Author |
Message |
 |
|
 |
Advert
|
Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
- No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
- Times and dates in your local timezone.
- Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
- Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
- Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now. |
|
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2013/07/15 22:02:19
Subject: Is the Imperium patriarchal?
|
 |
[MOD]
Solahma
|
Troike wrote:But whether or not it's a cruel theocracy and whether or not it is a patriarchy are different issues.
True enough -- and totally irrelevant to my point. I only used the cruel theocracy part to show that GW makes blanket statements about this huge collection of cultures and societies. It is therefore possible to make other blanket statements about it, such as it being patriarchal (or not). Troike wrote:And anyway, the way GW characterises the 40K universe, in this case having lots of male protagonists, does not necessarily translate into in-universe cultural norms
I'm not sure there is actually any difference. 40k is a franchise not an alternate dimension. It only exists insofar as what GW and its licensees choose to present.
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2013/07/15 22:57:58
Subject: Is the Imperium patriarchal?
|
 |
Longtime Dakkanaut
|
But GW hasn't represented anything about the Imperium being patriarchal. It's one thing for books to have lots of male protagonists, but nothing in any of the books even MENTIONED patriarchism. Given the large amount of females in the cast, and even neo-feminists in Necromunda, you'd think at least one of them would bring up the Imperium being biased towards males if that were the case (instead, even the neo-feminists aren't fighting against male oppression, but instead believe that females are SUPERIOR).
The fact that none of them do implies the Imperium isn't patriarchal. Because it'd make no sense otherwise for it to never be mentioned anywhere by many of the numerous high ranking female characters we've seen (Not one of them ever mentioned that she had to fight an uphill battle to reach her position due to her gender)
If the Imperium were patriarchal, someone would have brought it up by now. It's unrealistic that no one would if it were patriarchal. By not having any character mention patriarchism, GW has implicitly implied the society is NOT patriarchal, because otherwise the lack of patriarchism being mentioned makes no sense.
|
This message was edited 5 times. Last update was at 2013/07/15 23:04:40
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2013/07/15 22:58:16
Subject: Is the Imperium patriarchal?
|
 |
Preacher of the Emperor
|
Manchu wrote:True enough -- and totally irrelevant to my point. I only used the cruel theocracy part to show that GW makes blanket statements about this huge collection of cultures and societies. It is therefore possible to make other blanket statements about it, such as it being patriarchal (or not).
But it's a different sort of blanket statement. We can easily apply the "cruel theocracy" blanket statement because that is how the Imperium, as an entity, operates. The patriarchy blanket, however, cannot really be applied because, in my opinion, because we see evidence to the contrary everywhere.
There's two ways I can see to define "the Imperium": the worlds that make it up and the Instituations that run it, and neither are patriarchial. A given world in the Imperium can be a patriarchy, a matriarchy, or anything inbetween or besides. Likewise, the Institutions making up the Imperium, like the Inquisition, Arbites, Administratum and (crucially) the High Lords or Terra, all have no problem with female members. The only Institution that is apparently stated to have some patriarchial element to it (the Ecclesiarchy) has a very strong counter-balance to this factor- just look at the organisation they rely on for protection.
Manchu wrote:40k is a franchise not an alternate dimension. It only exists insofar as what GW and its licensees choose to present.
Did not say it's an alternate dimension. I'm saying that it is a setting with its own rules and characterisation, and that the design choices of the people writing that universe do not necessarily translate into in-universe rules within that setting. GW's writers often focus on Space Marines a lot, but in-universe, they are a fairly small force next to the Imperial guard, who do a lot more of the Imperium's fighting for it. Were one to view this Marine-centric presentation as an in-universe factor, one could say that Marines are far more prominent than they really are.
|
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2013/07/15 23:14:02
Order of the Righteous Armour - 542 points so far. |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2013/07/15 23:06:40
Subject: Re:Is the Imperium patriarchal?
|
 |
Pyromaniac Hellhound Pilot
|
I've always thought that. As a whole, the Imperium generally doesn't care. It more depends on the planet and the planets culture.
|
Regiment: 91st Schrott Experimental Regiment
Regiment Planet: Schrott
Specialization: Salvaged, Heavily Modified, and/or Experimental Mechanized Units.
