this post was submitted on 12 Jul 2025
100 points (75.8% liked)

Witches VS Patriarchy

831 readers
65 users here now

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
all 40 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] KatakiY@lemmy.world 20 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Ain't men. The patriarchy exists, sure, but not solving the problem at the core will just lead to more unjust hierarchies with a different gender on top.

[–] Sivecano@lemmy.dbzer0.com 9 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Patriarchy isn't fixed by appointing female patriarchs

[–] LadyMeow@lemmy.blahaj.zone 3 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Matriarch is the word you are looking for. :3

[–] Sivecano@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Not really, since we're still talking about women holding a patriarchal position in a patriarchal system.

[–] LadyMeow@lemmy.blahaj.zone 3 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Hmmm. Does that make sense? I’m confused. I guess if we kept the same system, just had a woman in charge?

[–] Sivecano@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 3 weeks ago

Like, this is basically the mistake that "girlboss feminism" makes. just because you're putting a woman in a high position that formerly only a man could have occupied, you don't actually fix the oppressive system as a whole. the system of patriarchy is about more than just no women in high offices.

[–] Sivecano@lemmy.dbzer0.com 18 points 3 weeks ago

No one should rule the world. True liberation comes from realizing that it's the throne that's the problem and not who sits in it.

[–] Blackmist@feddit.uk 17 points 3 weeks ago

Counterpoint: Thatcher.

[–] Auli@lemmy.ca 16 points 3 weeks ago (4 children)

To bad women are no better. People are people and assholes want power.

[–] outhouseperilous@lemmy.dbzer0.com 10 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (2 children)

Then maybe let us prove it, for a change?

[–] murmelade@lemmy.ml 4 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Apparently America would rather have this than entertain the idea of a woman in charge. :(

[–] outhouseperilous@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Specifically this one though; i wish my opportunity to ruin.

[–] murmelade@lemmy.ml 3 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)
[–] outhouseperilous@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (1 children)

Thank you. I promise a great sundering. I promise ruin grief and desolation

Heres my platform:

A new government department dedicated to making your pets hate you.

A great new infrastructure public works and jobs project inspired by 'fullmetal alchemist'.

Nationalize twitter

All government services are now provided through chat bots. On twitter. Also the character limit is back.

End racism by instituting slavery for all americans, regardless of race or creed

Make new, more fucked up, racism. Possible a caste system, but definitely involve calipers.

Those dog robots? More of those.

Murder drones with arbitrary targeting rules, changed daily and only announced an hour in advance

Start a grand research project to realize every dystopian scifi novel

Engineer every child (to be a fucking disaster)

Taxes are now microtransactions. Through twitter. There will be points.

I promise to destroy or steal for myself: the moon and at least one continent.

Still capitalism, but cops have to break in and use your toothbrush at least once a week.

All home appliances must be wifi enabled and access your social media-including sex toys.

Gender affirming care for trans people is just as banned, but now cis people need to do it (we will check)

You can still have ice cream, but we only do meat and periodic table flavors now. No the meat is not cooked first.

All identification now requires licking a surface. You can clean the surface with a dry sponge. After you use it.

Possible slogans: Outhouseperilous 2028-

-a politician you want to lie!

-Hope you can trust; hope that im lying!

-Fuck it

-Can this really be worse?

-at least shes not a fascist

-no war for oil, only war for war

[–] murmelade@lemmy.ml 2 points 3 weeks ago

I applaud you, bravo! Still better than Frump.

[–] Tollana1234567@lemmy.today 0 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)
[–] outhouseperilous@lemmy.dbzer0.com -1 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

Just to be clear, i do brlieve that for a better world we need nobody in charge.

But i really want to try my hand at ruining everything. i feel like id be better at it.

[–] Pilferjinx@lemmy.world 4 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

I think overall it would be slightly better. I normally score a society by how safe the woman are, especially when they're alone.

[–] Bunbury@feddit.nl 5 points 3 weeks ago

I agree that it would be slightly better. Not because women are in some way superior to men, but because more diverse groups in gender and culture perform better in almost any metric measured.

[–] LadyButterfly@piefed.blahaj.zone 3 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

IME women in positions of power put in less misogynistic policies. Which would be an improvement.

[–] blockheadjt@sh.itjust.works 9 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

The republican women congresspeople and SCOTUS justices perform exactly the same capitulation as the republican men in those positions... Murkowski and Coney-Barrett have both been outspoken in these last weeks about their support of the direction the country is headed.

[–] LadyButterfly@piefed.blahaj.zone 0 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Yes, politicians maneuvere their supporters into key positions. Plus Trump doesn't appear to allow dissent

[–] blarghly@lemmy.world 3 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Doesn't this just support the opposite of your idea though? Regardless of gender, politics is about power, and it rewards those who do what is necessary to gain and retain power. We wouldn't just be holding a lottery to randomly appoint women to positions of power - we'd be selecting for (in one way or another) the most power-hungry women in society.

My original point was that IME women in power put less misogynistic policies in place.

[–] Tollana1234567@lemmy.today -1 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

usually one installed by a MAN, it ends up bad its called glass ceiling in some cases. its the case for many companies, aka X, or has gotten in a position of power through nepotism from thier husband or other. this allows woman to act as a lightning rod for criticism and failures while hiding behind said woman, which the man caused.

these are 2 things where woman are often seen as bad leaders, but if you look behind how they got there: nepotism/favors/connections or only electable when she is associated with a man(like with the clintons) or installed as PR shield, its actually still the mans fault.

[–] Okokimup@lemmy.world 15 points 3 weeks ago (2 children)

If by men you mean humans, yes, I say we give the Elephants a chance.

[–] Notyou@sopuli.xyz 6 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

Looks good to me.

I'm down with having an elephant leader. They never forget and everyone likes them

[–] BroBot9000@lemmy.world 6 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (1 children)

Absolutely! About time the patriarchy burned.

[–] outhouseperilous@lemmy.dbzer0.com -2 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

Oh... Uh.... Yeah. That's what... Yeah. Totally that.

Im not opposed i was just kinda hoping....

[–] Kolanaki@pawb.social 2 points 2 weeks ago

Same, girl.

Nobody should be running the world.

⩜⃝

[–] stoy@lemmy.zip 2 points 2 weeks ago

People who desire power should not be given power, regardless of their gender.

[–] captainlezbian@lemmy.world 1 points 3 weeks ago

The era of men is over. Let's let the hobbits have a go at it

i am so tired of men

[–] Lemminary@lemmy.world 0 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

We got so tired that we elected a woman for president. Best. Decision. Ever.

[–] 33550336@lemmy.world 0 points 3 weeks ago

As a femdom fan, fully agree

[–] Formfiller@lemmy.world 0 points 3 weeks ago

Ruining the world