Abraham & Son
'Patriarchy' describes the structuring of
society on the basis of
family units, in which
fathers have primary
responsibility and rulership for the welfare of these units. In some
cultures
slaves were included as part of such
households. The concept of ''patriarchy'' is often used, by extension, to refer to the expectation that
men take primary responsibility for the welfare of the
community as a whole, acting as representatives via
public office (in
anthropology and
feminism, for example).
The
feminine form of ''patriarchy'' is ''
matriarchy'', but there are no known examples of matriarchies from any point in history.
[1][2][3][4][5][6] Encyclopædia Britannica says it is a "
hypothetical social system".
[7] The Britannica article goes on to note, "The view of matriarchy as constituting a stage of cultural development is now generally discredited. Furthermore, the consensus among modern anthropologists and sociologists is that a strictly matriarchal society never existed."
[7] For more information see the appendix
Patriarchies in dispute.
The anthropologist
Margaret Mead said, "All the claims so glibly made about societies ruled by women are nonsense. We have no reason to believe that they ever existed. ... men everywhere have been in charge of running the show. ... men have been the leaders in public affairs and the final authorities at home."
[9] For
moral comment on this see
Feminist criticism below; for a
scientific explanation of why see
Biology of gender below.
Etymology
The word ''patriarchy'' comes from two
Greek words – ''patēr'' (πατήρ, father) and ''archē'' (αρχή, rule). In Greek, the
genitive form of ''patēr'' is ''patr-os'',
[10] which shows the
root form ''patr'', explaining why the word is spelled ''patr-iarchy''. The letter ''i'' in ''patr-i-archy'' occurs because ''patēr'' comes into
English via
Latin, which had a different
vowel flavour to Greek in the genitive (''pater''/''patris''). For example, the abbreviation ''DVP'' stands for ''Decessit Vita Patris'' (literally, she died in the life of the father). The basic meaning of the Greek word ''archē'' is actually "beginning" (hence
arche-ology)
[11] – the first words of
Genesis in Greek (see
Septuagint) are ''En archē'' ("In the beginning").
[12] However, ''archē'' is also used
metaphorically to refer to ruling, because rulers are perceived to "start" things.
[13] This use of ''archē'' is especially common in
compound words, for example
''hier-archy'' and
''an-archy''.
Related words
A ''patriarch'' is a man who has great influence on his family or society. Some historical societies claimed descent from one great man. For example, the
Romans believed they were descended from
Romulus who founded
Rome. The traditional founder of
Athens is Erectheus, and of
Sparta Lacedæmon. Similarly, the
Jewish tradition in the
Torah says
Jews are descended from
Abraham through
Isaac. Both the Torah and
Qur'an say
Arabs are descended from Abraham through
Ishmael,
[14] [15] Abraham's first son, Isaac's half-brother. Traditional founders are often called patriarchs. The feminine form of ''patriarch'' is ''matriarch'', for example see
Matriarchs (Bible). ''
Patriarch'' is also a name for the most senior leaders of
Eastern Christianity, roughly comparable to the western ''
arch-bishop'' (''archē'' as above).
The adjective for ''patriarchy'' is ''patriarchal''; and ''patriarchalism'' or, more commonly, ''
paternalism'' refer to the practice or defence of patriarchy.
''Patron'' is a related word used generically (that is, it is not
gender or
sex specific). Women and men who provide financial support to activities within a community can be termed ''patrons''. The verb form ''patronize'' can be used positively, to describe the activity of patrons, or negatively, to describe adopting a superior attitude. If the superior attitude is adopted by a man, he can be called ''paternalistic''.
Related customs
''Patrimonalism'' uses the Greek word ''monos'' (μόνος, sole) to describe the view of a
state as the extended household of a
mon-arch (sole ruler, ''archē'' as above) or
deity. There are records of patrimonalism almost as far back as the earliest
writing itself (about 5000 years ago). In fact, this is probably because patrimonalism directly facilitated the invention of writing – the first hereditary monarchs gained so much wealth as to need to keep
accounts, and enough to pay those
accountants. The earliest records of patrimonalism come from
Ancient Near Eastern legal documents, the best known being the
Code of Hammurabi and the Torah. Some aspects of patrimonalism can still be found in the few remaining
monarchies in the world today, for example,
British law concerning
real estate (see
Crown lands), especially in
Australia. For more detail regarding patrimonalism see
Traditional authority.
