three hundred thirty seven

 

PATRIARCHY

My last post I first used this word because I have often heard it used as a slur so I did some research. I found a spectrum of definitions and some of the newer ones are quite hateful so I thought I would go back to our past to see how it was used in positive and negative ways. 

I searched for how it was supposed to work and how it has been abused. The word has reached buzz word status today so just the mention of the word triggers strong reactions. 

Big business and government is open to criticism for sure. The good old boy network and discrimination are wrong. We have made progress in this area and there needs to be more. Women are as capable of running large corporations as anyone. 

Business is rough and tumble ruled by profits. To rise to the top of a ruthless cut throat rule bending big business what ever the anatomy requires a ruthless cut throat rule bending leader. Climbing the ladder in search of power, people will use any advantage they can find so networking, nepotism and victimhood are tools to get there. 

Politics is a little different. Many women have entered this world and have become successful. Raise enough support and convince enough voters and you will have the job. After that, keeping promises, serving constituents and being ethical should get you reelected. 

Politics is unfortunately even more screwed up then big business. Politicians don't answer to a board of directors looking for profits. To keep their jobs they do need to raise money and constantly focus on maintaining an image by using teams of pollsters and advisers. No tactic is off limits so everyone is subject to attacks. 

(No Pelosi crying pics, her tear ducts haven't worked for years.)

Charges of oppression, misogyny, racism, bigotry, hypocrisy, rumors of corruption and scandals while claiming victimhood is now a too common tactic. If adding more minorities or women is the fix for division, I don't see any evidence this works. Candidates with good character of any sex or color can get elected but even they only last a term or two if they don't play the game.     

I'll leave those two institutions to fend for themselves. I agree they are fair game for criticism, investigations and protests. Remember as consumers and constituents we usually get more of what we ask for. If you want leaders with character look for leaders with character.

The patriarchy I am focused on is man's role in the family. I think it has two elements, one is a charge of responsibility and the other is breaking a 50/50 tie. 

The many misconceptions and abuse of the words "leader" and "head" makes it a hard subject to discuss. I won't attempt to explain why men were put in this position but I will look at how it works.

A man's charge comes in two parts, the actual responsibility and the power to carry it out. Far too many men embrace the power and forget the responsibility. These men deserve the criticism they get.

Many men take on the charge of responsibility but don't have the support to carry it out. A woman can help him be successful or sabotage him to make him fail. If he is looking after the best interest of his family why not help?

There are many ways to lead, if a wife is more suited to lead and he takes a support role he is still responsible to fulfill his charge. The focus is fulfilling the charge not being the boss.

It's confusing to many men, they think they need to act like the boss but it doesn't fit their nature. It is probably better if you do it the way that fits you best.

Being an example to the children is important so leading as a team using the talents and abilities of both parents is healthy.

He is the tie breaker, after both sides give their input on a decision and they don't agree someone needs to break the tie. 

If she supports him and they succeed he will thank her for supporting him. If he fails he can't blame her for not supporting him. This draws them closer together. A bonus for her is she can remind him of this for the rest of his life.

If she doesn't support him and they fail he may blame her, if they succeed he may gloat because he did it in spite of her. This will divide them. 

Keeping ego in check is the key. Even though styles differ fulfilling the charge is the mission.

What is the charge exactly? Provider, protector, role model, spiritual example, disciplinarian, nurturer, mentor, companion, romantic partner, supporter and handy man. 

I love strong women, I have no issue taking on a supporting role. Even though I have a submissive nature, together we get the job done and I have no problem giving her full credit. 

Being more assertive works too, some women want a man with a take charge bossy style, it just doesn't fit me. The critics have a problem with this style. God picked men to be the responsible party, I cant tell you why this is, I guess it had to fall on someone.

I don't have answers I'm just saying how I feel. The "Patriarchy" has been a catchall for the problems of the world, but I hear no real solutions just complaints. 

Changing the genitalia of the people in charge without a focus on character is not a serious solution. If the focus is solely on who holds the power then it's just another power grab.