From: holzman@fnalno.fnal.gov (Daniel B. Holzman)
Subject: Re: Women and Men Witches
Organization: Fermi National Accelerator Lab
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 1992 21:39:14 GMT
X-Posted-From: fnalno.fnal.gov
NNTP-Posting-Host: sol.ctr.columbia.edu

In article <2B0C3B2A.5664@news.service.uci.edu>, cortese@skid.ps.uci.edu 
(Janis Maria Cortese) writes:
>>If there is no power-over in place, why enshrine power-over in the name of the
>>system?  "Archy" means "rule", as in coercion.
> 
> Because this was the name bestowed on it by patriarchal anthropologists
> working in a patriarchal system.  

I believe that when they coined "Matriarchy", they were using it to refer to a
system of power-over in which women were on the top.

> It has historically been used, and while I agree that it is a misnomer, it 
> is useful for recognition.  The preferred word seems to be "matristic." 

"Matristic" addresses the "Archy" issue, but not the "Matri" issue, which you
discuss below.  I had used "focal" in the place of "istic", but am comfortable
with either one.

>>If it is a set of values, not a gender, being valued over the other, why 
>>enshrine either gender in the name of the system and not derscribe the values?
>>
>>How about calling it Omnifocal?
> 
> Because women have been so shit on for so long and done nothing about
> it through swallowing all the drek about our victimized powerlessness
> that it is necessary to weigh down a little harder on our side.  Telling
> people who've grown up in a patriarchal society to celebrate all values
> won't work; their minds are still locked in.  You have to smack them
> over the head with alternative possiblities.  You have two millenia's
> worth of garbage to haul out -- it must be EXPLICITLY STATED that women
> have been devalued and that women and the values that have been
> associated with them must be paid more attention.  

The problem I have with this is that societal systems are self-perpetuating. 
If you set a system up which hits people in the head, it will continue to hit
people in the head even after they need to be hit.  There are already those of
us who don't need to be so hit who still are.  A society which wieghs down a
little harder on the side of women will continue to do so once things have
balanced out.  Maybe that's how Patriarchy got it's start -- people decided to
pay men a little more attention, but there was nothing in place to say "OK. 
We've hit balance," and things got gradually worse.

I see going from an explicit bias towards men ("Patriarchy") towards an
explicit Omnifocal bias to be explicitly saying that women are going to be paid
more attention.  I see going to an explicit bias towards women ("Matriarchy" or
even "Matristic" or "Matrifocal") as explicly saying that we are going to stop
allowing men to hold any power.  When I raise this point, I get told one of two
things:

- That's exactly what is going to happen, and isn't it great.

or

- Don't worry, women aren't like that, they won't abuse power.  Just ignore all
those women you see in your everyday life abusing power.  They're Patriarchal,
not Matriarchal.

Neither of these lead me to be comfortable with a societal system which feels
it necessary to put "Matri" in its name.

The lesson from Spiral Dance which has stuck with me most in working Magic is
that you focus on what you want your end goal to be, not on the middle steps to
the goal.  If we focus on a system which explicitly values women over men,
that's what we'll get.  If we focus on a system which explicitly vaues men and
women equally, that's what we'll get.

-- 
Daniel B. Holzman                    | Eight Words the Witch's Rede Fufill:
HOLZMAN@FNAL.BITNET                  | An It Harm None, Do What You Will
HOLZMAN@FNALC.FNAL.GOV.INTERNET      |
                                     | All Acts of Love and Pleasure are
Love doesn't subtract,               | Her Rituals
   it multiplies    - Heinlein       |
                                     | Speak the Word.
Disclaimer:  Fermilab's far too large to have an opinion, let alone mine.