Image Image Image Image Image Image Image Image Image Image

The Blue & Gray Press | August 19, 2017

Scroll to top

Top

13 Comments

Op Ed: Patriarchy and Oppression

Op Ed: Patriarchy and Oppression

By SARAH TEAGUE

This article is addressed to Kayleigh Rongey in support of her article “Hollywood’s glamorization of parenthood isn’t fooling millennials.”

            I can’t stand how the patriarchy has infiltrated the toy industry, but then again, capitalism is the perfect vessel for sexist oppression. I know of no worse combination than that of the western values of exploitation and degradation with the equally western, male-dominated consumer market. If millennials don’t want to have kids, then they shouldn’t be forced to, or even pressured to. Women are not broodmares and nobody can control their bodies today like society has in the past. I know I stand for all the other men who care about feminism when I say that this continued oppression has gone on long enough.

Rongey’s article hits the nail on the head by arguing that we millennials don’t want to have kids because of the state of the world. It is, frankly, terrible. To bring a child, or two and a half or more, into this world with its current state of politics is irresponsible. And what would the benefit be? The toy companies and other white-owned, multi-national corporations will see their profits go up. Who cares! Do they need more Lamborghinis?

These alt-right and other Republicans are constantly pressing issues of family, but what happens to us when we decide to have families? They don’t get any help from social programs that we desperately need. If I’m forced to go off and start a family, who is going to help feed them?

And besides that, Rongey’s article also brings up issues of the environment. This might be the bigger issue, honestly. What example would we be setting if, like the irresponsible generation before us, we also brought forth carbon-emissions in the form of children? According to the National Institute for Climate Awareness, over the course of an average American’s lifetime, we create about twelve hundred and fifty thousand pounds of carbon emissions alone. That doesn’t account for any of the other greenhouse gasses. To have kids isn’t pushing family values, it’s denying science.

But there is hope, I think. Rongey might not have touched upon it, but there are things that we can do to stop the rapid speed at which both the capitalist patriarchy and environmental science deniers are permanently hurting our world. Resist them by throwing out their social dogmas. If you don’t want kids, don’t have kids. If you do want to start a family, maybe reconsider it—don’t help the deniers and so-called “family values” right. What it really is, is white nationalism disguised using happy words.

Tags

Comments

  1. Snowflake Detector

    Anytime an article begins with, “I can’t stand how the patriarchy has infiltrated the toy industry,” you know it’s going to be good! Before I get to the meat of why your article is nonsense I’d like to address one point you made. You say that there is a “male dominated” consumer market. Considering women make around 75% of consumer purchases, I’d like to know how you came to that conclusion. It’s constant errors in fact (EIFs) like these that make it impossible to take radical leftists/feminist seriously.

    Anyway, you say that women shouldn’t be forced to have children. Congratulations on countering an argument no one is making. You have a very active imagination and that should be harnessed in your continued patriarchy fan-fiction. I also like your use of casual racism in your screed about Big Toy. Delightful! I mean, your article is so bad it reads as satire, but you’re being completely serious. How do you do that? What’s your trick? You really have a gift Ms. Teague.

    Let’s look at another quote real quick. “If (I)… go off and start a family, who is going to help feed them?” I’ll field that question for you: you. You feed them. Part of starting a family is being responsible for the well-being of a living thing that is not a cat. As you correctly, if inadvertently, realize you do not have the financial, intellectual, or social-emotional faculties to do that. I commend owning up to your own limitations. It would be a wonderful world if more people did.

    At any rate, I wish you the best of luck in furthering your degree in what I can only assume is Feline Studies.

  2. UMW Parent

    This is by far the most ridiculous article published in The Blue & Gray Press over the past four years.

    “If I’m forced to go off and start a family, who is going to help feed them?” How about you.

    “[B]ut what happens to us when we decide to have families? They don’t get any help from social programs that we desperately need?” Huh?

    “What example would we be setting if, like the irresponsible generation before us, we also brought forth carbon-emissions in the form of children?” An argument to not have children because of carbon-emissions” What is the OP doing to reduce his carbon-emissions?

  3. Jack Rudolph

    Well, and there’s the fact that this was in the April Fools issue.

  4. Trump2020

    This article is so bad that even White Knight beta cuck Jack Rudolph thinks it’s a joke.

  5. Philip (2008 alum)

    UMW Parent, although I may disagree with the idea that “capitalism is the perfect vessel for sexist oppression,” at least inasmuch as it seems to imply that capitalism is bad, I think the article makes an interesting point.

    You seem to object to the author’s questioning of the Republican party’s commitment to family issues. Republicans are always talking about “family values”–no gay marriage, no abortion, no pornography, etc. I’m not taking a position on any of those issues right now, but it sounds as though the author believes that Republicans should pay more attention to supporting families financially with social programs, as Democrats often do…particularly since not every couple can afford to provide adequately for their children. Thus the irony of Republicans saying that they care about the American family.

    I wasn’t clear what the problem was that you had with the climate-change-related argument, but in general I do not completely understand why you think this article is “the most ridiculous article published … over the last four years.”

