The Cycle of Expectations

In my personal experience, one of the most prickly parts of debates around patriarchy in its various manifestations how the behavior of those who are subjected to its effects interacts with people's notions of individual and social responsibility.  I'm talking every sort of victim blaming that some folks are inclined to in discussions about sexual violence, for instance, or people that suggest because women (and men) choose to act a particular way, they don't deserve anyone's sympathy.  A woman who experiences sexual harassment at work is free to change jobs, they say.  They stomp their feet and grumble that students who want more sensitivity in the language and practices employed on their campuses aren't entitled to have other people conform to their viewpoints.  People that take these kinds of stances often broadly lament the tyranny of "political correctness" which from their perspective has run amok and threatens to suffocate our American identity.  Let's dig a little deeper into this way of seeing the world, shall we?

Voices of our Choices

To really unpack the tension between the insidious nature of patriarchy and the countless choices we all make that comply with and prop up that power structure, we have to look back to the origins of those patriarchal tendencies: our biological programming.  Millenia of brutishly successful reproductive strategies have infected us all with an evolutionary tendency to play our designated parts in the androcentric mode of social organization.  Speaking in a broad, statistical way, women are born with a tendency to nurture, men to dominate and protect.  Built on top of this biological programming is social programming - human civilization was built by humans, after all, so it isn't surprising that we would produce sociocultural norms that reinforce and justify certain aspects of our biological programming.

So when women derive pleasure from or strive to appear attractive to men or when they hesitate to express their opinions for fear of being seen as "bitchy", they are making choices that make sense within the context of their biological imperatives and the status quo balance of social incentives. Does the fact that they make those choices necessitate that they also surrender their right to criticize the system that threatens them with very real consequences if they don't comply?

The American Way

That is the question, isn't it?  Many people absolutely hate any suggestion that responsibility for a person's decisions might lie beyond that individual person.  These people feel that the buck should stop at the boundary line of each individual's free will.  Choices come with consequences.  I get where they're coming from.  Particularly in the individualistic mythos that dominates the American psyche, that glorifies negative rights (don't mess with me) over positive rights (society owes me something), the idea that people might consider how the broader society plays a role in people's choices is abhorrent.

But here's a counterpoint to consider: to condemn someone for expressing their discontent with a system of power that has incredible influence over their lives is fundamentally un-American and anti-democratic, I think.  In just the same way that some knee-jerk conservatives whip out the old "If you don't like America, then you should get out!" line, deploying tactics like victim blaming is analogical; these people are saying "If you don't like patriarchy, you should just get out (of the society that's dominated by patriarchy)!"

Setting aside the tremendous costs this viewpoint imposes on individuals who have the least power and influence in the current social arrangement, let's think about the political implications of such a stance.  It demonizes people who criticize the way the world is right now.  If that perspective had won out in the past, we might all be serfs performing back-breaking labor in service to our feudal lords.

To put it another way, this is a question about hating the player versus hating the game.  It's nearly impossible to opt out of the game, in this case; we're all living it.  The game of democracy includes stipulations that allow players to change the rules.  If you don't like that, then what you're really uncomfortable with is the idea of American democracy, so maybe you should just get out.  Eastern Europe is experiencing significant negative population growth.  I'm sure they'd be happy to have you.