Some social customs reflect what is termed ''
patrilineality'' or ''
patrilocality''.
Sexual Reproduction
Where will we live?
''Patrilineal'' describes customs where family responsibilities and assets pass from father to son. By contrast, contemporary Judaism considers people to be
Jewish if their mothers were Jewish, which makes this aspect of contemporary Judaism
matrilineal. Biblical Judaism is, however, a classical example of a patriarchal society. ''Matrilineal'' is a particularly useful term in
genetics, where some genetic features are more or less passed via the maternal line, notably
Mitochondrial DNA and severe
X-linked genetic conditions. An X
chromosome from the mother is always passed to offspring, male and female. However, daughters do not receive a
Y chromosome, and sons do not receive an
X chromosome from their fathers (see
Sex-determination system,
Heredity and
Genetic genealogy).
''Patrilocal'' describes the custom of
brides relocating to the geographic community of the husband and his father's family. In a
matrilocal society, a husband will relocate to the home community of his wife and her mother (see also
Marriage). Matrilocality can substantially increase the social influence of women in a culture, however, given that tribal and family leaders are still men in all known matrilocal societies, matrilocality is not equivalent to matriarchy, see main entry
Patriarchy (anthropology).
By contrast with these other customs, patriarchy can be seen to be distinctly about gender and the
nuclear family, gender and public office, and about female-male relationships in general.
Feminist criticism
John Stuart Mill
Most forms of feminism have challenged patriarchy as a social system that is adopted uncritically, due to millennia of human experience where male physical strength was the ultimate way of settling social conflicts – from
war to
disciplining children. John Stuart Mill wrote, "In early times, the great majority of the male sex were slaves, as well as the whole of the female. And many ages elapsed ... before any thinker was bold enough to question the rightfulness, and the absolute necessity, either of the one slavery or of the other."
[16]
During the
democratic and
anti-slavery movements of early 19th century Europe and America, kingdoms became
constitutional monarchies or
republics and
slavery was made illegal (see
abolitionism). The
civil rights movements of 20th century America also sought to overthrow various existing social structures, that were seen by many to be oppressive and corrupt. Both social contexts led naturally to an analogous scrutiny of relationships between women and men (see
Mill above). The 19th century debate ultimately resulted in
women receiving the vote; this is sometimes referred to as
first-wave feminism. The late 20th century debate has produced far ranging social restructuring in Western democracies –
second-wave feminism. Although often credited with it,
Simone de Beauvoir denied she started second wave feminism, "The current feminist movement, which really started about five or six years ago [1970-71], did not really know [''
The Second Sex'']".
[17] Some consider the "second wave" to be continuing into the 21st century, others consider it to be complete, still others consider there to be a
"third wave" of feminism active in contemporary society.
In Feminist theory, the opposite of feminism is not
masculism but patriarchy. It is not surprising, therefore, that the word ''patriarchy'' has a range of additional, negative associations when used in the context of
feminist theory, where it is sometimes capitalized and used with the definite article (''the Patriarchy''), likely best understood as a form of collective
personification (compare "blame it on the Government" to "blame it on the Patriarchy"). The use of the word ''patriarchy'' in
feminist literature has been arguably overused as a
rhetorical device, becoming so loaded with emotive associations, that some writers prefer to use an approximate
synonym, the more objective and technical
''androcentric'' (also from Greek – ''anēr'', genitive ''andros'', meaning man).
Fredrika Scarth (a feminist) reads Simone de Beauvoir's ''The Second Sex'' to be saying, "Neither men nor women live their bodies authentically under patriarchy."
[18] Mary Daly wrote, "Males and males only are the originators, planners, controllers, and legitimators of patriarchy."
[19] Carole Pateman, another feminist, writes, "The patriarchal construction of the difference between masculinity and femininity is the political difference between freedom and subjection."
[20]
Most feminists do not propose to replace patriarchy with matriarchy, rather they argue for equality (though some have argued for
separation). However, equality is a difficult idea (see
Egalitarianism), "People who praise it or disparage it disagree about what they are praising or disparaging."
