Catholic nuns, prudish Mormon matrons, and women of the GOP are all obvious examples of women who are misogynists, often much worse than men towards women. But you don’t have to be an Ann Coulter or S.E. Cupp to be a female patriarch. The average female social worker and police officer that sides with the establishment against girls and women are all too common, especially due to the dual arrest policy that encourages police to arrest the victim along with the abuser. (The excuse used for this policy, which is responsible for women wrongly imprisoned and often killed, is to let the courts sort it out. A man can beat a woman bloody; but, if she so much as kicks him off of her, she’s fighting back. Self-defense is not recognized even when a mother is defending her children. It is common knowledge that American courts and prison system are “for profit” and rarely serve justice.) Women who work as social workers, police officers, and family counselors are trained to be neutral, often overlooking the obvious victim – the abused women who need their professional help. This is even more insidious when the professionals themselves are women. When you play neutral in the face of injustice, you take the side of the perpetrator(s).
Domestic violence is one such area where women are ignored by the very people who are in an official, public position to help. Women wrongly arrested for self defense has given rise to the number off women arrested for violent offenses, as well as the bogus statistics regarding men as domestic violence “victims.” Another interestingly factor that’s politically incorrect to expose: male on male domestic violence in homosexual relationships. Instead, these stats are ignored because it’s politically incorrect to point out that gay men commit domestic violence. Thus, the statistics of women, who are made twice a victim via dual arrest policies, are used to obfuscate the facts and assist the very real perpetrators of domestic violence regardless of sexual orientation: men. The issue of domestic violence is just one common example where women in law enforcement and social work not only excuse crimes against girls and women, but help perpetuate crimes out of sheer self-righteousness and misogyny. Whether it’s the neutrality fallacy or bias against women due to culture or religion, these female professionals are female patriarchs – female chauvinist pigs.
Globally, examples of women harming girls can be found in the indigenous tribes of Africa. It is often older women who hold down these girls and mutilate them. Often, it’s women who perpetuate the cultures and religions oppressing girls and women. An example of this is the American South where the typical Christian woman instructs her daughter to “save” herself for one man, while she herself plays second fiddle to her husband, awaiting her rise to the head of the hen-pecking order when his mother dies. Granted, this Southern nonsense is just that compared to the issue of female genital mutilation, yet this nonsense leads to a culture that embraces domestic violence as a norm, overlooked and under-reported.
Interestingly, it’s been men, namely western, secular atheists, who are the loudest and most ardent opponents against female genital mutilation. Sam Harris, Richard Dawkins, Michael Shermer, and Leonard Mlodinow have proven themselves to be better feminists than actual professional feminists who’d rather focus on stupendously dumb topics and non issues, such as “shirt-gate.” Former president Jimmy Carter gave an excellent TED Talk regarding the trampled rights of girls and women by religion. He discusses the abuses of women in western cultures as well as female genital mutilation. Why are the big name feminists not addressing the “adoption” newborn trafficking laws of states Alabama and Hawaii? Why are these feminists not looking at global issues, such as child brides, FGM, acid attacks, and human trafficking? Because they’re busy demonizing video games, cosmetics, Victoria’s Secret, and bowler shirts. Why isn’t the average feminist journalist supporting Emma Watson’s UN #HeForShe campaign instead of picking fights with fellow progressives over trivial crap they deem “politically incorrect?” Because they’re trivial bitches.
I opened with the example of domestic violence as a segue into the murky waters of female patriarchs. But there’s is no one archetype of a female patriarch, instead various examples of women who hate other women. They all have their varied reasons. Some reasons are simply an occupational byproduct, such as the police officer example. Women in patriarchal cultures and religions tend to see it as their vocation to pass down misogyny, often reciting the fallacious “if it was good enough for me, it’s good enough for you” excuse. Healthy parents want their children to inherit a better life, a better world, than what we were given. This isn’t the case of the female patriarch, which explains why she’s a pro-birther to the extreme, even in the case of maternal and/or infant mortality. The conservative female patriarch suppresses through GOP politics and the cult mentality of religion, often reigning in legal and social support from her church and community to demonize any young mother or girl who doesn’t cower to her “advice” and worldview, whereas the regressive left female patriarch embraces the term “feminist” for her own agenda, targeting other women who don’t precisely share her views as fair game for bullying. These are the types of feminists responsible for hijacking the label, bullying other women for the perceived social wrongs of being “basic” and feminine, or just wanting to be a stay-at-home mommy.
Three types of female patriarchs:
- The occupational female patriarch: A professional who misuses her power and profession/vocation to the detriment of girls and women. Whether a social worker targeting poor, single mothers to make bank on a fraudulent and forced adoption, or an attorney profiting on the hot issue of “father’s rights,” these women not only disenfranchise and harm, but destroy other women using the worn excuse “doing one’s job.” The truth is they are profiting off of the misery and injustices committed against girls and women. Personally, I find this female type of misogyny more insidious than any shock jock chauvinism. (One very real example is a certain female OB/GYN practicing in Montgomery, Alabama. This doctor hunts down newborns for infertile couples via impoverished patients with the help of fraudulent agencies. The case of this specific OB is currently under a gag order, and not public domain/knowledge like the #bringBabyElliotHome case. In one particular case, she sterilized the mother after an unnecessarily C-section.)
- The traditional or conservative female patriarch: Basically, that woman-hating, self-loathing female (often a mother-in-law) who votes Republican and attends church regularly. In other cultures, just look to the traditionalists or fundamentalists to find the equivalent. These are the creepy bitches who threaten you if you don’t live your life by their convictions. Always offering up their opinions, they’re pimping out a gun-toting Jesus, telling you how to raise your children, how many children you need, and how to fuck your spouse.
- The regressive left and/or limousine liberal female patriarch: Recently, social media has called these PC bullies out thanks to gamer-gate and shirt-gate. This is the type of female patriarch who excuses away atrocities like FGM and international adoption scandals, e.g. Marshall Islands, as “cultural expression” or some bullshit like that. Their creepy, paternalistic rhetoric sounds a lot like Christopher Columbus colonialism on 21st century crack. Find this type of misogynist embracing the term feminist, and in the halls of Academia. She’s the professor dressed like a bag lady who ridicules female students for wearing sundresses and having a different viewpoint – not even a directly opposing viewpoint, just a different angle viewpoint.
Yes, these types can overlap. And often, they do. My encounters with female patriarchs consists of the latter two whereas many of my friends have experience the first one. I choose the term “patriarch” instead of “matriarch” because these women are looking to replace men. They want to lord over the rest of us, “wearing the pants.” Often, they align themselves with the very sexist establishment because they’re sick enough to believe they are the special “exceptions,” the few women who will make it only to build the glass ceiling back over the rest of us. This is what Boomer women did. But there’s the feminist element as well. These are the politically correct, regressive left bullies picking fights with progressives and picking on girly girls. The separatist feminists are prime examples of female patriarchs neo-liberal style.
World Health Organization
Feminist Majority Foundation
Exposing Infant Trafficking