What exactly is wrong with the concept and application of patriarchy?

Question

This question goes to the basic root of feminism- that is, to challenge the notions and practices supposedly set forth by the infamous "patriarchy" and thereby establish equality for women. Patriarchy as defined by the dictionary is:

"A form of social organization in which the father is the supreme authority in the family, clan, or tribe and descent is reckoned in the male line, with the children belonging to the father's clan or tribe."

Anecdotes seem to relate the fact that women actually "run" the household more often than men, but that is not the issue here.

I have no problems if a woman heads a household, leads an organization, or even a country. The point is that patriarchy is a general guideline; that is, it doesn't have to be followed to the letter. Furthermore, I have seen many claims that it somehow cheapens the quality of women in some way, and results in many social ills. Is there any proof to back this up? Could one prove that a person died because of "patriarchy?"

Could one prove that someone was raped because of "patriarchy?" Abused? Oppressed?

All answers are welcome. Let's do our best to keep personal attacks to a minimum.

Thank you.

Since I've been getting a few comments about the particular point of this question, I'll break down my question like this:

Is there any proof that patriarchy causes the social ills that feminism asserts it does?
If so, where is it?

Alright, everyone! Nice responses. I'm actually getting a better image of the nuances of patriarchy by reading the responses.

I disagree with the "Middle East" idea because that is more a result of one interpretation of Sharia law rather than a patriarchal ideal. (My opinion.)

Any other proof/information/opinions?

Lotus, you imply that patriarchy somehow oppresses single mothers, denies divorce, etc.

(Just so that you know, my mother is a widow; she says she is "still married" to our father as well.)

I ask merely, how? As others have said, patriarchy has always been around in some form or another. Why should it change now?

You give me a source from Robin Morgan. Excellent. Did she not say the things recorded here?

http://wiki.mensactivism.org/index.php/Radical_Feminist_Quotes#Robin_Morgan

Why should I believe the unsourced/biased rhetoric of a woman who says:

"Sexism is NOT the fault of women--kill your fathers, not your mothers." (That is BARELY the gist of it; read the bottom quote in that link.)

There go the insults. Why is Wendy G the only one at the bottom of the list who can formulate a response without insulting?

Anyways, I'll have to look at the sourced book, Allegra, although your insult takes away from its credibility (as one who is not controlling herself is endorsing it).

Whatever. More responses are welcome.

Answer 1

Your definition sounds quite benign...indeed, who could take issue with such a harmless form of social organization? It is not until one really looks at history, and examines the effects of patriarchy, that one comes to understand "what exactly is wrong" with it.
The problem with a patriarchal social system is that it is a social system based on the idea that a "few" should rule over and dominate the "many." Women, as a group, are relegated to second class citizenship. So are "other" men...poor men or, in certain places, people of a different ethnicity. The presumption is that only a certain group of people should have all the privileges, while denying all others these privileges simply because of sex, social status, or skin color. This is the historical context. It is changing, but the residual effects remain. Meaning that those old assumptions are still prevalent. This should come as no surprise...Patriarchy has been around for some time...it is not going to be changed within the space of a few years, or decades.
Again, patriarchy does not just affect women. An example would be slavery in the American South. It is based on a patriarchal social system, as was the ensuing system of segregation. Paternalistic ideals allowed whites to view African slaves as "child-like", the rationale for enslaving them was, in part, that they would not be able to survive on their own without slavery...this mirrors the way women were viewed, as well. Weak, subordinate, in need of a man's help and protection...like a child.
I would like to make the point that no thinks that men SPECIFICALLY, are responsible for "patriarchy." No one thinks that, say, every second Tuesday of every month, men are (ostensibly) leaving for work only to hold "patriarchy meetings" with a secretary, treasurer, and all, and are discussing new and inventive ways to "keep women down." Patriarchy is a social system that exists independently; it is a juggernaut that holds men and women under it's sway...and BOTH sexes perpetuate it, to one extent or another. And men suffer negative repercussions from patriarchy as well. No one believes that all men should "be ashamed for what that bad 'ol patriarchy has done" or take the "blame." But we all need to recognize what is inherently wrong with it.

Answer 2

Because the fact that patriarchy exists it's not because it's "natural" but it's created by people like us. And that it has caused misery throughout history till now (not just to women) all because people believe it's the "right" thing to do in society and it's the order of life. And patriarchy serves a strong economic purpose in a capitalist society, which is probably why it flourishes. Patriarchy is one way to ensure all the money stays under one household.

There is nothing wrong with the woman wanting to stay at homne and the man wanting to work, but patriarchy basically believes in the authority of men based on the ideology that the man can do it better. Which is of course wrong.

