Conversation

Replying to
Also unlike other patriarchal institutions where power relations are legible and segmentary (bonds can be cleanly broken and remade without disturbing power structure) within a family power exists as an entanglement of lives. Quantum, not classical.
2
10
The presence of a strong functional emotional aspect to your entanglement with your family (or equivalent pack) is not a constitutive cause but an emergent effect. Ie you can’t “substitute” the emotional “need” like backfilling a job when an employee quits.
1
4
Emotions emerge when the family entanglement begin to function. Whether healthy or unhealthy (co-dependency, exploitation), once this kicks in, politics cannot easily split the pack. You have to appeal to its interests as a whole.
1
4
Though the family may have a legible public “leader” (say a working father) it is naive to assume that this leader has de facto power or that the interests of the pack coincide with those of any one member.
1
5
This was one of Hannah Arendt’s key insights: in the traditional family, the individual power of the free male head stops at the threshold of the home. Once he steps in, he may enjoy more comforts, but everybody: housewives, children, slaves, male head are fully constrained.
1
11
So when voting members of a functioning family vote, they vote the interests of the whole (I’d be *very* surprised if more than a tiny % of married couples with kids voted diff from each other, and it is significant that young people usually leave home when they can first vote)
1
9
This Tweet was deleted by the Tweet author. Learn more
White women voted roughly along partisan lines for/against Hillary and seem to be lining up similarly re: Kavanaugh. I can’t explain this any other way. Also your sample may be young. I think this likely gets stronger with length of marriages.
1
This Tweet was deleted by the Tweet author. Learn more
This Tweet was deleted by the Tweet author. Learn more