And now for the neopatriarchy!

Beatrix Campbell of course.

End of Equality argues that there is a new global settlement: neoliberal neopatriarchy. This is an ugly term for an ugly relationship. Neoliberalisation is the subordination of the social state to the market, and neopatriarchy tolerates girls being astronauts or bankers, but resists genuine reform of the sexual division of labour. It helps to be clear about what this new sexual settlement is not. It is not just a backlash, or a relic of olden times. It is not the temporary brutality of globalisation, or the collateral damage of austerity. It is an epochal enemy of feminism because it is a repudiation of the social solidarities and welfare states without which feminist agendas wither.

Yup, all the fault of us neoliberals. That market, which cares not one whit which set of genitalia you have, nor how you deploy it, is the enemy of feminism.

Go figure.

Neoliberal neopatriarchy is shaping the world. Before China embraced capitalism in 1979, workers were poor, but pretty much equally so. In 1988, women earned 87% of men’s pay – now they’re down to 67%.

In 1979 the average Chinese wage was around $600 a year. Today it’s around $6,000 a year (constant dollars). This is a bad result is it?

24 comments on “And now for the neopatriarchy!

  1. Tim

    In answer to your last question, the answer is yes!

    Maggie Thatcher summed it up in her last hurrah in parliament. There are people in this world with such a warped set of values that they prefer all equal but poor to all a lot better off but not equal.

    Despite the virulent professions of ‘caring’, the reality is that these people don’t.

  2. Christ I had to re-read the first couple of paragraphs to figure out if she was serious. I don’t think it’s a parody but I wont vouch for that.

    She says things like: “It is an epochal enemy of feminism because it is a repudiation of the social solidarities and welfare states without which feminist agendas wither.”

    I put the quote into Google Translate and is came back with “Womyn need men to make profits to pay for a Welfare State so that womyn can live without men”

  3. In other words, women can’t compete on a level playing field. Thanks for that, Beatrix. Now, back to your Satanic Conspiracies, please.

  4. What new powers have been granted to us patriarchs to merit the neo in neopatriarchy?

  5. One doesn’t want to be horrid, but there is a familiar process here which begins with the coining of a slogan or catchphrase and then tops up with verbiage.

    The result is a bit of prose that is barely intelligible at first reading and certainly not worth the trouble of deconstructing.

    This bit: the social solidarities and welfare states without which feminist agendas wither is typically tendentious. Of course it would be truer to write that social solidarity (why pluralise it?) withers within the welfare state and ignore feminism in this context completely.

  6. Meissen-

    “Social solidarities” means organised Feminist groups; what she means is that without big government, feminists can’t lobby for favours from that government.

    Which is nonsense anyway. Never have big governments and welfare states been bigger in all history. But that’s what she means.

  7. Campbell is one of the worst pieces of femmi-dross about –as IanB points out not only was she a supporter of the satanic panic shite (now as discredited as the Saville Hysteria will be in 20 years) she still IS a supporter of said satanic shite. Her grasp on reality is fragile even amongst the hate–filled leftist freaks who are her peers.

  8. Somehow I guessed what she would look like before I saw her picture – basically too ugly to breed.

  9. Ian B:

    quite so and I agreed with your first intervention too.

    Hard to argue with Interested’s pithy submission also.

  10. The thing that gets me about this sort of feminist is everything changed for women in 1970.

    Well, it did for men too. Women were no longer tied to their wombs and it was also the first generation in history that men were no longer being hacked to death at Agincourt/machine gunned on the Somme.

    Though they were still doing all the really shit jobs like mining, labouring, agriculture etc.

    I can just about respect a class view of the world but in historic terms women had it easy. Couldn’t vote and did the washing versus couldn’t die in gas explosions a mile underground, basically.

  11. Odd that she chooses to use the word “girls” rather than “women”. (“girls can be bankers”).

    Isn’t that sexist and belittling of women ?

  12. In other neopatriarchal emergencies in today’s Guardian:

    ‘I’ve had a termination but now my boyfriend won’t talk to me about it… We hadn’t been together long and didn’t think it was the right time to have a baby. But now that it’s done, I feel utterly miserable and he clams up when I try to discuss the issue’

    Next week: My boyfriend left me because I had an abortion (actually, it was because you kept wittering bullshit at him, love).

    Week after that: Why can’t I find a boyfriend?

    Ker-ching.

  13. I’m getting interested in the use of the “n” prefix in hate writing. I suppose it’s meant to imply that supporters of so-called neo-XYZ are like neo-Nazis or like that bunch of disgusting former communists the American neo-conservatives.

    It’s interesting to see The Left recoil from a prefix that means “new”. There’s nothing so reactionary as The Left.

  14. Meissen-

    Interested and I have often not agreed on things, but in this case I think it’s hard to top his comment.

  15. “I put the quote into Google Translate and is came back with “Womyn need men to make profits to pay for a Welfare State so that womyn can live without men”

    Gary, a first-rate summing-up.

    BraveFart, alas there is IVF

  16. @Peter

    “BraveFart, alas there is IVF”

    As well as the terminally desperate emboldened with alcohol, the lights off, the doggy position and no gag reflex.

  17. OK, so am I to understand that because I have a penis and own my business I am in control of just about everything on the planet. Right?

    Then why can’t I get grass to grow in my back fucking yard?

    If any feminist dimwit can answer that question to my satisfaction, I’ll buy their drivel. Until then… fuck off.

  18. “welfare states without which feminist agendas wither”
    Does that mean feminists *cannot* earn their own living or that they *will* not. I suspect the latter.

  19. Now that the thcweams of WACIST! haven’t worked it’s time for a new one.

    Culturalist! perhaps?

    Which in due course will morph into the neo-culturarchy.

  20. Get that womyn on a building site schlepping bricks and mortar up and down ladders post haste!

  21. I never thought to see anyone of any gender less coherent than @RichardJMurphy. Bravo, Ms. Campbell!

Leave a Reply

Name and email are required. Your email address will not be published.

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>