"SIR! Are you sure this will work!?"
"I HAVE NO IDEA, PULL THE TRIGGER!!!" 91st comms chatter. |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2013/07/15 23:49:39
Subject: Is the Imperium patriarchal?
|
 |
[MOD]
Solahma
|
TiamatRoar wrote:If the Imperium were patriarchal, someone would have brought it up by now. It's unrealistic that no one would if it were patriarchal. By not having any character mention patriarchism, GW has implicitly implied the society is NOT patriarchal, because otherwise the lack of patriarchism being mentioned makes no sense.
You're arguing from a lack of evidence. One of the key insights of real life gender studies is that patriarchy need not be explicit or overt to exist. Try telling a feminist that the existence of some number of female CEOs or generals implies there is no patriarchy. As to why no one brings it up in the fluff ... maybe because the stories are not (overtly) about gender? As K_K already pointed out, the presence of females in positions of power is not evidence for the absence of patriarchy. He used Queen Victoria as an example. We could as easily use Oprah Winfrey as another example. The idea that there is a female High Lord does not mean it's just as easy/acceptable for a woman to become High Lord as it is for a man to become one. If we only go by what the books present, there are far more men in positions of authority than women. If the Imperium is not patriarchal, if promotion is simply merit-based vis-a-vis gender, then I guess we have to assume that in the 40k universe men are just more qualified to lead. Personally, I'd rather the setting be patriarchal than misogynist.
|
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2013/07/15 23:51:12
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2013/07/15 23:52:25
Subject: Is the Imperium patriarchal?
|
 |
Gore-Soaked Lunatic Witchhunter
Seattle
|
Edited. See note about OT discussion above. Thanks.
|
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2013/07/15 23:55:14
It is best to be a pessimist. You are usually right and, when you're wrong, you're pleasantly surprised. |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2013/07/15 23:53:53
Subject: Re:Is the Imperium patriarchal?
|
 |
The Conquerer
Waiting for my shill money from Spiral Arm Studios
|
Yes, but in the case of there being a patriarchy now or in the past there is actual evidence.
With the Imperium, we have no evidence to suggest one exists. And plenty to suggest the Imperium is neither a Patriarchy nor a Matriarchy, but a place where all that matters is what each individual can provide the Imperium.
|
Self-proclaimed evil Cat-person. Dues Ex Felines
Cato Sicarius, after force feeding Captain Ventris a copy of the Codex Astartes for having the audacity to play Deathwatch, chokes to death on his own D-baggery after finding Calgar assembling his new Eldar army.
MURICA!!! IN SPESS!!! |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2013/07/15 23:57:09
Subject: Is the Imperium patriarchal?
|
 |
Longtime Dakkanaut
|
Manchu wrote:TiamatRoar wrote:If the Imperium were patriarchal, someone would have brought it up by now. It's unrealistic that no one would if it were patriarchal. By not having any character mention patriarchism, GW has implicitly implied the society is NOT patriarchal, because otherwise the lack of patriarchism being mentioned makes no sense.
You're arguing from a lack of evidence. One of the key insights of real life gender studies is that patriarchy need not be explicit or overt to exist. Try telling a feminist that the existence of some number of female CEOs or generals implies there is no patriarchy. As to why no one brings it up in the fluff ... maybe because the stories are not (overtly) about gender?
