Patriarchy's Brand

Patriarchy had a product to sell, it needed a 'wow!' brand to sell male dominance, a product people could be made to believe in.

Patriarchy's Timeline shows us that in the 11th Century man came into common usage as the name for the male by renaming wer 'man' and fem, wo 'man'. Patriarchy's two-men-of-opposite-sex made man look like it was truth after it renamed fem (wo) man, and the species, hu 'man' in the 13th Century. With 'man' in the names of all three categories in our species the name "man" became the brand by which patriarchy would sell 'man' as having high value justifying male dominance, also known as patriarchy. Man and wo/man as hu/man made the name man the foundation stone of sexual politics 10,000 years after the Sumerians named Phallus supreme creator in 9000 B. C. E. [1] A foundation needs a structure built on it to make it appear to be real. A structure of more names embedding male-bias would create the structure "mankind" to make it look like a theory. Wow!

A brand identifies a product, in this case, patriarchy. The brand/name delivers the message, imprints it on the mind, builds credibility, connects with its target, in this case, the masses, and motivates them to believe in the brand, thus creating loyalty to the brand.

The masses are then defined only through patriarchy's brand. They are the millions and millions of slaves, servants, not-male men, working poor, middle-class, etc., believers-in-man assumed by male dominance to be below 'man'. The destined recipients of patriarchy's brand entitled the 'Lords-of-Patriarchy' to control the believers. These rich men look upon the masses as below them by assuming being above them, justifying using the masses for their own ends.

In the Medieval times hundreds of opulent castles and palaces dotted the country-sides where feudalism with slavery was law and order. This is the story of Lords and Lordship that written history keeps silent. 'Lords' still exist to this day, but are now called men.

Mud shacks and one-room log cabins with dirt floors, disintegrated long ago, replaced by tar-paper shanties and plastic-and-tarp tent towns alongside millions of modest houses with manicured lawns, as the rich, living in million-dollar mansions, separate themselves from the masses on prime lands they possess. The wealthy and the masses, still very much reality today.

Mansion and manses, secular and religious, 'sell' the thousands of names embedding man. Man is the brand name of the product - male dominance- patriarchy sells. No matter how the name man is used being man in reality entails only being male abides. Irrefutable. But man is embedded in thousands of names we use every day. The 'Wow!' brand is omnipresent in language: 20,000 names embed 'man'.

1, 'Man" is a short one-syllable morpheme easily embedded in names for patriarchy's goal.
2, It's politically always & only male, while it pretends to include a not-male man
3, It doesn't implicate "Lords" in present time in making "two-men-of-opposite-sex."
4, The belief in male superiority due -penis Supreme Creator - since 9000 B.C.E. prevails.
5, The long tradition in time made man appear natural, patriarchy's timeline.
6, It's put into practice by making the masses believe in 'man' through non-stop repetition.
7, Patriarchy supressed fem's participation in civilization as (wo)+man to stop her contribution to the development of speech with man.
8, When fem was re-named as a not-male-man 'wo' man became lexical law, a name granting her (lower) value as a (not-male-) man in the species The name 'fem' was put into disuse.
9, There is no other man on earth but the male, a secret in testes-writ testaments in "holy books".
10, "Being man in reality entails only being male" is not articulated by any philosopher in any book concerning the speech-making and using species.

Brand: statesman, chairman, gentleman, walkman, family man, policeman, postman, strawman, fireman, clergyman, batman, superman, bookman, milkman, foreman, boardman, gasman, oilman, businessman, headman, yeoman, German, huntsman, sportsman, husbandman, manhours, manpower, flagman, horseman, lineman, oneupmanship, fellowman, Frenchman, common man, universal man, man on the street, learned man, kinsman, new man, conman, salesman, busman, churchman, helmsman, moneyman, liegeman, man-made, mansuetude, man about town, man-at-arms, man-wise, manly, manward, mansized, mandible, seaman, airman, groundsman, footman, layman, middleman, tradesman, fisherman, newsman, anchorman, cameraman, frogman, handyman, caveman, prehistoric man, breakmanship, a man's man, mantle, manager, manage, mansion, maniple, manipulate, manly, etc. Patriarchy's house held thousands of names embeding male bias. The name man came to be related to source, food, hand, measure, penis, strength, mind, head, truth, growth, goodness, arm, jaw, flow, house, coat, sleeve, control, gentleness, prayer, divinity, whole being, individual, etc. He's everyman. 4 thousand. Names with fem as fem: 0

