![\"\"](\"https:\/\/substackcdn.com\/image\/fetch\/f_auto,q_auto:good,fl_progressive:steep\/https%3A%2F%2Fsubstack-post-media.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fpublic%2Fimages%2Ffd0a89a3-84ea-400e-bd50-5fbe4099def7_2048x2048.jpeg\")
<\/a><\/figure><\/div>\n\n\nDefinition<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
It is important to note the definition I will be using for this article. Patriarchy can be defined this way: A system of society or government in which the father or eldest male is head of the family<\/em>. There have been branches formed off of this from emotion and protest, but this is the original definition.<\/p>\n\n\n\n So then, what really is a patriarchy? According to the original definition, males lead their families. On the surface, this doesn\u2019t sound so bad. Males are often natural leaders. Their innate ability to assess a crisis intervention with rationality, calmness, and refusal to allow emotion to inform his decision, makes men born leaders. Men have elevated levels of testosterone, which creates more muscle mass and bone density. As a result, men are more aggressive, risk more, are typically taller, faster, and stronger than women. Men go\u00a0towards<\/em>\u00a0danger, rather than seek safety. It has been noted in literature that with sociological and psychological research on gender studies, the axiomatic presupposition is that real gender equality is logically and ontologically impossible.1<\/sup><\/a>\u00a0The argument made is that patriarchy worked for centuries utilizing the strengths of both genders, rather than an attempt at equality, which cannot become reality. Now before you get into the zero-sum argument, we will deal with that in a minute. And before you get into the \u201cBut you\u2019re a man, of course you\u2019d say that!\u201d arguement, women who can see this objectively and set emotions aside are saying the same things this article proposes. You can find such ladies Here<\/a>\u00a0and\u00a0Here<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n What we know from history on patriarchal societies is that it has been historically successful. We know this because major cultures that dominate much of the global landscape have patriarchal history. Even major religions, Christianity, Judaism, Islam, and Hinduism come from patriarchal cultures. The innerworkings of patriarchy are that it is child centered. It is based on evolutionary biology. Patriarchy is designed to produce children and raise them to contribute to society. Patriarchy is others-focused. It is a social system of survival. Based on matriarchal societies, we know that matriarchy is individual based. You take care of you. I will take care of me. And we can thrive as a society if everyone does their part.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Patriarchy is still not sounding too bad so far. But along the way, things changed. Hierarchies in general are flawed systems. Hierarchies often displace those at the lowest level of the hierarchy. This requires the people, not the state, to lift those from the bottom. Historically, when this is done, the patriarchy survives and offers its finest benefits. As with any hierarchy, it has the propensity to devolve into a power-based structure. This is the entire reason for the U.S. Constitution and amendments. The founders understood this propensity and created documents that were designed to keep such power in check. Prior to the abatement into power-based patriarchy, our country was thriving in most areas. When men began abusing their power, limiting social mobility in women, and refusing to acknowledge women\u2019s God-given abilities and contributions to society, exacerbated by the Margaret Sanger(s) and Kate Millet(s) of the world, touting pluralism, anti-monogamy, and the open intent on destroying the family through actions like promiscuity and prostitution, patriarchy began giving society good reason to abhor its existence.<\/p>\n\n\n\n So where has its destruction taken us? Men are now traditionally devalued and openly discriminated against, without fear of retribution from anyone. James L. Nuzzo puts it this way: \u201cFeminism has led to blatant discrimination against boys and men.\u201d<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n One study \u201cproved\u201d that there is a bias against women in hiring STEM positions.2<\/sup><\/a>\u00a0However, this study was done using a sample size of 127. When another group ran the exact same study using a sample size of 1016, they failed to replicate the findings and actually found the exact opposite: People were not biased against women in hiring for STEM, they were biased in\u00a0favor\u00a0<\/em>of hiring women.3<\/sup><\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n Society spends a great deal of time concerned about the disadvantages girls have in math and science. This is in the face of stats showing us that boys\u2019 disadvantages in reading are a much larger scale. In fact. In the average school, boys are almost an entire grade level behind girls in English.4<\/sup><\/a>\u00a0The gender gap in college enrollment is now wider than prior to Title IX in 1972, with\u00a0only 42% of males earning degrees<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The effects of underrepresenting males in attention to health issues throughout society has cataclysmic effects. Among victims of Intimate Partner Homicide (IPH), approximately 75% are female and 25% are male<\/a>. But try to remember the last time you heard someone suggest we need to address any<\/em> males being victims of IPH. Yet they make up 1 out of every 4 victims.<\/p>\n\n\n\n We can all recall hearing people say that there isn\u2019t enough funding for women\u2019s health. However,\u00a0Steve Stewart-Williams reviewed data<\/a>\u00a0provided by James Nuzzo that shows that 20% of the country\u2019s health budget is sex-specific. Of that 20%,\u00a015% goes to females and 5% goes to males<\/a>. Again, tell me the last time you heard someone address a lack of men\u2019s health funding. This is despite the fact that\u00a0more men die on the job<\/a>,\u00a0men have a shorter life span than women<\/a>, and men commit suicide more often than women. Male suicide accounts for the\u00a0same number of deaths per year as breast cancer<\/a>. Male suicide rates are\u00a0four times higher than females and has increased 40% in younger men since 2010<\/a>\u00a0(which just\u00a0randomly<\/em>\u00a0coincides with the explosion of smart phones and social media).