    Finally, just a general comment, directed at the other commenters…it bothers me that it seems like every time anyone publishes an article about feminism, race relations, or any other “liberal-friendly subject,” hordes of trolls and/or spammers descend on the post, often with highly offensive or otherwise inappropriate comments. No, I no longer go to UMW, and have barely even had time to visit since I graduated over 8 years ago. But as someone who still cares about the UMW community, I wish that the comments at my alma mater’s school newspaper website reflected better on the authors of these comments. Please remember that a lot of people read this paper on the web beyond UMW students…including, I would imagine, many prospective students.

  6. Snowflake Detector

    Phil,
    I’d be much more worried about the article content itself if you’re concerned about UMW’s reputation. If you think this article makes “an interesting point,” then UMW has failed in educating you as well. The fact a college educated person wrote this and then at least one other college educated person approved it for publishing is very disappointing. This article is nothing but leftist nonsense and should be treated as such.

  7. Philip (2008 alum)

    Hello again, Snowflake Detector,

    I haven’t heard any evidence that my opinion that the article makes an interesting point implies that UMW has failed to educate me. On the other hand, your constant smears against article writers regarding “narcissism,” “Feline Studies,” and other accusations, coupled with your defense of extreme right-wing figures, makes me think that you are spewing rightist nonsense. (I am actually only a little bit left of center politically.)

    Finally, I would like to ask why it is that you posted the comment that I am responding to at 4:20 a.m. I am not questioning your sleep habits, just wondering why you would post a comment at a time that is reminiscent of 4/20, which is Adolf Hitler’s birthday. (Under ordinary circumstances, I would take this as mere coincidence, or perhaps a reference to Donald Trump (D is the fourth letter of the alphabet, and T the twentieth)…but as I noted your support for alt-right figures leads me to interpret your time choice in a more sinister light.)

  8. Snowflake Detector

    Phil

    It looks like your degree in Snowflake Stiudies is really shining through in the comment section. Now, I can tell your education was pointless because you said this article made a good point. Seeing as the article has 0 points it was a simple deduction to make. Unless you’re suggesting that parroting daily kos nonsense is a good point. I admit I’m having difficulty arguing with you as I may not be able to explain it in a way that is simple enough for you to understand.

  9. Philip (2008 alum)

    Snowflake Detector, I don’t know you, don’t know your name, don’t know for sure where you work or go to school, and don’t know if you’re even 18 yet…so I don’t know if you would be tried as an adult for cyberstalking or stalking under the federal statute:

    https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/2261A

    Although I’m not a lawyer, I think you have already violated this and possibly other statutes several times. Because it’s possible that you could be a young, vulnerable guy/gal with some emotional baggage that I couldn’t possibly know about, I want to give you a chance to do the right thing. The right thing in this case would be to apologize for the intimidating and harassing cryptic remarks you’ve been making, and either stop commenting on this website or say things that are more constructive and positive.

    In particular, I think you should consider changing your username to something that doesn’t include the word “snowflake.” If you were to Google that, you would see immediately some of the highly offensive alt-right-related definitions that show up.

    In general, I’d like to encourage you to think about the choices you are making in terms of your online behavior. The internet may seem like the wild west, where there are no consequences for your behavior and “anything goes.” But the truth is that the arm of the law is long and our actions have consequences wherever we go, so as I said, I’d like to encourage you to think carefully about your conduct and shape up.

    If you can’t do that and continue harassing me, or anyone else on this site, I will give a tip to the FBI on their website, FBI.gov.

    I bet you are using some sort of fancy IP-address-altering tool to disguise your identity, but I would imagine that if there is some sort of investigation into your conduct, the FBI would still be able to figure out your real name pretty quickly.

  10. Snowflake Detector

    Phil,

    Wow you finally said something that was factually correct: you’re not a lawyer. My Snowflake Detector is off the chart with your FBI comment! Here, I’ll help you pen the letter—

    “Dear FBI,

    Its me, Phil again. You’ll never believe what happened this time. Someone disagreed with me on the internet! I also think he’s a big meanie face. P.S. I am not a crackpot”
    —-

    This is typical of the cowardly left. Trying to shut down speech they do not agree with using threats. Let me break it down for you- making hilarious comments about the absurdity of an article and comments is funny. If you don’t like my comments, stop reading them. Threatening to dox me or make a false police report is a crime. Defamation is a crime. Intimidation is a crime. So when you try to intimidate and harass me from making comments that doesn’t make you look so good. I would encourage you to not commit any crimes in your crusade against free speech.

    Cheers!

  11. Philip (2008 alum)

    This will be my last comment for some time. I am not defaming, threatening, intimidating, or doxing you, and the FBI report that I just filed about you contains no false information.

  12. Anonymous

    *bye felicia*

  13. NOT THE FBI

    Hello,

    It’s NOTTHEFBI here.

    Snowflake Detector, come with us. You have been a meanie paneenie on the internets. As you well know, it is a crime to disagree with Phil (2008 Alum) as of the 1794 Act of Duhhhhh.

    The jig is up, buster!

    And Phil (2008 Alum), thank you for reporting him to us, the NOTTHEFBI. We’ve been searching for him for some time. You have made a valuable contribution to our field and our nation. We are going to award you with the highest civilian honor that the NOTTHEFBI can award– our Mom’s Basement Dweller Gold Disposable Razor Blade designed for even the trickiest neckbeards.

    Stay in school and don’t do drugs.

    Regards,

    The NOTTHEFBI.

Submit a Comment