[21] It is particularly hard to work out what equality means when it comes to gender, because there are real differences between men and women (see
Sexual dimorphism and
Gender differences). Recent feminist writers speak of "feminisms of diversity", that seek to reconcile older debates between
equality feminisms and
difference feminisms. For instance, Judith Squires writes, "The whole conceptual force of 'equality' rests on the assumption of differences, which should in some respect be valued equally."
[22]
For a leading feminist who writes against patriarchy see
Marilyn French; and for one who is more sympathetic see
Christina Hoff Sommers.
Average Income USA (2005 Census Data)
In summary, recent feminist writers have shown a tendency to admit misandry among some members of the movement, and acknowledge real differences in men and women that make diversity a more meaningful aim than
reductionistic equality (for example Judith Squires above). However, the basic issue stands out even more clearly now than at the peak of second wave activism in the early 1970s. Decades of
legislation and
affirmative action have not yet changed the fact that
western culture is male dominated, and that it remains patriarchal. Women can vote in most countries of the world, and they outnumber men in
higher education in many countries.
However,
heads of state,
cabinet ministers and the top
executives of major
companies are still male dominated (see
glass ceiling). Also, women's average
income is still significantly
lower than male average income.
Feminists are still doing both theoretical and practical work to change things, for what they believe to be the best for everyone; but one man predicted they would not (and will not) change male domination and patriarchy, see below.
Steven Goldberg
First Book
(born 1941) was chairman of the department of sociology at
City College of New York. He is probably the only author to have written two whole books on patriarchy. In his second book on patriarchy he wrote:
Second Book
His first book was published in 1973 – the early days of second wave feminist activism. Like feminists (and this article), he started with the
data that all known societies have constructed patriarchies. This data requires both moral comment and scientific explanation. Consider the theory that "all power corrupts". If all known cases of people with
power result in some form of
corruption, we need to study both the moral question of eliminating corruption, and the scientific question of how power leads to corruption – perhaps a
just society should eliminate power structures, perhaps it only needs to modify them. Another analogy is
psychology, it seeks to identify both what constitutes a
pathology and what
causes it, in order to work out both what to treat and how. In the case of patriarchy, feminism largely provides moral comment, Goldberg tries to provide the scientific explanation. It is important to note that Goldberg's aim is neither to recommend nor to condemn patriarchy, he simply provides a
hypothesis to explain it. It is also important to note that science is neither superior nor inferior to
ethics. They advance human
knowledge in different directions by asking different types of
question. Ideally the two assist one another.
In Goldberg's first book, he seeks an explanation for three specific aspects of male dominance behaviour in human societies. Patriarchy is the first of these. He also considers the phenomenon of male
status seeking, which he calls "male attainment". He is influenced by Margaret Mead in identifying this phenomenon. She says, "Men may cook, or weave or dress dolls or hunt hummingbirds, but if such activities are appropriate behavior for men, then the whole society, men and women alike, votes them as important. When the same occupations are performed by women, they are regarded as less important."
[23] Finally, he considers the way men seem to dominate in one-to-one relationships with women. Marriage is just one example of such relationships. Goldberg comments, "A woman’s feeling that she must get around a man is the hallmark of male dominance."
[24]
Goldberg proposes the
hypothesis that the statistical averages of all these forms of behaviour are partly explained by the
necessary (but not sufficient) condition of
neuroendocrinological effects – namely,
testosterone. The title of his first book makes his hypothesis very clear, it was called ''
The Inevitability of Patriarchy: Why the Biological Difference between Men and Women always Produces Male Domination''. At the time he wrote (1973), there were only very limited results from
biological researchers to support his hypothesis. The situation has changed a lot since then.
For other writers who make similar points to Goldberg see
Steven Pinker and
Donald Brown in the
literature below.
For current feminists and writers with considerably more biological knowledge than Goldberg, who accept but go beyond the biological, see
Helena Cronin and
Louann Brizendine.
Biology of gender
Female-Male Differences
The 'biology of gender' is scientific analysis of the physical basis for behavioural differences between men and women. It is more specific than
sexual dimorphism, which covers physical and behavioural differences between males and females of any sexually reproducing species, or
sexual differentiation, where physical and behavioural differences between men and women are described.