No, in this case, it's how a lack of evidence is UNLOGICAL. In EVERY society in real life, if a female is oppressed, some of them at least CONSIDER the fact, and you'd also see men consider it whenever they see a woman in position of power. The fact that we've seen multiple female perspectives in the fluff yet not even one of them considered the fact only makes sense if the society isn't patriarchal. The fact that we've seen multiple men deal with multiple female characters in the fluff yet none of them considered the female being in a position of power to be odd only makes sense if the society (imperium at large, in this case) isn't patriarchal. Otherwise we're to assume that all these female characters never consider the fact that their patriarchal society is against them, or that none of the male characters ever considered it their right to have something because they're male despite this "patriarchal" society, and that's just nonsense.
|
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2013/07/15 23:58:54
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2013/07/15 23:58:39
Subject: Is the Imperium patriarchal?
|
 |
Preacher of the Emperor
|
Manchu wrote:As K_K already pointed out, the presence of females in positions of power is not evidence for the absence of patriarchy. He used Queen Victoria as an example. We could as easily use Oprah Winfrey as another example. The idea that there is a female High Lord does not mean it's just as easy/acceptable for a woman to become High Lord as it is for a man to become one. If we only go by what the books present, there are far more men in positions of authority than women. If the Imperium is not patriarchal, if promotion is simply merit-based vis-a-vis gender, then I guess we have to assume that in the 40k universe men are just more qualified to lead. Personally, I'd rather the setting be patriarchal than misogynist.
As said. the abundance of male authority figures over female ones can be put down to the fact that the setting is mostly written by men (who may find male characters easier to write/understand) and is targeted mostly at males, who will usually emphasise better with male protagonists and heroes.
The fact that nothing has ever been said in-universe to suggest that the organisations in the Imperium are patriarchial would support the above view that the abundance of male authority figures is due to an out-of-universe reason rather than an in-universe one.
|
Order of the Righteous Armour - 542 points so far. |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2013/07/15 23:58:53
Subject: Is the Imperium patriarchal?
|
 |
[MOD]
Solahma
|
The trouble is, you're thinking about these female characters as if they are real people rather than elements in a story. A female character will not necessarily consider whether or not she is oppressed -- I daresay it is somewhat less likely if that character is written by a male author.
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2013/07/16 00:00:03
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2013/07/15 23:59:53
Subject: Is the Imperium patriarchal?
|
 |
Longtime Dakkanaut
|
Manchu wrote:The trouble is, you're thinking about these female characters as if they are real people rather than elements in a story. A female character will not necessarily consider whether or not she is oppressed -- I daresay it is somewhat less likely if that character is written by a male author.
Less likely, perhaps. But unheard of despite all the books that exist in the BL? That's nonsense. Tons of non- BL books written by male authors have female characters spouting off about their girl power and how it makes them equals. If BL writers weren't consciously purposefully trying to avoid implying the Imperium was patriarchal, at least one writer would have thrown in a feminist character by now (not necessarily a feminist movement character, but one with feminist thoughts. It's a VERY common female archetype that male writers usually toss into their "token female character")
So far the only characters with any feminist thoughts whatsoever are House Escher, and that's because they think females are SUPERIOR, not oppressed (although they;d only apply to necromunda anyways, not the Imperium at large)
|
This message was edited 5 times. Last update was at 2013/07/16 00:04:23
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2013/07/16 00:12:02
Subject: Is the Imperium patriarchal?
|
 |
[MOD]
Solahma
|
Troike wrote:the abundance of male authority figures is due to an out-of-universe reason rather than an in-universe one
It's an arguable point. I am especially thinking about Caves of Ice, where the issue is obliquely addressed -- albeit through the biased first-person perspective of a notoriously unreliable narrator who's speaking more about utility in attrition-based military strategy rather than gender politics. What's really at issue here, however, is literary criticism. On the one hand, there's the alternate reality method where you are free to say that the material does not accurately represent the objective reality of the fictional universe. I disfavor that approach precisely because the so-called universe has no objective reality. To me, it's a setting rather than a universe and that setting exists only in the exposition afforded by its creators.
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2013/07/16 00:16:11
Subject: Is the Imperium patriarchal?
|
 |
Longtime Dakkanaut
|
Manchu wrote: Troike wrote:the abundance of male authority figures is due to an out-of-universe reason rather than an in-universe one
It's an arguable point. I am especially thinking about Caves of Ice, where the issue is obliquely addressed -- albeit through the biased first-person perspective of a notoriously unreliable narrator who's speaking more about utility in attrition-based military strategy rather than gender politics. What's really at issue here, however, is literary criticism. On the one hand, there's the alternate reality method where you are free to say that the material does not accurately represent the objective reality of the fictional universe. I disfavor that approach precisely because the so-called universe has no objective reality. To me, it's a setting rather than a universe and that setting exists only in the exposition afforded by its creators.
