Was Patriarchy a Women's Scheme to Control Men?

self | 10/30/2002 | SauronOfMordor

[SauronOfMordor]

Does Patriarchy Benefit Women?

Much has been said in feminist circles about how women are oppressed by patriarchy. Patriarchy literally means “rule by fathers” and is a system where men effectively are in control of property and decision-making. An important characteristic of patriarchal systems is that they are generally also patrilineal (a child’s descent is described by who his father, and father’s father were, rather than through the mother’s line).

The question I’m putting forth here is: Does the patriarchal/patrilineal system act more to oppress women, or is it actually more a way for women to tap and control male energy? My assertion is that patriarchal society creates an incentive structure that enables women to harness male energy and initiative for the benefit of women and their children.

In patrilineal societies, men tend to be confident that the children of their household are theirs, and take an active role in their upbringing. The men also tend to perform long-range planning, and invest time and effort into making life better for their offspring.

Matrilineal societies have been recorded in early history, and still exist in sections of Africa. The matrilineal societies of ancient times did not leave much in the way of historical record. In modern times, where they exist, they are generally poor and technologically primitive. To some extent, the welfare enclaves of our inner cities are increasingly matrilineal. In the developing matrilineal societies in our inner cities, the defining characteristic is that males have no permanent attachment to the children they father, nor to the women who are the mothers of their children. In such an environment, males tend not to make long-range plans for the well-being of their children, nor do they make much effort to create the institutions that would be needed for long-term stability and prosperity.

In classic patriarchal cultures, men are motivated to amass wealth through the acquisition and enhancement of productive facilities: land, ships, businesses – things that will produce revenue to support a family, and which will provide an inheritance to pass along to their children. Part of the motivation is from love and emotional attachment. A large part of it is also pride and self-image -- the desire to leave a legacy, to be remembered as a great person after he's gone.

Having children who are emotionally attached to you has mutual benefits: the children can rely on support during their vulnerable years, and parents can have the expectation of support in their declining years. This can be very important in societies where survival is not assured unless you have a committed provider looking out for you.

Once someone has property, he has a strong incentive to promote institutions to protect and preserve his property. He bands together with his neighbors, in mutual protection. He has an incentive to cooperate with his neighbors to create improvements for their mutual benefit: roads, irrigation systems, etc. The incentive system promotes the institutions needed to preserve itself

Now let’s consider the incentive system for males in a matrilineal environment. When a man cohabits with a woman, he has no assurance of any of the children being his. He is less likely to experience any emotional bonding with them, and may consider them an interference with his relationship with the woman. He will have no expectation that the children will take care of him in his old age, and will be much less likely to make any investment in the children’s well-being.

In such an environment, the male won’t expect to survive much past the point where he’s no longer strong enough to obtain food and resources through his own strength. He’s likely to be invited to share the bed of a woman as long as he provides for her and protects her, and invited to leave when she acquires a better provider. The incentive will be to acquire wealth the fastest and easiest way he can: by getting together into a strong gang and taking it from somebody else. In matrilineal societies, whether in Somalia or South Central LA, the men tend to band together into warring gangs rather than engage in productive work.

In a competition between a patriarchal society and a matrilineal society, the patriarchal society will tend to prevail. The men of the patriarchal society are more likely to stand and fight off encroachments to territory they consider their property, while the men of the matrilineal society will be more likely to seek easier targets in another direction. A man will fight for his wife, his children, and his property – they are HIS, and part of his self-identity. A man is less likely to endure long-term conflict to protect the property of a woman he considers to be just a temporary girlfriend – it’s simpler to just find another girlfriend in an area with less conflict.

Comparing a patriarchal culture with a matrilineal culture, the advantages for women become apparent. By channeling male energy and imagination into long-term planning, patriarchy creates an environment where women and children are better provided for and better protected, thus better assuring long-term survival for all concerned.

[sonserae]

Wow...you are on...a coffee date with you....Thank you for the compliments. You made my day.

Wie Gehts? Ich studiere im Heidelberg mit Pepperdine Universitat. Ich habe fergessen viele aber ich habe mein hertz im Heidelberg ferloren.

Tschuss....

[Z in Oregon]

If women as a group were one day faced with the prospect of forever working to support themselves in COMPETITION with men, as opposed to being able to quit whenever they want to give birth and nurture children, you would see a kind of fear never before seen in America.

Totally true.

Now, why is that the case?

Who of those to whom this is addressed has an explanation?

[Z in Oregon]

Yo, toc, if you're secure about what you bring, you don't need to run down other guys to make yourself look better in comparision.

