surely the critique of patriarchy has reached its apotheosis at precisely the historical moment when patriarchy has lost its hegemonic role – that is, when market individualism has swept it away
I hope somehow we get Zizek to do an AMA here. I want to bait him into spouting this ivory-tower stupidpol horseshit so that the mods ban his rich eurolib ass.
It's incredible how he just refuses to see any nuance here. Of course there are plenty of aspects of patriarchy that capitalism has swept away. Capitalism radically changes social relations, that's Marx's point I think. And the relations between men and women have been radically changed - some for the better! But how does Zizek go from that to thinking patriarchy isn't a problem anymore, I have no idea.
He seems to be deliberately conflating "patriarchy" as in the class relations of primitive agrarian society with "patriarchy" as in the institutionalized sexism that persisted in subsequent modes of production.
I hope somehow we get Zizek to do an AMA here. I want to bait him into spouting this ivory-tower stupidpol horseshit so that the mods ban his rich eurolib ass.
His take is really dumb. Patriarchy hasn't gone anywhere, it's still a fucking mess. Saying we're post-patriarchy is either very ignorant or bait.
Engels wrote quite a bit about capitalism and the family (with the father as the head).
It's incredible how he just refuses to see any nuance here. Of course there are plenty of aspects of patriarchy that capitalism has swept away. Capitalism radically changes social relations, that's Marx's point I think. And the relations between men and women have been radically changed - some for the better! But how does Zizek go from that to thinking patriarchy isn't a problem anymore, I have no idea.
He seems to be deliberately conflating "patriarchy" as in the class relations of primitive agrarian society with "patriarchy" as in the institutionalized sexism that persisted in subsequent modes of production.