Patriarchy in feminism

Patriarchy is an important concept in feminism. Although the narrowest definition of patriarchy is "father-rule", this leaves out the far-reaching social consequences of the way of thinking that underlies this social practice. Patriarchy is most likely a reflection of deeper expectations of formal male dominance in a wide range of social relationships.Dubious|date=March 2008

Feminist criticism

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.Fact|date=July 2008 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." [John Stuart Mill, "The Subjection of Women", (London: Longmans, 1868).] 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"] ". [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.] 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.

As masculism opposes the matriarchy, feminism opposes the 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 (see Cathy Young and Misandry), 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." [Fredrika Scarth, "The Other Within: Ethics, Politics and the Body in Simone de Beauvoir", (Oxford: Rowman & Littlefield, 2004), p. 100.] Mary Daly, a radical feminist writer, wrote, "Males and males only are the originators, planners, controllers, and legitimators of patriarchy." [Mary Daly, "Gyn/Ecology The Metaethics of Radical Feminism", (Boston: Beacon Press, 1978), p. 29.] Carole Pateman, another feminist, writes, "The patriarchal construction of the difference between masculinity and femininity is the political difference between freedom and subjection." [Carole Pateman, "The Sexual Contract", (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1988), p. 207.]

Some feminisms 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." [Ronald Dworkin, "Sovereign Virtue: The Theory and Practice of Equality", (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2000), p. 2.] 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).Fact|date=July 2008 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." [Judith Squires, "Gender in Political Theory", (Cambridge: Polity Press, 1999), p. 97.]

For a leading radical feminist who writes against patriarchy see Marilyn French; and for one who is more sympathetic see Christina Hoff Sommers.

In summary, some recent feminist writers have shown a tendency to admit that misandry exists among some members of the movement (for example Cathy Young above), 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 assertion made by some feminists that western culture is male dominated and remains patriarchal.Fact|date=July 2008 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 largely male in gender (see glass ceiling). Also, women's average income is still significantly lower than male average income.

ee also

* Antifeminism
* Chinese patriarchy
* Gender role
* Homemaker
* Masculinity
* Men's movement
* Nature versus nurture
* Pater familias
* Patriarch magazines
* Patriarchs (Bible)
* Sociology of fatherhood

References

External links

* Jonathan Marks. [http://personal.uncc.edu/jmarks/pubs/Un-Textbook/MarksUnTextbook08.pdf 'Essay 8: Primate Behavior'.] In "The Un-Textbook of Biological Anthropology". Unpublished, 2007.
* [http://www.britannica.com/eb/article-9051408 'Matriarchy'.] "Encyclopædia Britannica" Online, 2007.
* [http://www.newscientist.com/news/news.jsp?id=ns99994220 'Cattle ownership makes it a man's world'.] "New Scientist" (2003).
* [http://oregonstate.edu/instruct/phl302/texts/wollstonecraft/woman-a.html#CHAPTER%20II Mary Wollstonecraft. "A Vindication of the Rights of Women. Boston: Peter Edes for Thomas and Andrews, 1792.]
* [http://www.marxists.org/reference/subject/philosophy/works/fr/2ndsex.htm Simone de Beauvoir. "The Second Sex". Translated by H M Parshley. London: Penguin, 1972.]
* [http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/equality 'Equality'. "Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy". Stanford University, 2001.]
* [http://www.debunker.com/texts/avoidable.html "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, [http://web.archive.org/web/20051225190911/http://menweb.org/throop/books/goldberg/menrule.html at archive.org.]
* [http://www.era.anthropology.ac.uk/Kaberry/Kaberry_text Phyllis M Kaberry. "A Study of the Economic Position of Women in Bamenda, British Cameroons". London: Her Majesty's Stationary Office, 1952.]
* [http://www.nybooks.com/articles/9751 Steven Webster. 'Was it Matriarchy?' "New York Review of Books" (1972): 37-38.]
* Phillip Longman. 'The Return of Patriarchy'. [http://www.foreignpolicy.com/story/cms.php?story_id=3376 "Foreign Policy" (2006).]
* Francesca Lunzer Kritz. [http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/12/15/AR2006121501879.html '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.
* [http://www.ibangs.org International Behavioural and Neural Genetics Society]
* [http://www.cbmw.org Council for Biblical Manhood and Womanhood]
* For a critical analysis see [http://www.isj.org.uk/?id=240 'Theories of Patriarchy'] by Lindsey German

Literature

* 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.