Family names: Newman, Chapman, Ulman, Goldman, Cooperman, Reichman, Bowerman, Shuman, Schuman, Borman, Holzman, Blugerman, Bowman, Bauman, Blackman, Silverman, Grossman, Holoman, Homanchuk, Jarman, Kai-man, Longman, Kussman, Layman, Larman, Allman, Siemen, Manson, Manfred, Mandrake, Manley, Manning, etc. 5 - 6 thousand. With fem: 0 First names: Norman, Manny, Manly, Roman, etc. About 200. With fem, 0

Names of places: Manchester, Germany, Bowmanville, Manilla, Manitoba, Mansfield, Man, Mana, Mano, Manteca, Mankato, etc. With fem as fem: 0

Books: Man in Search of a Soul, Man and his Music, Man and Nature, Between Man and Man, Grammatical Man, Man and his World, An Essay on Man… About 800. Books on fem: 0 Patriarchal law upon marriage: (wo) man's birth name changes to Mrs. His Name, implying she's his property, giving her object status in man. She's a thing to be passed 'from man to man.' Phone books and dictionaries show man is patriarchy's brand. Repeating the name man embedded in thousands of names would make the masses believe "mankind is a theory" … with divine Phallus. Wow!

Patriarchy's brand is the most omnipresent name on planet earth. In my book1 I call man the archimorpheme of all time. It bestows the aura of divinity on man since the Sumerians named penis Supreme Creator in 9000 B. C. E. Man is omniscient as the agent in the species. In this way, blame is cleverly deflected from the few males who are the elite controllers of the system; Lords, today as men. So, blame today lands on the masses of ordinary males and not-male-men believing in "the theory" that's not a theory. A more, clever ploy has never been invented.

Criticizing "man" then, is not only an act of criticizing patriarchy's laws, religions and politics. It puts the masses in a big blame game. Ah, rejoice! Trump is here. Speaking more precisely, patriarchy is the rule of the few elite males who believe in phallic divinity bestowed on the penis in 9000 B.C.E.: Phallus, Supreme Creator. Belief in penile divinity, a phallic fantasy, is imposed in language to create belief in man. Lords/men then pass their lordly wealth, power and control to males who uphold the idea of male supremacy. Before 1800 C.E., males possessing a divine phallus were Lords, about 20%. Today these are the 20% obscenely wealthy men controlling people behind the anonymity as men - no longer as "Lords."

There is never going to be equality between men-who-are-men and men-who-aren't-men. He's sacred; she's profane. This is not a position of equality, it's a position of subject, male, controlling his object, the not-male thing.

But using "wo man" justifies the brand: she's a -bastard- man in name. The name woman is patriarchy's best and biggest supporter and guarantor of the archimorpheme man. The one-half not-male-men uphold belief in the brand, man. Now, there's a definition of success!

The suppression of fem and her name 'fem' (now as wo man) plays a big part in sabotaging the species. The name radicalizes it from being sapiens to being two-men-of-opposite-sex. The day fem re-establishes herself as fem, the name man shrinks to a flaccid penis.

Just imagine for a moment if fem, as fem, had been a participant from 9000 B.C.E. up to now. The short morpheme fem would be in as many symbols as man. This would change philosophy, sociology, knowledge, indeed, all disciplines in life as sapiens, to live a life of equality and trust on planet earth. Balance would be standard. Instead, phallic extremism is what we have, with killing machines H/his epiphany. ©2016

References

1, John M. Allegro. The Sacred Mushroom and the Cross. Gnostic Media, UK. 2009.
2, Louise Gou?ffic. Breaking the Patriarchal Code. Knowledge Ideas & Trends, Manchester CT



Return to   Home Page