If the universe has no objective reality, we're free to assume that there are tons of female heroines out there too. We just never see any books about them. Books starring male characters doesn't imply patriarchism in any way. Hell, it wouldn't imply patriarchism even if there weren't tons of female heroines out there that we've never see.
If you reject that, then it still doesn't imply the Imperium is patriarchal. Let's say that, hypothetically speaking, there were no female heroines out there and the only heros that existed were the male heros we read about. The only thing that implies is that men in WH40k are more competent when it comes to being heroic in battle. It still doesn't imply the society is patriarchal. In that case, any men that rose in rank and stature due to their inherent heroicness did so because of their merits, not because they're men. That would make the Imperium a "meritocracy which just happens to have male characters rise to power because male characters are more competent at protagonist-esque heroics, not because they're actually male". Which I doubt is the type of answer the OP was looking for (that answer is about as useful as saying "All space marines are male because of science!" It ignores the context and intent of the original question).
That also assuming that characters actually rise in status due to heroics outside of space marine chapters. Given the large number of incompetent characters at the top of leadership, even that assumption is questionable.
|
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2013/07/16 00:17:47
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2013/07/16 00:17:11
Subject: Is the Imperium patriarchal?
|
 |
Preacher of the Emperor
|
Manchu wrote:It's an arguable point. I am especially thinking about Caves of Ice, where the issue is obliquely addressed -- albeit through the biased first-person perspective of a notoriously unreliable narrator who's speaking more about utility in attrition-based military strategy rather than gender politics. What's really at issue here, however, is literary criticism. On the one hand, there's the alternate reality method where you are free to say that the material does not accurately represent the objective reality of the fictional universe. I disfavor that approach precisely because the so-called universe has no objective reality. To me, it's a setting rather than a universe and that setting exists only in the exposition afforded by its creators.
Oh, is that when he talks about the unique troubles of having a mixed-sex regiment? Sorry, don't have the book to hand.
But yes, i do want to re-clarify that it's an arguable point, in that we can't say for definite if the male writers/male audience is having that major an effect. Though I'd say that it is.
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2013/07/16 00:17:31
Order of the Righteous Armour - 542 points so far. |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2013/07/16 00:19:12
Subject: Is the Imperium patriarchal?
|
 |
[MOD]
Solahma
|
TiamatRoar wrote:If the universe has no objective reality, we're free to assume that there are tons of female heroines out there too
That's not quite what I mean by objective. I don't mean that we're free to say UM wear red armor and BA wear blue. I mean, there is no world in which there are either UM or BA. There is only a setting, which is inextricably linked to the context that created it. Automatically Appended Next Post: Troike wrote:Oh, is that when he talks about the unique troubles of having a mixed-sex regiment? Sorry, don't have the book to hand.
I think he expresses sentiment to the effect of the Imperium not caring whether one is a man or woman as long as one is willing to die for the Emperor. It's been a while, though. Troike wrote:But yes, i do want to re-clarify that it's an arguable point, in that we can't say for definite if the male writers/male audience is having that major an effect. Though I'd say that it is.
I just take it for what it is (i.e., appears to be in the books): the setting is patriarchal rather than misogynistic in that, speaking generally, men enjoy subtle privileges that women do not but that women are not as a matter of "fact" less able to lead. That's how I explain the apparently huge gender gap in 40k leadership as a matter of the setting rather than as a matter of the market for these books.
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2013/07/16 00:24:10
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2013/07/16 02:10:15
Subject: Is the Imperium patriarchal?
|
 |
Hallowed Canoness
Ireland
|
Manchu wrote:TiamatRoar wrote:If the universe has no objective reality, we're free to assume that there are tons of female heroines out there too
That's not quite what I mean by objective. I don't mean that we're free to say UM wear red armor and BA wear blue. I mean, there is no world in which there are either UM or BA.
