Patriarchy: 7 keys to understanding cultural machismo

A historical legacy that condemns women to have less prominence than men.

Patriarchy has been defined as a system of subordination of women to men that has been reproduced over thousands of years. that has been reproduced over thousands of years.

This concept, closely related to machismo and inequalities, has had much weight both in psychology and in social sciences, since it tells us about a dynamic of relationships that makes one part of the population totally or partially dominated by the other.

What is patriarchy?

The discussions and debates that revolve around the idea of patriarchy generate a lot of controversy, among other things, because of how difficult it is to study its existence or its presence in certain societies, but also because of the far-reaching implications it has for us, both politically and philosophically.

But patriarchy is not only a controversial topic, it is also a relatively difficult concept to understand. These are some of the keys that can help us to better understand what we mean by patriarchal society.

1. Machismo and patriarchy are not synonyms.

Although they are two closely related concepts, machismo and patriarchy are not synonymous, machismo and patriarchy do not refer to the same thing.. Machismo is a set of beliefs, cognitive biases and attitudes that predispose people to act as if women have less value than men, while patriarchy is defined as a social phenomenon that historically has been the driving force behind machismo and certain privileges enjoyed only by men.

While machismo is expressed through individuals (regardless of whether they are men or women), patriarchy is something that exists in large collectives, a power dynamic that can only be understood if we take into account many people at the same time.

2. It is not just a system of cultural domination

When we talk about machismo, we often tend to think that it is only a psychological phenomenon, a way of thinking in which women are undervalued and objectified. However, from gender studies and feminism it is customary to speak of machismo generated by patriarchy as a phenomenon that has two pillars: a psychological one, based on how individuals think and act, and a material one, based on objective characteristics of our environment and institutions: clothes, laws, movies, films, and so on. and institutions: clothes, laws, movies, etc.

In this way, the psychological and material aspects would feed back on each other, giving rise to individuals whose macho attitudes are reinforced by the environment in which they live and which they contribute to reproduce through their actions.

• Recommended article: "Feminazi: a feminist current? too radical?"

3. It is believed to be related to the property system.

Patriarchy is understood as a phenomenon that jumps from generation to generation, and that is why a relationship between it and the idea of property has been hypothesized. This idea, deeply rooted in Marxist philosophy, proposes that, just as property is inherited and offers the possibility of exploiting others to work with it, generating a part of value that the owner can keep even though he has not worked, women have been conceived of as a resource, something that can be possessed. and with which the patriarchs of the family have dedicated themselves to trade, either to have cheap labor (normally applied to household chores) or to be able to have offspring (something that is also linked to the domestic sphere and, therefore, private).

Since women could not aspire to be owners, since they only took care of the goods necessary for the welfare of the family, they could not aspire to negotiate as equals with men, which would put them at a disadvantage even when female participation in work outside the home began to be normal.

4. Its relationship with capitalism is confused

Within feminist currents there has been much discussion as to whether patriarchy is a system of domination linked to capitalism (as understood from Marxism) or whether they are two separate phenomena. Both have been theorized as dynamics of relations based on repression and exploitation, but it is not clear whether their historical driving force would be the same.but it is not clear whether their historical driving force would be the same.

5. Patriarchy has been universal

It is very easy to find societies in which men have clear power over women, but so far it has not been possible to find any example of a relatively large and stable culture in which the opposite is true.

The idea of matriarchy, proposed in the 19th century by the anthropologist Johann Jakob Bachofen, talks about primitive societies thousands of years ago in which women held power, but it is not based on empirical evidence. is not based on empirical evidence to support it..

6. It is not clear whether it originated from genes.

Since patriarchy is conceptualized as a universal system that is widespread throughout the world and has resisted all kinds of political changes, some researchers have proposed the idea that its origin has to do with genetic propensities. Specifically, one possible explanation for its existence would be the presumed differentiation in the way the two sexes behave, for which DNA is directly responsible. According to this idea men would have a kind of natural tendency towards dominating and aggressive behaviorwhile women would more easily manifest submissive behaviors.

The other proposal, much less controversial, is that patriarchy came about as a result of cultural dynamics in which men and women were educated to divide the workload between them.This has led to a situation in which men have gained a bargaining power over women that they have exploited over the generations.

Of course, between these two proposals there are theories that could be considered intermediate between these two extremes.

7. It is a terribly abstract concept

Being a social phenomenon with different ways of manifesting itself, the existence of patriarchy in certain countries is not given as an evident fact. This is so because this concept is not in itself an explanatory model that can be proved or disproved through empirical testing, and therefore the same fact can be interpreted as a proof of the existence of patriarchy or as a sign of its absence..

For example, the abundance of famous actresses who conform well to the canons of beauty can be understood as a sign that women need to sell their bodies to prosper, but it can also be interpreted as an example that women can become more powerful than men without having to work much harder than men.