And there is no equality in patriarchy for everyone. The stress on men being the sole bread winners(traditional patriarchy I mean), the stress on women not to "overwork".

I don't actually think a bit of patriarchy is evil because it has been around since forever and it would be impossible to eradicate it, as long as there's the belief that neither gender is better than another I don't think there's much of a problem.

A good evidence of how patriarchy causes harm is the case of those conservative middle-eastern countries. Women need 4 witness to prove she is raped. Women have to cover head to toe with cloth or she is to blame for being sexually assaulted as she's "seducing" the men. These are extreme cases, but they are on the basis of patriarchy system.

Also the bible/religion being patriarchal. Which is why people should wake up and realise that religions are man-made

Answer 3

That would depend on the interpretation. Most Christians hold Islam, like Mormonism and the Watchtower Society, to be cults because they accept additional teachings by so called "angels" and [false] prophets to be cults. Whereas Christianity was originally seen as a different sect of Judaism, a sect that believed that the prophesied Messiah had already come in the person of Jesus, although was soon considered a religion of its own. The major change that brought about a shift from being a sect to a different religion was when more focus was put on Jesus than the law, as early evangelism had gone on under the guise of Judaism, the martyr Stephen emphasized more on Christ and thus the Galilean sect became more than just Judaism, but Christianity.

Answer 4

"Is there any proof that patriarchy causes the social ills that feminism asserts it does?
If so, where is it?"

The notion of patriarchy no matter how you argue it was constructed under the notion that men are superior to women. I am sorry if you cannot see this and just want to hold on to some idealistic idea about men leading the family.

Western civilization was built on three patriarchal institutions: Religion, Philosophy and Aesthetics, which all aim toward explaining the purpose and meaning of life for MEN read Nietzsche much, read the Bible, the Torah. whatever you chose to fill your mind with?

These three institutions completely embedded in the American infra-structure (and abroad) that are suppose to aim at explaining life’s higher purpose fail greatly for women because they are rooted in this tragic (in the Greek sense) battle of patriarchy that aims at always devaluing one thing over another; father over son, men over women.
You tell me how can women truly find autonomy in a structure such as this? And you tell me how you would take this if it was reversed?

Other example of where patriarchy fails completely and totally is with SINGLE MOM'S; patriarchy's arch enemy( or wait women are not allowed to divorce if they are property) and don't forget our lesbian sisters.

See my dear boy, the world is changing and patriarchy is archaic and no longer works, but some are holding on for dear life for fear of change. Don't be scared go find a "comfort woman" and start a liberal family.

Also read the Demon Lover by Robin Morgan the first 12 pages are complete list of atrocities done to women throughout the world and since the beginning of patriarchy and all under patriarchal societies, it might help you if nothing else with some compassion.
EDIT: final
Robinson, you don't have to believe her that is your unfortunate choice, but that website you provided is a biased website that gives no context to which she is saying these things. And the 12 pages of atrocities on women are completely documented and well researched read the book seriously you might get a lot of good out of it. I find your arguments irrational you are completely emotional about your stance, but you try to rationalize your volatile emotions.

Why don't you get the book like I said if you really want to pursue the road you are following and be an opponent of feminism or a proponent of patriarchy make sure you understand all sides of the argument as you do not. and good luck to you in your desire to hold on to an archaic, myopic, and failing
world view.

Answer 5

Virtually every society that has ever existed has been in one way or another patriarchal. That being said, many such societies have not been rigidly patriarchal with women hold significant social and political power and often very strong power within the family. One such society would have been the Iroquois where families are matrilinial (descent traced through mother) and often matrilocal (children live in their mother's house and when they marry daughters bring their husbands to their mother's house). Women had an important role in choosig the chief, but the chief was always a man. In this kind of society, the power balance between women and men seems to be comfortable for both sexes. The problem arises with rigid patriarchal systems, where women become severely restricted in freedom of thought and action, and have become not so much people, but instruments of men. In mildly patriarchal systems, there are mechanisms for granting divorces, dealing with abusive husbands, and resolving disputes that arise between men and women. In rigidly patriarchal systems, these mechanisms do not exist, and by default men are always right. Partiarchy isn't an evil in itself, but patriarchy which restricts women's rights is.

Answer 6

I have no problem with patriarchy as long as it provides the structure of the corporation.

A leader who picks a team (wife & kids) and trusts the team to go for a goal which he sets with feed back from the team. This means he won't 'micro manage' to death ... or disappear to leave his team alone to acheive the goal. Also, should the ship start sinking he should be willing and able to resume the duties of his team. Same as any successful leader in the corporate world.

