From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search


Formerly Unbalanced

This page does a good job of describing patriarchy as it is more or less defined by multiple parties. It does an ok job of citing sources, although on checking some of the sourced links, the article text is not consistent with the cited material.

Additionally this page lacks a section covering criticism of this construct, as described in WP:OPPONENT

Ethanpet113 (talk) 23:41, 1 June 2017 (UTC)

@Ethanpet113: In order for your concerns to be addressed, we are going to need to know more specifics. Which parts of the article are not consistent with the sources? Regarding criticism, Wikipedia:Criticism discourages the creation of sections specifically devoted to criticism. (See WP:CSECTION specifically.) Instead criticism should be integrated into the body of the article itself. It seems that the article already has content criticizing patriarchy (for example, the Feminist theory section), but it sounds like you are looking for criticism of the very idea of patriarchy itself. If you know of any sources that argue against the existence of patriarchy, please let us know so that we can integrate them into the article. Kaldari (talk) 01:01, 3 June 2017 (UTC)


Criticism of patriarchy as a in a social setting is addressed under the feminism section:

However, it is important to recognise the negative influence that the patriarchy can have on males, and also that females can cause oppression and mistreatment to their own sex by embodying and living down to common stereotypes.

But does not appear to address any historic notion of patriarchy. I am uncertain whether it would be correct to deny the existence of patriarchal themes in many parts of human culture, there are many situations in which women are and have been systematically been disadvantaged. However the concept is of patriarchy as defined in the opening section.

Patriarchy is a social system in which males hold primary power and predominate in roles of political leadership, moral authority, social privilege and control of property.

Seems to suggest that patriarchy is to have control of all these attributes simultaneously. There are two common arguments regarding this, which do not necessarily invalidate patriarchy as a concept, but merit some investigation. If not a criticism section, I would like to know where structurally it would be recommended to include such information.

Patriarchy as a concept ignores the expendability of men in society[edit]

Some (often libertarians for some reason) would argue that although it was historically unjust to for example confine women to home life, and child rearing; this was part of a social contract for which they were offered protection and was beneficial for the safety of both women and the children they were responsible for rearing.

Although historic figures are less well known certain contemporary figures are.

  • 98% of combat deaths are men
  • 80% of workplace fatalities happen to men

Although men held political authority and property authority, they did not have social privilege because privileged groups should not be conscripted and women should logically hold the moral authority since this would be transmitted memetically in child rearing.

It's not necessarily a particularly strong case but it is worth mentioning for the sake of encyclopedic completeness. Perhaps it does not belong in a section onto itself, but certainly there should at least be a section on "contemporary patriarchy"

The patriarchy in feminist theory must be adapted to suit modern statistics for developed nations[edit]

Patriarchy is and live and well in developing nations In the united states however:

  • About 60% of all college degrees are earned by women
  • Among single people under 35, women out-earn men
  • Among single people of all age groups, women earn 96% as much as men
  • 98% of combat deaths are men
  • 78% of homicide victims are men
  • 78% of suicides are committed by men
  • 80% of workplace fatalities happen to men
  • 75% of jobs lost in the Great Recession belonged to men
  • 80% of divorces are initiated by women
  • 16% of men receive children in custody battles
  • 85% of household spending is controlled by women

Ethanpet113 (talk) 04:16, 3 June 2017 (UTC)

That falls afoul of our original research and WP:SYNTH policies - that is to say, you're gathering statistics and then suggesting that we use them to try and make an argument to the reader. We can't do that; we report arguments rather than making them ourselves. So what you need is eg. a citation to a source or two that passes WP:RS and WP:DUE and which uses these statistics to make the argument you feel the article needs to represent. --Aquillion (talk) 04:37, 3 June 2017 (UTC)
Ok so for example Dr. Warren Farrell Ph.D discusses some of these issues at length in his book "The Myth of Male Power"(1993), although it was released some time ago so the statistics are out of date. Is it acceptable to present modern statistics beside but not accredited to Dr. Farrell or do the statistics and Dr Farrells quotations have to be separated, or must I avoid citing government statistics for some other reason?
Ethanpet113 (talk) 05:12, 3 June 2017 (UTC)
It would not be appropriate to present detailed statistics just about the United States, per WP:PROPORTION and WP:WORLDVIEW. This article is about patriarchy across the world and throughout history. We should try to keep it more general rather than focusing on a particular country. Throwing in a couple of example statistics might be appropriate, but like Aquillion says, we should only report the arguments of others, not use the article to present our own arguments. Also, per WP:NPOV if we presented statistics from one side of an argument, we would also be obligated to present statistics from the other side as well (in proportion to their prominence in reliable sources), and the article would quickly degenerate into competing lists of statistics. If you could give us some examples of what The Myth of Male Power says about patriarchy (especially if you can find some broad statements), perhaps we could help you figure out how to integrate it into the article. Keep in mind, however, that WP:WEIGHT requires that we represent all significant viewpoints in proportion to the prominence of each viewpoint in the published, reliable sources. That means if 90% of published sources about patriarchy are written from a feminist point of view, 90% of our article should be devoted to that point of view. Kaldari (talk) 06:55, 3 June 2017 (UTC)
Nota bene* I've removed the {{Unbalanced}} tag until more reliable, scholarly sources are shown to present views neglected on the article, not pop psychologists like Warren Farrell. Also, WP:STRUCTURE and WP:BALANCE discourage a back-and-forth between proponents and critics of a theory or idea, instead suggesting using secondary and tertiary sources that comment on a disagreement from a disinterested viewpoint. —Sangdeboeuf (talk) 11:57, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

Marxist theory[edit]

I was surprised that this article doesn't mention Marxist theory more prominently. According to Thomas Keith, Marxist theory is one of the "most cited explanations" of patriarchy. So I added a brief summary to the History and Origin section, based on Keith's explanation. —Sangdeboeuf (talk) 05:47, 16 June 2017 (UTC)

Thanks. It is problematic to speak of things like "Marxist theory" in the singular. Jytdog (talk) 07:28, 17 June 2017 (UTC)
If it's problematic, the source doesn't mention it. Keith uses "Marxist theory" in the singular. —Sangdeboeuf (talk) 08:00, 17 June 2017 (UTC)
Yeah that is an introductory textbook for you. Jytdog (talk) 11:24, 17 June 2017 (UTC)