| Patriarchal marriages undermine democracy, feminist scholar contends BY ADRIENNE FRANK Touting patriarchal marriage as the “seedbed of virtue” that undergirds democracy, the Christian Right advocates traditional gender roles for husbands and wives. However, feminist scholars like R. Claire Snyder, professor of political theory at George Mason University, contend that male dominance and female submission actually undermine our system of government. “How can patriarchal marriage, which reinforces male dominance, provide the foundation for democracy since democracy requires equality for all citizens, including women,” asked Snyder, who lectured last Wednesday as part of the Women and Politics brown bag lunch series. “While a free society leaves people free to engage in relationships of inequality in their familial lives, we must recognize the threat those practices pose to the health of American democracy and take precautions both to protect individual freedom and preserve the principle of equality for all,” she continued. During the event, Snyder presented her paper “The Allure of Authoritarianism: The Bush Administration and the Reconso-lidation of Patriarchy,” which was written for W Stands for Women: Feminism, Gender, and Security in the Presidency of George W. Bush. Troubled by “the lack of outrage to what I see as creeping authoritarianism of the Bush administration,” Snyder seeks to understand the appeal of inequitable familial relationships. The Christian Right, she said, views female submission and male dominance as “a loving form of natural complementarity.” They also believe that when men and women reject their God-given roles, society suffers. “Men [lose] interest in fulfilling their traditional family responsibilities,” Snyder explained, “and boys have no one to teach them how to become responsible men.” And while Snyder acknowledges the difference between coercive and consensual forms of dominance and submission—“the woman who is tyrannized by her husband” versus “the woman who finds fulfillment through submission”—she said patriarchy is most problematic when it informs policy decisions. “Consenting adults certainly have the right to choose relationships of dominance and submission for whatever reason,” she explained. “They are not free, however, to impose that type of relationship on others through law and public policy.” The Bush administration, for example, has embraced the Christian Right’s view of traditional marriage. As a result, we see programs like the Healthy Marriage Initiative, and teen sex education initiatives with pro-marriage messages. In order to “bolster the equal position of women in society and ensure the democratic socialization of children” in the face of such initiatives, Snyder advocates two policies. First, we need to ensure that women can exit relationships of dominance, if they choose. “Women need protection from domestic violence and marital rape, and they need to maintain the right to divorce,” said Snyder. “They also need policies that help them balance work and family responsibilities and protect them from economic destitution upon divorce.” Second, we need to ensure that “growing up in an authoritarian family does not undermine the democratic socialization of children.” “If liberal democracy needs particular virtues,” Snyder explained, “society would be better served by deliberately instilling those virtues in children via institutions like the public schools—which the Christian Right tends to oppose—rather than just hoping that families will produce the necessary virtues.” |