<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n Are men important? If you ask around, look around, you would think not. According to recent polling,\u00a0both sexes think it\u2019s worse for a husband than a wife to have an affair<\/a>\u00a0\u2013 the opposite of the traditional double standard. We talk often about more women\u2019s health funding, breast cancer awareness, battered women, hiring biases against women, and rightfully so. But we rarely, if ever, hear ways society can help men who are struggling to the point of taking their own lives. Meanwhile, daughters of single parents without the father involved are 53% more likely to marry as teenagers, 71% more likely to have children as teenagers, and 92% more likely to get divorced.5<\/sup><\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n One group studied couples separated into two groups. One group, the husband worked full time and the other group, the husband worked part-time or not at all. They found that the couples where the husband worked part-time or not at all were significantly more likely to get divorced.6<\/sup><\/a>\u00a0However, when the study was turned towards wives, there was no correlation whatsoever in how much the wife worked and likelihoods of divorce. Why the correlation for husbands but not for wives? Men reported becoming depressed from not working and isolated themselves while simultaneously the wives were becoming less attracted to their husband because he wasn\u2019t being productive. Meaning, men need to be productive. But men don\u2019t want to be productive and mocked for it at the same time.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Am I suggesting we should stop focusing on women\u2019s issues and turn the attention to men? Absolutely not. I\u2019ll let Dr. Richard Reeves<\/a> say it best:<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cGender equality cannot be a zero-sum game. We can do more for boys and men without doing less for women and girls. We can be passionate about women\u2019s rights, and compassionate toward the struggles of boys and men.\u201d<\/p>-Dr. Richard Reeves, Of Boys and Men<\/cite><\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n As Dr. Steve Stewart-Williams pointed out<\/a>, no one is asking for the spotlight to move from one group to another, we are merely asking that the spotlight shine on a broader population to include both genders.<\/p>\n\n\n\n What if patriarchy was used to serve others, care for others, and resist power dynamics? Would you be opposed to that system? Am I suggesting that patriarchy is the best thing available? No. I am suggesting that it is the least bad<\/em> system available, and our nation\u2019s history proves it. Only when men abused their power was it a problem. And women stood up to such abuse, rightfully so. This doesn\u2019t diminish the potential that lies within men to lead their families, thus making men better versions of themselves, which helps their family, community, and society thrive. True patriarchy is servant leadership. It is possible. But it will never happen as long as we are in love with a vitriol-filled rage against all things male.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Stay Classy GP!<\/p>\n\n\n\n Grainger<\/p>\n\n\n\n 1<\/a> Mushfequr Rahman, M. (2021). Why Society Needs Patriarchy: A Scientific and Social Justification.\u00a0Social Sciences (New York, N.Y. Print), 10<\/em>(5), 229.\u00a0https:\/\/doi.org\/10.11648\/j.ss.20211005.14<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n 2<\/a> Moss-Racusin, C., Dovidio, J. F., Brescoll, V. L., Graham, M. J., & Handelsman, J. (2012). Science faculty\u2019s subtle gender biases favor male students.\u00a0Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 109<\/em>(41), 16474\u201316479.\u00a0https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1073\/pnas.1211286109<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n 3<\/a> Honeycutt, N., Careem, A., Lewis, N. A., Jr., & Jussim, L. (2020, August 18). Are STEM Faculty Biased Against Female Applicants? A Robust Replication and Extension of Moss-Racusin and Colleagues (2012).\u00a0https:\/\/doi.org\/10.31234\/osf.io\/ezp6d<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n 4<\/a> Reardon, S. F., Fahle, E. M., Kalogrides, D., Podolsky, A., & Z\u00e1rate, R. C. (2019). Gender achievement gaps in U.S. school districts.\u00a0American Educational Research Journal, 56<\/em>(6), 2474\u20132508.\u00a0https:\/\/doi.org\/10.3102\/0002831219843824<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n 5<\/a> Seidel, F. L. P. (2021).\u00a0The proclivity of juvenile crime in fatherless homes: An urban perspective\u00a0<\/em>(Psy.D.). Available from ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global. (2628794018).<\/p>\n\n\n\n 6<\/a> Killewald, A. (2016). Money, Work, and Marital Stability: Assessing Change in the Gendered Determinants of Divorce.\u00a0American Sociological Review, 81<\/em>(4), 696\u2013719.\u00a0https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1177\/0003122416655340<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" From Father Knows Best to Man Bashing Recently, I have been seeing more posts about patriarchy than I remember seeing in years past. It appears that in most societal circles, it is a foregone conclusion that patriarchy is evil and any forward-thinking non-neanderthal should already know this. So I looked into it. Why is it … <\/p>\nBenefits<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
What Went Wrong<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
Devaluation and Disadvantages<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
Importance of Men<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
Where To Go From Here<\/h3>\n\n\n\n