There's one important difference between the Imperium's gender policies - if it has any - and the example you have chosen, however. We have multiple sources explicitly stating that the UM, BA, etc are wearing these or those colours. There is nothing, however, stating that women are looked down upon or in any way disadvantaged as far as the larger Imperium is concerned.
Also, TiamatRoar's statement is, in fact, what the authors of said universe themselves are telling us.
In the words of Andy Hoare:
"It all stems from the assumption that there's a binding contract between author and reader to adhere to some nonexistent subjective construct or 'true' representation of the setting. There is no such contract, and no such objective truth."
You already sort-of accepted this when you said that you see 40k as a setting influenced by the bias of its creators. The thing is that the handlers of the franchise are quite aware of this bias, and are telling us all not to look to closely specifically because this bias creates potentially contradicting expositions.
Manchu wrote:I just take it for what it is (i.e., appears to be in the books): the setting is patriarchal rather than misogynistic in that, speaking generally, men enjoy subtle privileges that women do not
To which there is still no indication in the books.
We don't even have half the names of the High Lords or their gender. For all we know the Council of High Lords could have more women than men in its ranks.
Are we to assume that black people, asians, hispanics are next to non-existent just because 99.999% of the artworks feature white caucasian people? Are we to assume that the Space Marines fight more battles than the Imperial Guard, because there are way more images, more tales, more battle records about the Astartes than the IG? Are we to assume that, in 40k, nobody is wearing socks because we don't see what's beneath their boots?
It's an issue of a very, very selective focus influenced by real life authors and artists, whose tendencies to showcase exemplary scenes from the setting in a very specific manner have no effect whatsoever on said setting as long as these tendencies are not also confirmed by the background itself. That's really all there is to it.
Of course one is still free to assume and pursue whatever they want - as a franchise, 40k does grant us this level of artistic liberty, after all. The only thing that bears repeating is that there is nothing in the original material providing a solid basis for such interpretation, which may or may not be important to some of us depending on how we like to treat the various origins of fluff. The rest is up to each of us individually. If someone likes their version of the Imperium more that way ... more power to them. As long as they don't propagate it to be some sort of "fact".
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2013/07/16 02:13:20
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2013/07/16 14:08:56
Subject: Is the Imperium patriarchal?
|
 |
[MOD]
Solahma
|
Lynata, your usual reposting of the GW spin on canon is inapplicable here. If anything, Hoare's statement lines up with what I have just posted. Please note the similarities: Manchu wrote:On the one hand, there's the alternate reality method where you are free to say that the material does not accurately represent the objective reality of the fictional universe. I disfavor that approach
Andy Hoare wrote:It all stems from the assumption that there's a binding contract between author and reader to adhere to some nonexistent subjective construct or 'true' representation of the setting. There is no such contract, and no such objective truth.
I mean, you'll have to excuse Hoare for mixing his terminology ("subjective construct" v "objective reality") but he's a writer, not a critic. The rest of your post is not significantly different from points I have already addressed.
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2013/07/16 14:11:33
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2013/07/16 16:10:41
Subject: Is the Imperium patriarchal?
|
 |
Hallowed Canoness
Ireland
|
The key difference I see is that in your argument you assume that this biased exposition is an accident, but that we should just roll with it - when the creators themselves argue the exact opposite: that it's intentional, and that we should cherrypick what we like, because it's all just "myths and legends" anyways.
But that's not even relevant to the actual topic. Even in the real world, we shouldn't just assume things based solely on our own perspective (because that is a focus just as limited as what we are presented in the various 40k books), but rather incorporate the existence of examples outside of our immediate surroundings, and what we hear/read in regards of general observations.
