthropology (at least IMO)

There are also plenty of bad faith actors who dishonestly use such rhetorical jargon as a means to an end, normally to enhance their own status.

I would tend to agree with you that it is the latter.

I think the idea that the US (or I should say the western world in general) is a "male oppressive patriarchy" is a symptom of a common thing that happens when formerly oppressed groups achieve equality. They don't believe it, or don't want to believe it. For ex. there is little doubt that women were treated as second-class citizens for a large part of the history of the US. There is also little doubt that those days are over. But for whatever reason people in formerly-oppressed groups do not like to admit that the struggle is over and the battle is won.

Perhaps they are worried the pendulum will swing back without vigilance, which is a valid concern but far different than claiming the oppressive patriarchy still exists.

I imagine I'll have more to say about this at some point, but for now I'm just going to suggest that there's a danger of turning "oppressive patriarchy" vs. "complete equality" into a false dichotomy, and that's worth keeping in mind.

One might reject as hyperbolic the strongest most radical claims about oppression and patriarchy, and also recognize the astounding level of social change that has happened over the last 60 years or so but still recognize important socio-cultural phenomena grounded in patriarchal assumptions which are worth challenging, for example.

I don't know, but I have a few thoughts:

a) I question the degree to which some of the ideas you are calling "mainstream" are truly mainstream.

b) I think there is a contingent that has a number of probably unrealistic goals regarding gender outcome equality that correctly see those goals as yet unachieved.

I personally think that people who are striving to raise their kids "gender neutral" or whatever are kind of weird and are probably doing those kids a disservice. But those kind of people are not wrong to assess the fact that the world as it exists is not particularly close to the world they wish existed.

The Western World is absolutely ok and you realize this when you ask old people, especially women like your grandmother. Most grandmothers will say that life in the 50s was absolutely fine and that they had no problems whatsoever. Besides that I am a strong believer that women have the control in the relationship. Every husband knows this. Just ask your grandfather. In other words, male oppression in western societies has always been utter and complete bs. In the rest of the world it's a totally different story.

Note: This "oppression"-stuff and basically the whole concept of identity politics comes from a guy called Saul Alinsky (just google him). He made a living from deviding people into two groups, generating hate between each other and starting a revolution. It was his business model. I can't blame him for it, but I wonder why the FBI didn't stop him, especially in the days of COINTELPRO.

male oppression in western societies has always been utter and complete bs
male oppression in western societies has always been utter and complete bs
male oppression in western societies has always been utter and complete bs
male oppression in western societies has always been utter and complete bs
male oppression in western societies has always been utter and complete bs
male oppression in western societies has always been utter and complete bs

Well, that’s the dumbest take I’m going to read today.

Just go on Youtube and pick a random documentary from the 50s about the life in America, like "Typical Life of a Teenage Girl in High School and University (1950s)", and answer the following question to your best judgement: Do these women look oppressed to you? What would they answer if we asked them?

I never heard Donna Reed complaining about the patriarchy.

I give you another example: The Flintstones.

Even in the stoneage the husband and father was the donkey of the familly. It was funny in the 60s because every husband and father would realize that after all those years nothing had changed.

it's oppressive in taxes and penalties. ofc if things were incrementally more severe based on wealth the rich people would then complain about being oppressed. it's a simple thing to solve and that's where the big issue comes from.

Now that I think about it, wasn’t The Jetsons an oppressive society toward robots? It’s pretty clear Rosie was a sentient being kept as slave labor.

Women are not treated worse than men because men frequently cave to their incessant nagging and only sometimes go to jail for hitting them.


definitely a hot take

The argument that (white) women were happier in the 1950s when they were socially constrained primarily to the domestic sphere is something that comes up a lot, but I have never seen any data to back up this assertion one way or the other.

I wonder if there is any social science research on this topic.

#paging well named

Ditto slaves that were not treated poorly by their owners. Can we see that data please?

My grandmother was raped to death by Brahms.

Was Rosie really a robot? I thought it was just a costume and assumed there was a team of child slaves inside. Maybe Shardrax knows.

Look at June Cleaver. That ***** was way happier than that girl from women's studies who can't get a date.

If there is still a patriarchy today it is probably most apparent in executive positions where most are still men, even though women now obtain more college degrees than men. Likewise gender representation on corporate boards still skews heavily male.

The question is how much of that is due to free choice, and how much is due to discrimination or lack of opportunity.

Anecdotally I know a lot of women (and a few men too, but more women) who have zero desire to ever be the boss. We can't assume being in charge is everyone's goal. It's more headaches/stress in exchange for more income/prestige. Everyone values those things differently and some won't make that trade. Men are still often judged by their career success and income in ways that women aren't. So they may feel that they are "supposed" to want the promotion and bigger paycheck that comes along with it, even if they'd really prefer to not take on the added stress.

On the flip side women feel their own societal pressures (to devote their time to being a mother especially) that may lead them to not make the choice they would really prefer (to become CEO etc.). So it works both ways.

For example a job like preschool/elementary school teacher is still overwhelmingly female. Is this because society judges that as a "woman's job"? Or is it simply that women, in general, just freely choose that career path more often than men?

(Narrator's voice:- "Unfortunately, but predictably, Shandrax disproved Trolly's claim just 120 seconds later.")

I little wiki'ing informs we that while the Flintstones is set in the stoneage, the show itself was actually made in the 1960s and 70s. Really makes you think.

I've been rendered inoperative by the flu. I'm just going to lock this for now, since I doubt it's going anywhere useful. I'll re-evaluate when I'm alive again.