Patriarchy gaps or strengths. McKinnon notes that when

is a fundamental concept of the radical second-wave feminists, who define it as
a system of social structures, and practices in which men dominate, oppress and
exploit women (Walby, 1990). This research will critically analyse the feminist
theories of patriarchy.


the end of the twentieth century, the two most widely accepted assumptions
about the gender balance were the liberation of free women, their formally fair
standard 2 and the gender difference or the predominant method of Catherine
McKinnon (Carastathis, 2014, p. 314). A liberal, formally fair feminist
standard requires that the public’s understanding of the balance be also a
judicial inquiry. “McKinnon’s discontinuous approach came to standardize
the discourse of legality regarding gender equality, but both are cleared at
their center and do not contain controversial respect for patriarchy.

We Will Write a Custom Essay Specifically
For You For Only $13.90/page!

order now


Dominance Feminism Theory

the question of formal letters is the starting point for understanding
McKinnon’s choices, gaps or strengths. McKinnon notes that when men and women
matter, liberalism provides insurance for women. Whenever there is no
relationship between relatives and men, the rationale is that some differences
may seem important – norms are not applicable (Smith, 2010, p. 15). Therefore,
formal justice is provided by a qualification based on any difference. Despite
this, the more unequal women and men, the more they will be compared and the
more significant the differences will be. Thus, as McKinnon shows, the more
gender differences in a public place, the fewer standards of freedom and
coherence. To determine, in our way of life, heterosexuality and any obscenity
are a patriarchal structure that makes a significant contribution to the
subordination of women. 5 However, men’s access to the sexuality of women is
not the main driving force of patriarchy. His main driving force is the fear of
men in front of other men, as well as the need to complete his power and
control in order to retain control over other men (Smith, 2010, p. 15).


Walby’s structures of patriarchy

For Sylvia Wallby, the concept of
patriarchy must correspond to the feminist understanding of society. She claims
that there are six patriarchal structures that limit and maintain domination of
people. The existence of these structures limits the flexibility and life
chances of women to oppose men. Despite this, she acknowledged that women of
all classes and ethnic groups, as well as unique sexual introductions, face
these structures in different ways. Similarly, Volcker believed that the
structure of patriarchy could change, and they could be affected by the actions
of two men and women – later in her discussion of “sexual
orientation” instead of patriarchy reflecting this more visible ease,
Sylvia Valbi contributed to the creation of society for almost 100 years from
private to public patriarchy in “rational patriarchalism” (Walby,
1989, pp. 213-234). Although this development to some extent increases the
status of women, society remains patriarchal and remains a victim of women.
With private patriarchy women are deprived of any paid work. They basically
rely on the person as a spouse or father, that is, the patriarch. Under the
social patriarchy, women can work for paid work, but they are subordinate to
the public sphere, that is, they are separated from men, have a lower status
and pay less. The first – a wave of feminist triumphs, which give women the
means to exit from private patriarchy. Women increased their political
citizenship, voting rights, access to training and convocation, property
ownership and the privilege to leave trade unions. Voltaire believed that the
emergence of patriarchy from private to public is due to the fact that (i)
entrepreneurs sought to use women who could provide adaptive jobs and work at
lower prices; (b) a fierce feminist movement. The truth was said that, in her
opinion, the free enterprise of an unknown reason is a patriarchal structure,
and the private patriarchate is controversial. 


Feminist views

Marxist feminists emphasize how the
private sector can use domestic violence against women and the unsafe
consequences of the family for the lives of women. For example, Margaret
Benston (1972) argues that the private sector enjoys a large armed force of
women, unpaid labor, as women are socialized, Women support future workers,
thinking about similar ways. Benston said: “The wide range of unpaid
working women is huge and useful for people who claim to have created a method
(Barrett, 2014, p.73). Social control over such work does more than creating
children as future votes. Experts also refer to the formation of ideology. For
Marxist feminists, the family is also a place of spreading social strata. The
treatment from a Marxist feminist point of view comes from sociologists who are
characterized by: Marxist women. The right to pay significant attention to
nuclear families and to neglect a decent family diversity (like functionalists)
also expects retirement with women, for example minority women can effectively
choose their social role as spouses and mothers A few women may have a
“dynamic” matriarchal clan, and not an “isolated” accident
of “patriarchy” (Cudworth, 2005, p. 76)


Feminist criticisms such as functionalism

Functionalists consider society a human
body. Each person relies on the proper functioning of various organs with
specific end goals. As the functionalist notes, society acts in the same way,
because it relies on the cooperation of various social funds (families, schools
and governments) to maintain the legal functioning of social institutions. On
the contrary, Marxists believe that society only brings profit for classes of
decision-making. The social design of our working class is designed to meet the
needs of politicians who use the entrepreneur’s financial base to derive the
greatest benefit from social order. On this route schools and families exist
exclusively for the proper work of zealous service to the needs of free
enterprise. Then feminists again think of society as a solution to male
problems and aspirations (patriarchy) (Cudworth, 2005, p. 100). The patriarchal
social order is aimed at meeting the needs and needs of men through
institutions such as family and guidelines. Under this premise, feminists say
that women are farmers.