Biological research of
gender has explored such areas as:
intersex physicalities,
gender identity,
gender roles and
sexual preference.
However, there is a field within the biology of gender which focuses on the physical aspects of patriarchy, and what is the origin of it.
Appendix
;Patriarchies in dispute
The
table shows all patriarchal societies that have been ''alleged'' at one time or another to be matriarchal. The
list, that follows the table, provides quotes from the first western women and men who studied these societies. In nearly every case it is clear from what these
ethnographers report, that the societies were patriarchal not matriarchal, even before changes brought by contact with western culture. What some of the societies ''do'' typify, however, is matrilinearity or matrilocality, ''not'' matriarchy, because of clear features of male dominance, see the main entry
Patriarchy (anthropology). This is the evidence that verifies the statements made by Encyclopædia Britannica, Margaret Mead, Cynthia Eller and Steven Goldberg elsewhere in this article, and has been mainly located using their
bibliographies. There are a lot of cultural groups in this appendix. No bias is intended against the more than 1,000 uncontroversially patriarchal cultural groups, nor against the few matrilocal or matrilineal cultural groups not mentioned here.
Note: "separate" in the marriage column, refers to the practice of husbands and wives living in separate locations, often informally called "walking marriages". See the articles for the specific cultures that practice this for further description.
Table
List
See also
★
Antifeminism
★
Chinese patriarchy
★
Gender role
★
Homemaker
★
Masculinity
★
Men's movement
★
Nature versus nurture
★
Pater familias
★
Patriarch magazines
★
Patriarchs (Bible)
★
Sociology of fatherhood
References
1. Steven Goldberg, ''The Inevitability of Patriarchy'', (William Morrow & Company, 1973).
2. Joan Bamberger,'The Myth of Matriarchy: Why Men Rule in Primitive Society', in M Rosaldo and L Lamphere, ''Women, Culture, and Society'', (Stanford, California: Stanford University Press, 1974), pp. 263-280.
3. Robert Brown, ''Human Universals'', (Philadelphia: Temple University Press), 1991.
4. Steven Goldberg, ''Why Men Rule'', (Chicago, Illinois: Open Court Publishing Company, 1993).
5. Cynthia Eller, ''The Myth of Matriarchal Prehistory: Why an Invented Past Won't Give Women a Future'', (Boston: Beacon Press, 2001).
6. Jonathan Marks, 'Essay 8: Primate Behavior', in ''The Un-Textbook of Biological Anthropology'', (Unpublished, 2007), p. 11.
7. 'Matriarchy', ''Encyclopædia Britannica'', 2007.
8. 'Matriarchy', ''Encyclopædia Britannica'', 2007.
9. Margaret Mead,'Review of Sex and Temperament in Three Privative Societies'. ''Redbook'' (October 1973): 48.
10. William D Mounce, ''The Morphology of Biblical Greek'', (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1994), p. 209.
11. Bauer, shit, Arndt and Gingrich, ''A Greek-English Lexicon'', 3rd ed., (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2000), pp. 137.
12. Alfred Rahlfs ed., ''Septuaginta'', (Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 1979), p. 1.
13. Bauer, Danker, Arndt and Gingrich, ''A Greek-English Lexicon'', 3rd ed., (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2000), pp. 138.
14. Genesis 25:12-18.
15. Sura 37:99-109.
16. John Stuart Mill, ''The Subjection of Women'', (London: Longmans, 1868).
17. John Gerassi, 'Simone de Beauvoir: The Second Sex 25 Years Later', an interview with Simone de Beauvoir, ''Society'' 13 (January/February 1976), pp. 79-85.
18. Fredrika Scarth, ''The Other Within: Ethics, Politics and the Body in Simone de Beauvoir'', (Oxford: Rowman & Littlefield, 2004), p. 100.
19. Mary Daly, ''Gyn/Ecology The Metaethics of Radical Feminism'', (Boston: Beacon Press, 1978), p. 29.
20. Carole Pateman, ''The Sexual Contract'', (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1988), p. 207.
21. Ronald Dworkin, ''Sovereign Virtue: The Theory and Practice of Equality'', (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2000), p. 2.
