One might think that everyone who agrees with a pre-conceived social architecture is abiding to traditionalism and has become part of the herd, but little do they know, that it is utterly asinine to discredit an idea out of appeal to novelty.
Everything must be dissected, kept or erased, and optimized, not frowned upon to meet personal proclivities of self-defeating progressives.
The role models you're describing are the epitome of Father-Mother archetypes that have proved to be most efficient for the survival of society, and its overall cohesion.
The word Patriarchy, to some, seems like the depiction of an authoritarian masculine fortress where the male dictates every fucking move to his slaves. "Hand me the freaking remote-control".
Well, yes. Whatever rocks your boat. If someone thinks like that, they're right. Every third wave feminist who bleached her hair has now apparently a chance to now become the Breaker Of Chains, Queen of the Andals and the First Men.
The downfall of western civilization is enabled by the mayhem that we now all witness. We're all divided, and soon, as the momentum is building up slowly, the foundation will subside until its absolute disintegration, leaving the west in its most vulnerable state. An easy target to anyone thinking about storming in, smelling the mephitis of this weakness.
How can Americans be united again while their sole purpose is seemingly ripping everything apart?
If that's their definition of Ordo ab chao, then they're indisputably right. Nonetheless, no one gets to choose who's going to prevail in the end. A new outsider party might as well claim their share of the cake, if not all of it. We all agree though, that such a turn of events, as melodramatic in exhibition, burlesque and grotesque, is a necessary evil until the pendulum finds its equilibrium.
Humans are inherently selfish even in their most benign acts, but what we see of violence and bloodshed, is a cheap replica of self-righteous activism.
Within us, resides the Selfish Gene, that gene which entices us to survive, that gene that pumps cortisol into our veins in critical moments to run for our lives, that gene that would make a man or a woman sacrifice themselves for their families, that gene that leads the few inside a unified collective to sacrifice themselves for the sake of many. It's the same gene that runs the program of Survival.exe in the background while we're going normally about our lives. It's a primordial instinct we all share.
Now, how did we as humans concoct a way to live without being concerned everyday that a virus might thwart our daily functioning? We live in organisations, herds, tribes, and inside these tribes, Patriarchy proved to be the most efficient Core processor, among other processors that were always doomed to fail.
In Patriarchy, men assumed their role, and women assumed their role. Men were providers, and women were the caregivers. This model would only be obscene inside of a mind that didn't have a Father figure and a Mother figure fulfilling their roles. Men were powerful, carrying the Selfish gene which will allow their offspring to thrive, and women could choose with whom to mate. Women are subconsciously looking for the best genes that have a higher rate of survival, and that is hardcoded inside their brains. Of course, other than being healthy and thriving, that survival aspect is linked to the behavior of the man in society, and in the relationship.
In Patriarchy, there is no equality. There is partnership.
Just by example, the women in my family are lawyers, engineers, doctors, professors, can fully earn their life, but still, some of them decided to stay home and raise their kids. They have a maternal bond with the family, and know that their place is a place that none can overtake, and they fill it proudly. The role they play in the upbringing of the next generations is something they take seriously, but even more compellingly, they do it out of love. Of course this relationship of partnership makes the bonds even stronger.
If I go back home to find a pantagruelic feast, it doesn't mean I can't cook myself. I'm one hell of a cook.
If they let me take care of them, it doesn't mean they can't take care of themselves. They can easily earn their lives.
What does this show? It shows that there is trust. The trust they put in me, is something a patriarch should honor, just like I appreciate their existence in my life, and see to their every need.
A good patriarch doesn't only provide. He's the emotional and spiritual leader, before being a provider and overseer. The last one to eat, and the last one to sleep.
Beyond politics that can assign roles to people who are unable to fulfill, but should address any injustice when it comes to merit, one should discuss ethos and how to infuse the better principles, the lost wisdom.
Yes, gender roles have been fluctuacting in many cultures and civilizations throughout history. That's a fact. We even have living examples of matriarchal models, like the chinese Mosuo tribe.
So what? There have been great women throughout history who left undying legacies. Let's just take the Islamic history for example, where Patriarchy was the divine Quranic word, in which many awe-inspiring women contributed in the expansion of the Islamic Eastern culture during the Jahiliyya period to the Andalus period, from poets like Hind Bint Utba, scientists and mathematicians like Lubna of Cordoba and Sutayta, to great warriors like Khawla bint al-Azwar and Nusayba bint Kaab. There were female leaders, intellects, rulers, queens, and they fought even in great wars.
Great women were behind great men. Great men who could have been just average if they didn't love them, or have been motivated enough to keep up. Yeah, some men are like that. That's why we associate the word "nurture" to women, because you, have the seductive touch to unleash latent potential inside men. Men can "nurture" themselves, but not as good. "Food tastes better when shared together".
Whoever denies that women played and still play important roles in our lives, are dreadful infants.