A, the crimes against marriage are the same as in the corporate world. A leader who won't say "Good Job", "We're going to make it" and "This needs to be done better" will lead the ship into the cliffs of despair. When the leader overworks his crew ... well, they'll burn out and look for an easier and more rewarding ship to serve ... if the leader sleeps with the competition, well, bankrupcy is around the corner. I guess corporate world has men like those who sank Enron ... and the same breed of men sink the marriage. So, for a patriarchy society to return, I think men need more 'home economic classes' learning the qualities of good leadership skills.

Answer 7

Merriam Webster - "social organization marked by the supremacy of the father in the clan or family, the legal dependence of wives and children, and the reckoning of descent and inheritance in the male line; broadly : control by men of a disproportionately large share of power"

American Heritage - "1. A social system in which the father is the head of the family and men have authority over women and children. 2. A family, community, or society based on this system or governed by men."

I don't know what dictionary you used but it does not mention the legal authority of men over women and forbidding woman to be in positions of power.

A patriarch is not a general guide line it is a social structure that does not allow women to lead organizations or countries, marriage is of economic importance to the women (it is her means of protection), and was adopted due to male physical strength being seen as the way to solve problems (war, child rearing etc.).

Perhaps we all want the same thing but are just putting different titles to it.

Answer 8

I'm not sure what is exactly what you're trying to get to.

However, while on the surface, the concept of patriarchy works, there are a lot of flaws, and one of the biggest ones, is because there is almost always a scapegoat in each one, and more times than not that scapegoat can be a woman.

I grew up in Spain, and Spain is an extremely partriarchal society. Men have all the rights and all the doublestandards are usually laid in their favor, and women are brainwashed to loathe themselves and all the other women around them, especially those who may not buy into such a hypocrisy.

Answer 9

Yawn.

Yes, in fact, most experts surmise that a strong correlation exists between patriarchal societies and violently adamant homophobia. Try Eve Kosofsky Sedgwick's _Between Men: English Literature and Male Homosexual Desire_.
_________________

Yes, Robinson0120, I'm just so wildly uncontrollable that I don't know what to do. (The insanity accusation, ironically, as you might know if you'd done any sort of reading on women's history, has a long and respected history of assisting men in policing and silencing women who spoke out against their own marginalization or questioned traditional gender roles and stereotypes.) It's also a very clever rhetorical technique for discounting and ignoring anything meaningful a person might ever have to say: just proclaim s/he is out of control, mad, crazy, irrational!

And my own personal character of course quite magically and inexplicably ruins the "credibility" of the books I recommend. Indeed - all the years of published criticism will turn suddenly from good to bad. The book's text will magically rearrange itself into new collections of less credible words.

Brilliant. Here's another piece of reading to fry your brain (and directly related to your question, even): Gerda Lerner's _The Creation of Patriarchy_.

Answer 10

I personally feel that patriarchy does not make sense. There are several reasons for this. I also try to live my life according to that belief, because to do otherwise would feel unnatural.

I believe that children are the domain of women. Children belong to women. My major objection to patriarchy is that when a child is born, everyone knows who the mother is, but no one knows who the father really is. Babies in hospitals are automatically given the mother's last name, whether it's her maiden name or married name (not legally of course - just in terms of the hospital being able to identify which child belongs to each mother). The child is not named after the father (unless specifically requested by the mother). Hospitals send babies home with their mothers. They are not concerned with matching the right father with the right child. Hospitals only concern themselves with sending the right baby home with the right mother. This simply makes sense. Matriarchy makes natural sense, because we know who everyone's mother is.

Following that same line of thinking; it does not make sense to focus on a child's genealogy or heritage through the father. Again; we know who the mother is, therefore, we are certain of that part of the child's lineage. The only way to be certain that a specific man's lineage is accurately applied to a certain child, is to do scientific testing. When extraordinary measures have to be utilized to prove something, then we are no longer looking at a "natural" course of action or state of being. That makes patriarchy unnatural. Patriarchy is therefore an imposed belief system. Matriarchy is natural and logical. It would be an impossible task to go back and test every person ever born to determine who their father was, and therefore, what everyone's true lineage is. In this sense; patriarchy has forever destroyed a significant part of our human history. If we cannot prove, without a doubt, who everyone's father is; then patriarchy simply makes no sense. It is naturally much easier to trace everyone through their mother.

Mothers have special meaning in children's lives. Mothers and their children are naturally bonded to a degree that fathers simply are not. More phone calls are made on Mother's Day than on any other day of the year. More flowers are purchased and delivered for Mother's Day than for any other day of the year. More greeting cards are purchase for Mother's Day than for any other holiday during the rest of the year. More mothers commit suicide on Mother's Day than on any other day of the year. There's your proof. Children should be kept in the realm of women by being named after their mothers, and having their lineage traced through their mothers.

I have to get going now. Hopefully I can get back to this later. Thanks for listening. Lisa.