[Z in Oregon]

Wie Gehts? Ich studiere im Heidelberg mit Pepperdine Universitat. Ich habe fergessen viele aber ich habe mein hertz im Heidelberg ferloren.

English, por favor.

[Z in Oregon]

Oh sure. In a few weeks, you'll sign up for a new handle:

"Motherbear In Burka"!

[Z in Oregon]

Being a father is what makes the man.

[BuddhaBoy]

I'll offer an explaination, since it was my quote.

The fact is that women are used to recieving from men with as little effort expended as possible. If women were faced with having to put more effort into getting and keeping a man's attention, they would first pout, then freak out, just like some have done on this thread.

Women dont want REAL equality with men, the very prospect would destroy them. They want OPTIONAL equality, and OPTIONAL superiority, which the courts are all too happy to grant them.

The plain truth is that a woman who can do everything a man can do, is probably not very attractive. A man who can do everything a woman can do, is not very attractive either, and likely scary.

But the day is coming when women, because they refused to just shut up, are going to face the prospect of having to fight against men for everything, because they have stomped all over the idea of chivalry and grace in a man.

One thing men know, is that when you can no longer negotiate, that is when the war begins. Negotiating with a woman today is like negotiating with the wind. Now, on that note, it is Friday night, and I have a date with one of those horrible creatures......

Cover me, I'm going in!!

[Z in Oregon]

You're unnecessarily conflating the roles played by men within the framework of Industrial Age Traditionalism, and the value/criticality of men in and of themselves. The latter exists regardless of the era in which it exists.

[Z in Oregon]

Too many women define "maturity" as "thinking like a woman".

Good line. Society has been sickeningly Oprahfied.

[Z in Oregon]

Note that The Seneca Falls Convention happened right about when women were starting to get the vote in some states. At Seneca Falls, early feminists made innumerable demands. Just goes to show, "If you give a mouse a cookie..."

[Z in Oregon]

Patriarchal societies seem to be the ones where the fathers know their children, help raise them, and spend time with them, educating them etc. Matriarchal societies are there the women are on their own, the children don't know their fathers, the fathers don't much care about them, they tend to stay with women for only a short time --just enough to breed them. It seems obvious patriarchal would be better for everyone.

True.

[Z in Oregon]

"If women ran the world there would be no wars."

If women ran the world wars would be just as frequent. Besides, PMS and a nuclear arsenal would not be a happy mix.

[Semaphore Heathcliffe]

You're unnecessarily conflating the roles played by men within the framework of Industrial Age Traditionalism...

So before the Industrial Age men were not tasked with the more dangerous, physically demanding jobs? I'm not understanding your point.

The latter exists regardless of the era in which it exists.

Men have always had concerns about their worth as Men? Please elaborate.

[tictoc]

Seek, brother Z, and ye shall find :-)

Yuma, AZ

[Z in Oregon]

Brother Z...

Thanks, ArchBishop Tictoc.

[Z in Oregon]

What a man brings to the table exists regardless of societal circumstance or prescribed roles. For example, no matter how kind and gentle the pursuit (reading picture books, etc.), there is a unique component to how fathers interact with their children which is specific to fathers. It is far more subtle than a broad brush paints; for example, a casual observer might note nothing, but the critical element would be in play nonetheless.

Ditto for any circumstance.

You seemed to be saying that the information age, with tasks that are often done by women, rendered men obsolete as unique entities in terms of their contributions.

I dispute that, and note that the nature of manhood is not bound to any one set of tasks. Rather, it alters the dynamic of any set of tasks, whatever they may be.

Only the broadest brush would paint a picture in which the nature of manhood was defined by a certain set of tasks. It is a trillion times deeper than that: at least for those who have not lost their way.

Some have.

[waterstraat]

The problem is....women would be flat out crazy to put themselves under the control of men who discuss patriarchy WITHOUT GOD. The God of the bible should be the dominating influence of this discussion. Thanks, but I'd rather not wear a burka.

You are exactly right, and frankly, if all the men had to wear burkas for a few years, it might open their minds and make them see the light and understand the subject better.

[DBtoo]

I'm a woman and I hold the door open for whoever is behind me. I think it is a common courtesy and kindness.

[DBtoo]

Oh that is so funny!! I am laughing my butt off!!

It seems this person has a bit of an obsession with Vanity Posts on FR. I bet he/she spends a good bit of time worrying and fretting over the growing threat of such posts appearing on FR. It's amazing what some people fret over. Really, it's funny, but it must be very uncomfortable for the person doing the fretting because they are in a constant state of stress. But to be in a constant state of stress because of the proliferation of Vanity Posts on FR is really interesting!