"Tunnel vision" rarely confers an accurate assessment. In regards to 40k, this is also why personally I place much more emphasis on general descriptions rather than individual events. See my example on the quantity of battles attributed to the Space Marines and the Imperial Guard.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2013/07/16 16:12:49
Subject: Is the Imperium patriarchal?
|
 |
Gore-Soaked Lunatic Witchhunter
Seattle
|
Is there a Goddess-Empress with her own Golden Throne on Holy Terra? No? Then it's a patriarchy. It just might not be an misogynistic patriarchy.
Patriarchy (rule by fathers) is a social system in which the male is the primary authority figure central to social organization and the central roles of political leadership, moral authority, and control of property, and where fathers hold authority over women and children. It implies the institutions of male rule and privilege, and entails female subordination. Many patriarchal societies are also patrilineal, meaning that property and title are inherited by the male lineage.
There is no authority greater than that of the God-Emperor, and it is in His name that all other authority in the Imperium is derived. He is the sole figure of the state religion. He is, in a very real sense, the "Father of the Imperium".
|
It is best to be a pessimist. You are usually right and, when you're wrong, you're pleasantly surprised. |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2013/07/16 16:15:11
Subject: Is the Imperium patriarchal?
|
 |
Preacher of the Emperor
|
Psienesis wrote:Is there a Goddess-Empress with her own Golden Throne on Holy Terra? No? Then it's a patriarchy. It just might not be an misogynistic patriarchy.
Patriarchy (rule by fathers) is a social system in which the male is the primary authority figure central to social organization and the central roles of political leadership, moral authority, and control of property, and where fathers hold authority over women and children. It implies the institutions of male rule and privilege, and entails female subordination. Many patriarchal societies are also patrilineal, meaning that property and title are inherited by the male lineage.
There is no authority greater than that of the God-Emperor, and it is in His name that all other authority in the Imperium is derived. He is the sole figure of the state religion. He is, in a very real sense, the "Father of the Imperium".
But in practice, it's the High Lords who run things and are the greatest power, and, of course, they can be either gender. So using your logic, it is not a patriarchy.
Big E is a god, not a ruler.
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2013/07/16 16:16:52
Order of the Righteous Armour - 542 points so far. |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2013/07/16 16:17:09
Subject: Is the Imperium patriarchal?
|
 |
[MOD]
Solahma
|
@Lynata: Not sure if you mean what you are (apparently) saying: that the huge gender imbalance between male and female leaders in the 40k setting is intentional rather than accidental. Yes, I think it is purely accidental, in the Thomistic sense of "accident." I don't think the writers are trying to say "this is a patriarchal world" just like I don't think real life people necessarily intend to make our society patriarchal. But patriarchy may exist anyway -- and I think it very clearly does in the BL books -- as an incidental subtext. As always, you are free to develop your fan fiction spin-offs of the published material.
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2013/07/16 16:21:38
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2013/07/16 16:20:55
Subject: Is the Imperium patriarchal?
|
 |
Gore-Soaked Lunatic Witchhunter
Seattle
|
It is still patriarchal, because the only reason any of the High Lords have any authority at all is because Big Daddy Emperor told them they could have it.
Patriarchy (rule by fathers) is a social system in which the male is the primary authority figure central to social organization and the central roles of political leadership, moral authority, and control of property...
With a male as absolute, beyond-all-considerations, without-any-shadow-of-a-doubt or whisper-of-a-question *the* Absolute Monarch of the Imperium, in this world and the next, and in a position that is entirely unassailable, then the Imperium will continue to be a patriarchy.
What it does not mean is that it is a misogynistic patriarchy. Under the God-Emperor, all humans may be equal (or they might not be) but that is irrelevant. It does not change the fact that the Imperium is lead by an Ultimate Father Figure.
|
It is best to be a pessimist. You are usually right and, when you're wrong, you're pleasantly surprised. |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2013/07/16 16:21:01
Subject: Is the Imperium patriarchal?
|
 |
[MOD]
Solahma
|
Troike wrote:But in practice, it's the High Lords who run things and are the greatest power, and, of course, they can be either gender. So using your logic, it is not a patriarchy.
Big E is a god, not a ruler.
