Queering the Narrative: Whitewashed Feminism and Patriarchal Illusions in Modern Society

Assumptions are made, by everyone, from time to time. Some are correct—if someone works at the local grocer, it’s pretty safe to assume they live nearby. But assuming to know someone simply because you know their name or, worse, because you know the people who sired them says a fair bit more about you than it does about them. Sure, in a perfect world everyone would share a strong, healthy relationship with their ‘family’—unfortunately, that is not often the case, and people see what they want to see. Many people who believe they have healthy relationships with their relatives fail to recognize deeply rooted co-dependent dynamics and generational trauma cycles. In many cases, they have to do mental gymnastics to justify the less than healthful interactions or core beliefs passed down from one generation to the next. This is evident in the way those same people always have some condescending remark or an attempt at insult in rebuttal, for being confronted or proven wildly misinformed.
That’s not to say that what they want to see is what they want to exemplify, but it is to say that most people seem to find it easier to subconsciously choose false narratives that support their own perception of reality.

It is easier to assume that “being [queer] is trendy now” and “feminism today is just man hating” (we'll get into misandry another time), or that they’re “not racist, but…[DEI discriminates against White people]” than it is to accept that Euro-centric patriarchal structures are alive and well. Strange misconceptions of sexual orientations and identities being resultant of mental illness or attention seeking choices perpetually outshone by none other than the chronic imposition of cisgender-heteronormative ideals as holy writ. Centennial “man-eater” has been meant to diminish the resolve of the Feminine, and in the same breath contradicts itself by the fault inherently lain on outsider influences. Not without assuming that a strong Feminine could never exist of their own accord, of course. Far be it from anyone (or anything) to exist without orbiting the whim of men. As with every layer of the patriarchal pyramid, misogynoir only exaggerates this sentiment for Black women and femmes, portraying them as hypersexual and masculine. Further highlighting the mind-bending double standards nurturing the tension by these deep-seated, intersecting inequities, rooted in centuries of an inflated sense of superiority in a fragile male ego.
Previous waves of feminism lacked intersectional focus to the detriment of all of us. I am not the same brand of feminist as previous generations. I’m a bit more abrasive, I think, whereas they were softer in their approach, fighting for equality with the power of Femininity, still catering to the same patriarchal systemic values that stripped us all of autonomy and equity. All while stepping on and over every other marginalized community along the way. Unlike them, I do not fail to acknowledge the damage done by women and femmes who look like me have caused to those who do not. It is not lost on me that whiteness will (almost) always override femininity, queerness, and ability in the eyes of society. It’s interesting, though, how audacity can override all critical thought. Match that with an assumed authority and the unearned confidence granted by systemic privilege and centricity, and you have the foundation of patriarchy. Every other day I find myself knee deep in some comment section overflowing with vitriolic drivel and hateful commentary, blaming women/femmes and other marginalized demographics for their hindrance. It’s a constant effort trying to understand the cerebral backflips employed to justify their cyclical reasoning, to navigate their questionable moral direction—a stance that ultimately bogs down progress. Much like the tired and persistent “but what about ‘straight white men'?” stance, which instantly prevents social change and equity.
There was an interesting, if not telling, TikTok a couple of years ago where women/femmes asked their male partners, “How often do you think about the Roman Empire?” Collectively, men of the Western Hemisphere boasted their frequency of thought at several times per day, multiple days per week. Of course, this shocked their feminine acquaintances while they glowed with enthusiasm, so much so they had a segment about it on The View. The superficial analysis concluded that it’s just some silly phenomenon among men, an inexplicable trait of Divine Masculinity. I beg to differ. The idea that a collective consciousness being nothing more than social fodder is illogical, and the briefest of google explorations leads to plenty of dots waiting to connect themselves. The pattern is glaring in its simplicity: fair-toned European men have topped political and social hierarchies since ancient Rome. Patriarchy and Whiteness did not begin in Rome, of course, but during those ancient times we started to see solidification in the exchange of power and patriarchal structures.
There was an interesting, if not telling, TikTok a couple of years ago where women/femmes asked their male partners, “How often do you think about the Roman Empire?” Collectively, men of the Western Hemisphere boasted their frequency of thought at several times per day, multiple days per week. Of course, this shocked their feminine acquaintances while they glowed with enthusiasm, so much so they had a segment about it on The View. The superficial analysis concluded that it’s just some silly phenomenon among men, an inexplicable trait of Divine Masculinity. I beg to differ. The idea that a collective consciousness being nothing more than social fodder is illogical, and the briefest of google explorations leads to plenty of dots waiting to connect themselves. Fair-toned European men have topped the social and political hierarchies since ancient Rome. Patriarchy and Whiteness did not begin in Rome, of course, but during those ancient times we started to see solidification in the exchange of power and patriarchal structures. Roman social structures and legal systems defined (and enforced) gender roles which built the framework that allowed the demonization of those existing outside of those norms. In those times, sexual relationships between men were common, especially between older men and male teenagers. Homosexuality was seen as a leisurely pleasure, while monogamous heterosexuality was a civic duty. The pressure to possess and reproduce was tethered to a man’s sense of worth—and so, women and children became a burdensome commodity. A requirement of respectable society. This ideology was further embedded into the social fabric by inception of the Catholic Church, which was later bastardized to demonize same-sex relations.
Ultimately, the comfort of ingrained assumptions and self-serving narratives proves to be a formidable barrier to progress, demanding complex mental gymnastics to justify outdated beliefs. There exists the erroneous idea that men are superior, dominant protectors by Divine ordinance unsurprisingly linked to the reign of the Roman Empire and the influence of the Catholic Church on modern society. That they are unemotional, logical creatures who are innocent victims of biological imperative. Ironically, yet another brief hop through google (it’s free!) will highlight the grave inaccuracies of that assumption. Centuries of documented Feminine experience and decades of a growing body of statistical evidence starkly contradict the colloquial claims that men are protectors. In fact, when we dig, we find startling male suicide rates, under-reporting of sexual violence, toxic expectations beset on men—by patriarchy, and unsurmountable evidence of emotional condemnation and damaging generational cycles. We see a long history of women/femmes of European descent afraid to lose the comfort and security offered by their proximity to power. Prevention efforts always seem to include stepping on and over marginalized communities—spitting on Black children during school desegregation in the 1960s, using tears to garner sympathy from the social authority, fawning at the feet of men who “could be worse”—in the name of status maintenance. Even today we have Trans Exclusionary Radical Feminism driving a wedge amongst would be allies, with yet another blatant contradiction to their cries for equity and inclusion. Follow each broadly embraced affront to patriarchal values, and you will find the projections of internalized patriarchal expectations.

---

Thanks for reading! I appreciate your continued support and hope you enjoyed this piece, and I'd love to hear your thoughts. Please, feel free to leave a comment below. Don't forget to like and share! 
For more deep dives into the unknown, subscribe to The Dive, my quarterly newsletter.

Shop