From: cbcox-AT-rs6000.cmp.ilstu.edu (Carrol Cox)
Subject: "Patriarchy" (Verbal History)
Date: Tue, 1 Aug 1995 13:18:13 -0500 (CDT)


    Lisa writes, "straightforward meaning of the word from the Latin roots,
"father-rule," i.e. male domination per se."

    Tsk Tsk. Are you claiming that a father does not rule his sons or his
slaves or his other dependents?

    One stream of modern feminism does hypostatize the term, "The Patriarchy,"
and treats it as *the* core of all forms of human dominion. But the word has
been used for a long time (prior to the rise of modern feminism) to indicate
various cultural forms (e.g., that we see in Homer's Odyssey). It does always
*include* male domination of women, but the relationship between Odysseus and
the Swineherd is just as patriarchal as the relationship between him and
Penelope. And Zeus of course is father of *men* and *gods*, not just of
*women* and *goddesses*. More tentatively, one might suggest that Odysseus'
relationship of domination over Penelope is "patriarchal" only *because* his
relationship to the swineherd is patriarchal.

    Again, see the accounts of colonial households in Coontz, Social Origins of
Private Life: the "master" lived in the same house, even slept in the same
room, as his various dependents (including slaves, bondservants, apprentices,
etc). And while his wife was subordinate to him (very much so, he having the
right of physical chastizement), the servants (male and female) were
subordinate to her. And so on. The relation of such a "patriarch" to his
household is certainly different from the relationship of Walmart employees
(male and female) to Waltons. In such a social order male domination is simply
built into the very fabric of human society and requires no justification (no
pseudo-scientific concepts of smaller female brains, etc). When that
patriarchal relationship is dissolved by modern capitalism, and the
"primordial" basis of male domination is gone, some form of male domination
continues (and is essential I think to capitalist rule), but we certainly need
a different analysis for a working class family today in which both have jobs
but the woman continues to do the bulk of the housework. If you want to call
tht patriarchal, you have many to agree with you, and it does not violate
current usage of the word; but I think it obscures the reality and hence
strengthens male supremacy, to continue to call it patriarchy.


     --- from list marxism-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---

     ------------------