You're getting into shadowy territory there. There were High Lords before the Emperor mounted the Golden Throne. And we don't know exactly what is going on with the Emperor anyway. Automatically Appended Next Post: Psienesis wrote:It is still patriarchal, because the only reason any of the High Lords have any authority at all is because Big Daddy Emperor told them they could have it.
That's a bingo.
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2013/07/16 16:21:22
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2013/07/16 16:29:40
Subject: Is the Imperium patriarchal?
|
 |
Hallowed Canoness
Ireland
|
Manchu wrote:Not sure if you mean what you are (apparently) saying: that the huge gender imbalance between male and female leaders in the 40k setting is intentional rather than accidental. Yes, I think it is purely accidental, in the Thomistic sense of "accident."
*nods* That's it exactly.
I think we just disagree over how much these accidents should truly "taint" our perception of the setting - at least in the absence of a clear-cut description that would give it a basis. There are so many other things where the same principle could be applied. Another example: lots of dakkanauts think most Imperial worlds are quite peaceful and are rarely, if ever, threatened by invasion. Why? It's certainly not what is suggested in the books ...
Manchu wrote:As always, you are free to develop your fan fiction spin-offs of the published material.
Mind you, this includes the assumption that females are somehow disadvantaged to males, to which I have so far not seen any indication in said published material. You are extrapolating based on the number of protagonists / powerful individuals being portrayed in the various sources, yet you are still interpreting when you assume that this quota is in any way meaningful in regards to some hidden social rule that is, in fact, never elaborated anywhere.
And that's why, personally, I'd just disregard it as unintentional real life influence, just like I disregard the apparent lack of black people, asians or hispanics, which - going by your interpretation - would be almost extinct. How many such individuals do we know of? Two? Three?
Psienesis wrote:Is there a Goddess-Empress with her own Golden Throne on Holy Terra? No? Then it's a patriarchy. It just might not be an misogynistic patriarchy.
Patriarchy (rule by fathers) is a social system in which the male is the primary authority figure central to social organization and the central roles of political leadership, moral authority, and control of property, and where fathers hold authority over women and children. It implies the institutions of male rule and privilege, and entails female subordination. Many patriarchal societies are also patrilineal, meaning that property and title are inherited by the male lineage.
There is no authority greater than that of the God-Emperor, and it is in His name that all other authority in the Imperium is derived. He is the sole figure of the state religion. He is, in a very real sense, the "Father of the Imperium".
You're focusing on the role of the Emperor, dismissing the other aspects of the description you quoted. The "central roles of political leadership" are arguably divided between the mixed gender High Lords, and how would you know whether the Imperium really propagates fathers having "authority over women and children"?
That kind of turns Manchu's argument upside down - going by the Emperor's role alone, England would suddenly become a matriarchy just because it has a Queen? No.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2013/07/16 16:38:15
Subject: Is the Imperium patriarchal?
|
 |
Gore-Soaked Lunatic Witchhunter
Seattle
|
Again, though, none of those High Lords, or anyone who is not the God-Emperor... their gender doesn't matter. Their authority derives from Him and Him alone. That, on its face, and requiring one to dig no deeper, fits the text-book definition of "patriarchy".
All of the High Lords could be female, every Inquisitor could be female, it could be the Spacette Marines allied with their sisters in the Sisters of Battle... and it would still be a patriarchy, because the Top Dog is a male figure, has always been a male figure, and always will be a male figure.
Two splits here... the implied division of property issue is exactly that: an implication. It's not a requirement.
The entailed female submission? Again: Is there now, has there ever been, or will there ever be, a Goddess-Empress? No? Then it's a patriarchy by default, because every human woman in the galaxy is subservient to the God-Emperor. Every man is, too, but all that means is that the patriarchy is not also misogynistic.
|
It is best to be a pessimist. You are usually right and, when you're wrong, you're pleasantly surprised. |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2013/07/16 16:43:41
Subject: Is the Imperium patriarchal?
|
 |
Banelord Titan Princeps of Khorne
Noctis Labyrinthus
|
Psienesis wrote:Is there a Goddess-Empress with her own Golden Throne on Holy Terra? No? Then it's a patriarchy. It just might not be an misogynistic patriarchy.
