"The patriarchy does not exist." Why does it stir up so much emotion then?
This article is a part of "Psychobabble" (pol. Psychobełkot) or the biggest myths of pop-psychology. In this series, we will attempt to disarm the myths of pseudo-psychology, which often do more harm than good. This time we wonder if the patriarchy still exists.
The high-profile premiere of "Barbie" directed by Greta Gerwig is stirring up a lot of emotion. It is the result of a complex marriage between a brand that has existed for decades and a purely feminine commentary on its phenomenon. Similar contradictions are sewn into the doll itself which, on one hand, has always "claimed" that girls can become whoever they want when they grow up, while on the other, showed that they should live up to physically unattainable canons of beauty in the process.
Barbie doll is therefore both a product of the patriarchy and an attempt to transcend its rigid framework. The display of these elements in the pink mirror of "Barbieland" outraged many conservative commentators. In particular, the role given to Ken in the film was seen by these people as derogatory. The fact that he is a satirical commentary on a Bond girl-type pop culture figure is apparently not clear to everyone.
Does patriarchy exist?
What exactly is patriarchy? According to English-language version of Wikipedia it is "a social system in which positions of dominance and privilege are held mainly by men." In Polish, the definition of the word is vague and focused solely on formal power structures, which does not quite capture the modern sense of the term.
Conservatives often go so far as to claim that patriarchy no longer exists ("we have complete equality") or that the very concept itself has never described and still doesn’t describe reality. To assess what it actually is one only needs to look around. Not only at politicians, but also at decision-makers in companies, institutions or those speaking in the media.
It is also necessary to compare the reproductive rights of men and women, the paygrade in professions that are still masculinised in relation to those that are feminised and measure who in the family spends how much time on housework and caring activities.
Are women carers and men hunters?
Conservatives are mainly interested in maintaining the status quo. They are adept at justifying dysfunctional systems and distrustful of change. In the case of patriarchy they look for justifications for their views in, among other things, prehistoric caves, where women were said to be caretakers and gatherers while hunters (i.e. men) went hunting.
Meanwhile, these notions created by anthropologists in the early 20th century are not supported by any evidence. A recent analysis of data from around the world, published in "Science" magazine, showed that women were actively involved in hunting in at least 80 per cent of the primitive societies that have left archaeological traces.
Myths about the "gender of the brain" or the supernatural ability of women to be the sole caregivers of children or the elderly were debunked much earlier. Even at the hormonal level the increase in oxytocin (which for a long time was attributed to the uniqueness of the mother-child bond) was observed in both fathers in heterosexual couples and fathers in same-sex relationships. Frequent, affectionate physical contact with the toddler is sufficient to increase levels of oxytocin which makes all people more caring.
Most psychological and neurological studies show that there are greater differences between individuals within a group of women and within a group of men, rather than between women and men as groups. Ken the blonde is more different from Ken the brunette than Barbies and Kens are as whole groups.
This is in fact the biggest problem with the rigidity of gender roles imposed by patriarchy. Chasing the ideals of "masculinity" or "femininity" created by religion, pop culture and marketing agencies deprives a great many people of the opportunity to simply be themselves. Assigning specific characteristics to one gender by force narrows the possibility of expression for all.
Not all women are sensitive and gentle, not all men are competition-loving risk-takers. Women who are assertive should not be described as "aggressive butch women". In the same way, men who recognise the absurdities of patriarchy are not "simps". Finally, it is worth asking who in the modern world is benefitting the most from maintaining stereotypes that are incompatible with reality.