Delphy perspective

Christina Delphi said
that if we need to change the world, we can not just ignore it, as if it does
not exist. This reality means patriarchy. Without a just view, we can fight the
patriarchate one by one in a reasonable play soul. It’s just Ivanhoe. In fact,
we do not choose our theater. We can hardly admit this, and we emphasize that
we failed before the hostilities began. In any case, this main priority is the
fight against any serious framework. To reduce it, basically, one must avoid
reality itself, the price of it is to abolish any ability that affects it. All
that limits the patriarchy or its sense of reality are hypothetical and real
women’s rights (Hartmann, 1979, p. 16). More importantly, the same is true of
the verified or unambiguous argument that patriarchy has disappeared or almost
disappeared in society: this is an important start for women to move from their
slums to their special circumstances. In any case, if the patriarchate
disappears from society as an adventurous stone for this paranoid order, this
prejudice will become an adventurous stone of anti-feminist arguments for the
disappearance of the patriarchate.




Hartmann dual systems approach

Heidi believes that
the relationship between Marxism and the rights of women in each structure is
still unequal. Although the Marxist strategy and the feminist investigation are
important for understanding the social order of entrepreneurs and their
inherent status of women, women’s rights certainly sound. Heidi defines
patriarchy as the organization of male social relations, and men have material
foundations, but various social relationships establish connections and
solidarity between men so that they can lead women (Hartmann, 1979, p. 33).
Despite all sorts of patriarchates, men and women of all strata, races and
ethnic groups also have a better place in the patriarchate. However, they also
joined each other in their additional advantages and rely on each other for
such skill. To a certain extent, the “work” of progressive systems is
partly due to their personal fairness under current conditions. Those at a
higher level can “buy” these lower levels by giving control to those
who are at a lower level. In the order of patriarchy, all men, regardless of
their place in the patriarchate, are acquired through the ability to control a
handful of women.


feminist views

Radical feminists tested the
traditional understanding of the issue of legislation in the motto
“Individuality is politics”. This opened up a space for the political
sphere of human experience, in a personal circle, however, these radical feminists
were influenced by many different ideas, such as the progress of the modern
social movement in relation to civil rights, the new left and Chinese Written
work of Guatemalan guerrillas of a lower class, including alienated and
vulnerable new neighbors (Jackson, Scott, 2002, p. 93). In the 1970s, women met
in small gatherings, where they established fruitful links between everyday
life and socio-political structures. Women need class identity and sisterhood
among their members, so they emphasize closeness and distance from contrast.
This is a massive movement that requires radical action to change the lives of
women and the general public (Jackson and Scott, 2002, p. 93). The radical
rights of women have changed feminist exchanges and their goals. They complain
of mistreatment of women as housewives, mothers and sexual partners, they
consider marriage a formalization of women’s oppression. They emphasize certain
parts of the male power that characterize gender inequality in the political
arena, political problems, employment, family, room and even self-awareness.
The patriarchate supports men through the basic framework of political control,
energy and social cohesion of the individual.


Anna Pollert
and gendered power relations

Anna Pollert said
that we need patriarchy to understand the eternal problem of gender imbalances
and to control our planet through the male and female malevolence of women,
young people, creatures, nature and other people. The problem with the
“patriarchy” is that it takes place where it shares the same
fertilizer, like the decadent remnants of sexual orientation and the
emancipation of women. This is all our refusal, and we are hands with the
antibacterial nature of postmodernism (Pollert, 2003, p. 331).



In feminist assumptions, intersection
has become the dominant method that conceptualizes the connection between the
offensive foundation for our innumerable traits and our social sphere in the
development of energy and profitability (Wilson, 2000, p. 2015). Focusing on
the intersection of multidimensional nature, interdisciplinarity and feminism,
how the current western financial, legislative and cultural problems affect the
mature millenniums of whites can be seen due to the fact that these women, in
general, are neoliberal. There is significant contact in society, with which
they expressed the desire for more outstanding monetary opportunities,
independence and the desire for development. The term interactivity hypothesis
was proposed by Kimberly Crenshaw in 1989 to allow black women to understand
their various contacts with the authorities (Becker, 2002, p. 57).



formal standard of coherence of liberal feminism is the community’s study of
the community, as well as the court. “The concept of patriarchy should
remain decisive for understanding the feminist society conditioned by the
theorized patriarchy that society created the patriarchy of the last 100 years
from private to publicism that Marxist feminism Stressed are those who
emphasize how free enterprise exploits the family persecution of women and the
unsafe consequences of the family for the lives of women .





Barrett, M., 2014. Women’s oppression today: The Marxist/feminist encounter. Verso

Becker, M., 2002. Care and Feminists. Wis. Women’s LJ, 17, p.57.

Carastathis, A., 2014. The concept of
intersectionality in feminist theory. Philosophy Compass, 9(5),

Cudworth, E., 2005. Different Feminisms.
In Developing Ecofeminist Theory (pp.
71-100). Palgrave Macmillan, London.

Hartmann, H.I., 1979. The unhappy marriage of
Marxism and feminism: Towards a more progressive union. Capital & Class, 3(2), pp.1-33.

Hartmann, H.I., 1979. The unhappy marriage of
Marxism and feminism: Towards a more progressive union. Capital & Class, 3(2), pp.1-33.

Jackson, S. and Scott, S. eds., 2002. Gender: A sociological reader.
Psychology Press.

Pollert, A., 2003. Women, work and equal
opportunities in post-communist transition. Work, employment and society, 17(2), pp.331-357.

Smith, A.D., 2010. The Concept of Social Change (Routledge Revivals): A Critique of the
Functionalist Theory of Social Change. Routledge.

Walby, S., 1989. Theorising patriarchy. Sociology, 23(2), pp.213-234.

Wilson, A., 2000. Patriarchy: feminist
theory. Routledge International
Encyclopedia of Women: Global Women’s Issues and Knowledge. New York:
Routledge. Retrieved December, 15, p.2015.


I'm Simon!

Would you like to get a custom essay? How about receiving a customized one?

Check it out