For that to be true he'd have to be a man.
He isn't.
He's a Warp abomination, far-removed from the humans he once ruled over.
The fact that his visage is male is largely incidental. The only exception apparently being the Ecclesiarchy, which makes it easier for men to advance. Apparently.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2013/07/16 16:46:28
Subject: Is the Imperium patriarchal?
|
 |
Hallowed Canoness
Ireland
|
Psienesis wrote:Again, though, none of those High Lords, or anyone who is not the God-Emperor... their gender doesn't matter. Their authority derives from Him and Him alone. That, on its face, and requiring one to dig no deeper, fits the text-book definition of "patriarchy".
"Patriarchy" is not based on the gender of the ruler alone, but upon the standards and conventions of a society. This is included even in the text you quoted, and as Manchu said, England was never a matriarchy in spite of having had female Queens as (sometimes sole and absolute!) rulers.
Psienesis wrote:Two splits here... the implied division of property issue is exactly that: an implication. It's not a requirement.
The same holds true for the head of government.
You've quoted from wikipedia, yet you are focusing on "a male" where it should be "the male". The, as in the gender, not one individual.
From the Oxford dictionary:
Patriarchy
noun (plural patriarchies)
a system of society or government in which the father or eldest male is head of the family and descent is reckoned through the male line
a system of society or government in which men hold the power and women are largely excluded from it
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2013/07/16 16:49:25
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2013/07/16 16:47:57
Subject: Is the Imperium patriarchal?
|
 |
Preacher of the Emperor
|
Psienesis wrote:Again, though, none of those High Lords, or anyone who is not the God-Emperor... their gender doesn't matter. Their authority derives from Him and Him alone. That, on its face, and requiring one to dig no deeper, fits the text-book definition of "patriarchy".
All of the High Lords could be female, every Inquisitor could be female, it could be the Spacette Marines allied with their sisters in the Sisters of Battle... and it would still be a patriarchy, because the Top Dog is a male figure, has always been a male figure, and always will be a male figure.
Two splits here... the implied division of property issue is exactly that: an implication. It's not a requirement.
The entailed female submission? Again: Is there now, has there ever been, or will there ever be, a Goddess-Empress? No? Then it's a patriarchy by default, because every human woman in the galaxy is subservient to the God-Emperor. Every man is, too, but all that means is that the patriarchy is not also misogynistic.
The Emperor is just a figurehead at present, the real rulers that wield all the power can be either gender. The fact that they justify it using a male entity is irrelevant, because it does not make said figurehead the actual ruler/authority figure.
There's a distinction to be made between a god and a ruler.
|
Order of the Righteous Armour - 542 points so far. |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2013/07/16 16:52:42
Subject: Is the Imperium patriarchal?
|
 |
Hallowed Canoness
Ireland
|
Troike wrote:The Emperor is just a figurehead at present, the real rulers that wield all the power can be either gender. The fact that they justify it using a male entity is irrelevant, because it does not make said figurehead the actual ruler/authority figure.
Well, it does in public perception.
But it is irrelevant because gender is simply a non-issue in this regard. Unlike certain real life religions, the Ecclesiarchy never used the Emperor's gender to push for the propagation and universal adoption of sex-based policies. There's nothing about female submission in the Imperial Creed, only stuff about aliens, witches, and heretics, as well as the general submission of the (genderless) servants before their (genderless) masters.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2013/07/16 16:53:41
Subject: Is the Imperium patriarchal?
|
 |
Longtime Dakkanaut
|
Doesn't seem like the Imperium matches the definition of a patriarchy even going by what Manchu thinks it is. According to the dictionary definition of a patriarchy, women need to be excluded from power. Even if a society is somewhat male-biased, as long as women aren't completely excluded from power (and they aren't, because they can become High Lords. The Emperor doesn't count because we can't even prove he's the one running things today and he arguably transcends gender), it doesn't match the dictionary definition of a patriarchy.
|
|
 |
 |
|