22. Judith Squires, ''Gender in Political Theory'', (Cambridge: Polity Press, 1999), p. 97.
23. Margaret Mead. ''Male and Female''. London: Penguin, 1950.
24. Steven Goldberg, ''Why Men Rule'', (Chicago, Illinois: Open Court Publishing Company, 1993), p. 11.
External links
★
Jonathan Marks. 'Essay 8: Primate Behavior'. In ''The Un-Textbook of Biological Anthropology''. Unpublished, 2007.
★
'Matriarchy'. ''Encyclopædia Britannica'' Online, 2007.
★
'Cattle ownership makes it a man's world'. ''New Scientist'' (2003).
★
''Bible''. Various translations.
★
''Qur'an''. Translated by M.H. Shakir. New York: Tahrike Tarsile Qur'an Incorporated, 1983.
★
Mary Wollstonecraft. ''A Vindication of the Rights of Women. Boston: Peter Edes for Thomas and Andrews, 1792.
★
Simone de Beauvoir. ''The Second Sex''. Translated by H M Parshley. London: Penguin, 1972.
★
'Equality'. ''Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy''. Stanford University, 2001.
★
''Times Literary Supplement'' review (by Mark Ridley) of ''The Inevitability of Patriarchy'' and reply by the author (Steven Goldberg).
★
Same text as above, without formatting, at archive.org.
★
Phyllis M Kaberry. ''A Study of the Economic Position of Women in Bamenda, British Cameroons''. London: Her Majesty's Stationary Office, 1952.
★
Steven Webster. 'Was it Matriarchy?' ''New York Review of Books'' (1972): 37-38.
★
Phillip Longman. 'The Return of Patriarchy'.
''Foreign Policy'' (2006).
★
Francesca Lunzer Kritz. 'Not Feeling Each Other's Pain: Men and Women Hurt Differently – and Some of The Difference May Really Be in Their Heads'. ''The Washington Post''. 19 December 2006. Page HE01.
★
International Behavioural and Neural Genetics Society
★
Council for Biblical Manhood and Womanhood
★
Regional Masculinities Bibliography Project
Literature
★
Andelin, Helen. ''Fascinating Womanhood''. New York: Random House, 2007.
★ Baron-Cohen, Simon. ''The Essential Difference: The Truth about the Male and Female Brain''. New York: Perseus Books Group, 2003.
★ Beauvoir, Simone de. ''Le Deuxième Sexe''. Paris:
Éditions Gallimard, 1949. (original French edition)
★ Beauvoir, Simone de. ''The Second Sex''. London:
Jonathan Cape, 1953. (first UK edition, in translation)
★ Beauvoir, Simone de. ''The Second Sex''. New York:
Alfred A. Knopf, 1953. (first USA edition, in translation)
★ Bourdieu, Pierre. ''Masculine Domination''. Translated by Richard Nice. Stanford:
Stanford University Press, 2001.
★ Brizendine, Louann. ''The Female Brain''. New York: Morgan Road Books, 2006.
★
Brown, Donald E. ''
Human Universals''. New York:
McGraw Hill, 1991.
★ Mead, Margaret. 'Do We Undervalue Full-Time Wives'. ''
Redbook'' 122 (1963).
★ Mies, Maria. ''Patriarchy and Accumulation on a World Scale: Women in the International Division of Labour''.
Palgrave MacMillan, 1999.
★ Moir, Anne and David Jessel. ''
Brain Sex: The Real Difference Between Men and Women''.
★
Ortner, Sherry Beth. 'Is Female to Male as Nature is to Culture?'. In MZ Rosaldo and L Lamphere (eds). ''Woman, Culture and Society''. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1974, pp. 67-87.
★ Pilcher, Jane and Imelda Wheelan. ''50 Key Concepts in Gender Studies''. London: Sage Publications, 2004.
★ Pinker, Steven. ''The Blank Slate: A Modern Denial of Human Nature''. London:
Penguin Books, 2002.
العربية
中国
Français
Deutsch
Ελληνική
हिन्दी
Italiano
日本語
Português
Русский
Español
