I've made it a rule not to discuss politics on-line anymore. In my experience, people's minds are rarely swayed by argument; and hurt feelings and outrage seem to be common.
This is a subject many women feel passionately about. I appreciate that; I even think I understand why, and sympathize. Nevertheless, passion and pain do not make truth; indeed, more often they make lies and chaos.
The idea of there being a "system" of male privilege is as fallacious as the idea that there is a health care "system" that can be reformed. In both cases, there simply is no "system." A true system is intentionally created to perform a set of tasks; what is being here called a system is merely a conceptual frame superimposed upon observed phenomena for which there is no demonstrable motivating force or unifying principle -- but these things are *assumed* to exist, in the act of calling them a "system." By calling them a "system," motive is *assumed* without being proven, and then the "system" is attacked on that basis.
In addition, perception is selective. In the case of people who have been wounded, it is especially selective. True objectivity is impossible to begin with; and the more emotionally involved the observer is, the more likely their observations will be tainted with confirmation bias. One of the less subtle examples of this is the fact that, in discussions of male privilege, the reality of female privilege is almost always completely ignored.
Furthermore, it is never acknowledged that "privilege" is about preference for things of value, and value is relative. Early in the history of feminism, women who agitated for equality in career potential were aghast that a number of their female contemporaries simply did not value what they were fighting for and were happy and content to stay at home and be homemakers, wives and mothers. I remember that there was some resentment toward these women, as though they were "undermining the cause." But it was simply a question of value. If you see going to work every day and slogging it out with competitors, working for an unpleasant boss or company, is not worth the money or the sacrifices you would have to make for them, then you might rather pity your husband than envy him. For such a woman, it is a non sequitur to cast her husband's preferences as "privilege." Preference for a detriment is not "privilege."
What's really going on with so-called male privilege is cultural, and is too deep to be reformed from the top-down. If you try to reform it from the top-down, you will not create: you will destroy. You do not make people better by forcing them to be good; you make people better by inspiring them to be good. Laws, rules, public disapproval -- these things merely force bad behavior underground, where it festers until it explodes and does even more damage.
There's a beautiful line in the Melanie Griffith film, "A Stranger Among Us" (1982), in which Griffith plays a policewoman who goes undercover in a Hasidic community. As you can imagine, culture shock, on both sides, is a major component of the plot. There is a conversation between Griffith's character, Emily, and Mia Sara's, Leah, the grown daughter of the community's rabbi, that ends like this:
Emily: What do you want to be when you grow up, Leah?
Leah: A wife, a mother.
Emily: That's it?
Leah: But, Emily, what could be more important?
Like it or not, convenient or not, this is a valid point of view, and it has its own beauty. To a woman with these values, discussions of male privilege are meaningless, even false. The point I'm making is, whether male privilege exists or not, is a problem or not, depends on what you value, and what you value is a subjective choice, not an objective fact.
As it is used, "male privilege" is a thought-weapon; and, like accusations of "racism," regardless of the user's individual intent, is used to cow males, to make them introspect, hesitate, yield ... all to assuage a sense of guilt imposed upon them by their accusers. Just as White people have been made afraid to act and speak in venues where Black people are concerned, now males are being made afraid to act and speak in venues where women are concerned.
This is a poisonous, destructive meme. Unfortunately, I do not think it will go away without first causing a great deal more conflict, destruction and pain.
EDIT: I just had a "Eureka!" moment. I think I saw something about the etiology of this phenomenon. I'll just throw it out there.
There's another line in the film, in a conversation between Emily and Ariel, the rabbi's son, in which he comments that the Kabbalah says that women are on a higher spiritual plane than men. Now, before the feminists start crying that I'm putting women on a pedestal ... that's not the point. The point is the relationship between form and function.
Some people believe gender is not innate; some people believe it is, but gender roles are culturally determined, artificial and relative. But if gender *is* innate, and if there is purpose to our existence, then it must follow that there are certain aspects of gender roles that are also innate and deeper than culture.
Throughout recorded history, men, the gender with political power, has found inspiration in woman. Before recorded history, women were the civilizing force for mankind. Desire for woman motivates man.
As I mentioned, you do not make people better by forcing them to be good, but by inspiring them to be good. The alternatives are force and desire: male power and female allure. We women are the inspiration, and, to be the inspiration, we must be weak, relative to males. Goodness, spiritual becoming, must be freely chosen; and, this can only occur in the absence of threat. By being weaker, we become vessels of transformation for man.
The flip-side of this are the problems mentioned in this thread: being overshadowed, feeling threatened in public venues, being disregarded and dismissed ... These things are possible because of our role in the spiritual progress of mankind. Man chooses to abuse our weakness in pursuit of power, or to use our weakness as a means of his own spiritual advancement.
This is our gift, and our burden. The two are inextricably intertwined. You cannot have one without the other. By trying to unravel this relationship, feminism is unraveling the cords that hold the human race together on its path to enlightenment.
