You never actually elucidate who is supposed to be doing these things - it's a Motte and Bailey tactic.
Your argument would fall apart if you were forced to be explicit about the who, the what and the why is supposed to be doing these things.
Likewise, culture is a complicated social phenomenon which has a life and a logic of its own.
It is cultural norms- of women. Making choices. In the real world.
It's simply women's revealed preference.
And maybe they'll try some vocal complaining to try to shift the preferences of the group. Which could work out, especially if a lot of group members don't have strong preferences and are just going along with the existing default.
The subject would just become 'everyone', 'the majority of the society', etc.
Like, "the majority of the society thinks men shouldn't wear skirts", "schools mandate skirts for girls uniforms", "the army doesn't provide shorts or skirts for men uniforms" etc.
I'm not sure to get your point really.
I use that language because these things happen on the socio-cultural level and are perpetuated indirectly through norms.
There is much in our society that is implicit.
Feminists.
> I use that language because these things happen on the socio-cultural level and are perpetuated indirectly through norms.
Belief in patriarchy is superstitious in nature. The patriarchy is everywhere, and nowhere. Its a global conspiracy. It is composed of powerful men and all men and all people both men and women and no-one all at once.
In this way, the patriarchy is unfalsifiable.
When speaking about the patriachy, feminists use the passive voice to tap-dance around having to make any specific claims otherwise they would be immediately falsified.
Can I ask what feminist literature you've read about the nature of patriarchy?
Maybe Invisible Women by Caroline Criado Perez could be good for you. It ties together a lot of different case studies from around the world to explore the unintended harm done to women by male-as-default thinking, from medical practices to urban planning.
The book is stuffed with concrete examples.
Or the fact that crash test dummies tend to be modelled only after men. It's easier to have one type of test dummy, and men are seen as the default. All of these things are not done out of malice, but out of laziness.
That said, there's also plenty of oppression that is actually done out of malice.
But if you want to have an informed opinion on this, yes, you should run out to your local book seller and read some relevant books on the matter. Or order them online. Or borrow them from the library.
I'm not talking about any conspiracy, I'm talking about emergent phenomena of our society that disadvantage people with "non-standard" bodies.
I didn't use the word conspiracy once. Nor did I present myself as a feminist.
You've put me into a neat little bucket and decided I'm not worth listening to on that basis. I don't have the time for that kind of discourse but I wish you the best and would like to again recommend you read Invisible Women. Maybe the next time you come across one of us feminists you'll be able to discuss the points they're making without discrediting them on am imaginary basis.