Comment by MichaelSalib | Hacker News Reader

Comment by MichaelSalib | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

I've heard a certain feminist (who happens to be married) say on TV that marriage is an old and failed system that we should get rid of.

There are over 6 billion people on Earth. Many of those people are just insane. And television shows have an incentive to bring on the real nuts in order to keep things exciting. As such, the fact that you heard one representative from group X go on TV and say something nutty doesn't allow you to make any inferences about what the median person in group X actually believes.

I think this is not too inconsistent with what the western culture(s) subconsciously believe.

Strange. If western culture "subconsciously believes that marriage is a failed system that should be disposed of", then I don't see why marriage is (1) held in high esteem and (2) heavily subsidized. I mean, when I got married, everyone I knew was delighted and no one told me "this is a terrible idea -- marriage is a failed system". Why would the government give me money once I got married if there was a social consensus that marriage is a failed system?

The problem with asserting things about an entire society's "subconscious beliefs" is that your assertions are impossible to refute. Which suggests that these assertions are meaningless garbage.

Calm down. I'm not trying to attack anyone, just stating what I'm observing. I'm not saying anything about whether or not it's morally right or wrong.

While I agree that person I heard from on TV is a nut, she's a rather prominent figure among the feminist movement in the middle east (Nawal El Saadawi).

In the west, marriage is the last step after a long long relationship. In the middle east, it tends to be the first step. This already suggests that marriage is much less important than it used to be, and I can only see it getting less and less important as time goes on.

Calm down.

I think your arguments would be more convincing if you spent less time worrying about other people's emotional states and more time making claims that are testable.

I note that you haven't disputed my point that claims about what entire societies subconsciously believe are meaningless since you can't prove anything about them.

While I agree that person I heard from on TV is a nut, she's a rather prominent figure among the feminist movement in the middle east (Nawal El Saadawi).

Um, how do you know? It seems like you've never actually read any feminist writings...am I wrong? And it also seems like you've never discussed feminism with any actual living feminists. So how exactly would you know how well this one person on TV represents living breathing feminists?

In the west, marriage is the last step after a long long relationship. In the middle east, it tends to be the first step.

I've read this half a dozen times and I still can't figure out what it means.

We studied feminism briefly in a Communications course I took at the University, the prof (female) was very sympathetic of the feminist movement. I didn't make up the notion of the patriarchal society.

> I've read this half a dozen times and I still can't figure out what it means.

When a man and a woman fall in love, the first thing they try to do in a traditional/conservative society is to try and get married. In the west, the first thing they do is go out together, make out, have sex, maybe move in and live together for years and have children without ever officially getting married.

Unless you want to say this only happens in F.R.I.E.N.D.S but not in real life.

We studied feminism briefly in a Communications course I took at the University, the prof (female) was very sympathetic of the feminist movement. I didn't make up the notion of the patriarchal society.

I didn't claim you made it up; but your presentation doesn't strike me as very accurate. In particular, "It's obvious that marriage is a byproduct of this patriarchal structure" seems wrongheaded. Marriage is a social institution; that means that the structure of marriage reflects the existing power structures in society.

Even in the most egalitarian societies, like Sweden, people still get married in great numbers. What's more, many of those who don't get married in fact do get married in all but name: they live together like a married couple indefinitely. Since there are often few benefits to explicit marriage, their choice represents little more than a willingness to forgo a religious ceremony. But it shouldn't surprise us that people in very secular countries decide to avoid big religious ceremonies; that's just common sense.

When a man and a woman fall in love, the first thing they try to do in a traditional/conservative society is to try and get married. In the west, the first thing they do is go out together, make out, have sex, maybe move in and live together for years and have children without ever officially getting married.

As I understand it, a great number of unmarried couples in traditional societies make out and have sex; the big difference is that they sneak around when doing so. But if you like, we can pretend that everyone in traditional societies actually strictly observes all their social norms.

Moreover, a great many people in western countries get married and stay married for many years. It seems silly to pretend that they don't exist. Your claims would be more persuasive if they were backed up by numbers.

I just looked Nawal El Saadawi up; apparently she is a survivor of female genital mutilation. Having your genitals cut off sans anesthesia in the name of preparing you for marriage is a rather good excuse for speaking out against the institution, don't you think?

Yea I actually only learned about this when I was looking up her name in English (had to go from arabic wikipedia -> english).

This might indeed explain why she's radical in her views.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com