Fiona wrote:
Well, there are a fair few female persons in positions of power in UK society, too, and that doesn't make it any less patriarchal-- just as
having
some African-Americans in positions of power does not make the US any
less
racially stratified. IMO, anyway...
Re: the second half of that, yes. Particularly considering that the African American currently in the position of greatest power got there by (a) orchestrating the killing of thousands of Asians a few decades back, and (b) condoning the systematic disenfranchisement of thousands of his own people by the party that put him in power.
I would also like to point out in our defense that there has been vast improvement in this regard over the past eight years, under the Clinton administration, which IMO is precisely why the Republicans hate Clinton with such a crazed passion that they have to make up wild lies about him, such as we've recently heard from Ellynne (more about that, with suitable B7 references, later). Compare Bush Jr.'s cabinet to Bush Sr.'s and you see the difference that Clinton made-- today the Republicans have to put in far more token blacks and token women to try to give the impression that they're not biased . Of course, as we all learned from Margaret Thatcher, an individual from one of the traditional out groups can be as nasty as any white male once in power.
Re: the first half, Tavia added:
That's entirely different. There's good evidence that UK society was overtly patriarchal less than 100 years ago, and so one needs a reasonable mass of evidence to counter the idea of it being so today. (Leaving open the question of whether it is or not.)
Yes, clearly things have improved a lot in this respect, in the UK and elsewhere, so the question is more a matter of where you draw the line and say "OK, it's not a patriarchy any more." Does that mean no gender-based discrimination at all? Or only a little, perhaps?
Another thought about Deliverance: do we know for sure that Meegat even wanted to be a priestess and Messiah-greeter? Maybe she didn't, but was chosen by lot and agreed to do her duty. Maybe the reason she looks so happy to see Avon is that now that the Messiah has arrived, she will soon be off the hook of obligation and can go and do whatever else she may have had in mind-- marrying her true love, perhaps, and/or pursuing some exciting activity that she had had to set aside to be a priestess.
Re: the idea that technology, as personified by Avon in Deliverance, is a masculine quality: but what about the scenes with Vila and the huntresses in "Powerplay," and of course the infamous "Power"? In both of those episodes we see a male/female social split, but with the women associated with the technological side.
Sarah T.
----- Original Message ----- From: Sarah Thompson sthompson162@mindspring.com
Yes, clearly things have improved a lot in this respect, in the UK and elsewhere, so the question is more a matter of where you draw the line and say "OK, it's not a patriarchy any more." Does that mean no gender-based discrimination at all? Or only a little, perhaps?
I tend to define patriarchy as a society in which the bulk of the ruling group are male (hence I do tend to see modern UK society, for better or worse, as patriarchal-- just do a quick head-count of the cabinet and you'll see what I mean). As for gender-based discrimination, speaking in a totally non-professional capacity here, I don't think you *can* eliminate it entirely-- whichever gender it favours.
Another thought about Deliverance: do we know for sure that Meegat even wanted to be a priestess and Messiah-greeter? Maybe she didn't, but was chosen by lot and agreed to do her duty. Maybe the reason she looks so happy to see Avon is that now that the Messiah has arrived, she will soon
be
off the hook of obligation and can go and do whatever else she may have
had
in mind-- marrying her true love, perhaps, and/or pursuing some exciting activity that she had had to set aside to be a priestess.
That's too many maybes for my liking :), but you have raised an interesting point here. One characteristic of Messiahs seems to be that they take the chosen people with them. Now Avon (for whatever reason, and for God's sake let's not start that one again) didn't, and he didn't stay either. Now, to play the speculation game a little, if he had stayed either he would have wound up as the absolute ruler of the society or the limitations of life with less than a hundred people capable of intelligent conversation would have palled-- in either case, stagnancy. If he had taken them with him, the general consensus seems to be that they would still have been dissatisfied-- if nothing else because, not being the Messiah, he could never fulfil their expectations in this regard totally.
However, by leaving them behind, Avon has, arguably, forced Gamete's people into questioning the whole Messiah concept, and into thinking in different ways. Perhaps they start building a society based on a different premise. Perhaps they even start developing anti-radiation drugs or practices (as seen in a certain other Terry Nation story, variously known as either "The Dead Planet" or "The Daleks")...
Smart bloke. Of course, that's just speculation :).
Re: the idea that technology, as personified by Avon in Deliverance, is a masculine quality: but what about the scenes with Vila and the huntresses in "Powerplay," and of course the infamous "Power"? In both of those episodes we see a male/female social split, but with the women associated with the technological side.
But are they the technicians, or are they the *guardians* of technology (bringing us back to my earlier point about men being seen as culture-makers and women as culture-sustainers)?
Fiona
The Posthumous Memoirs of Secretary Rontane Available for public perusal at http://nyder.r67.net
_________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
-
Fiona Moore -
Sarah Thompson