Patriarchyis a fundamental concept of the radical second-wave feminists, who define it asa system of social structures, and practices in which men dominate, oppress andexploit women (Walby, 1990). This research will critically analyse the feministtheories of patriarchy. Atthe end of the twentieth century, the two most widely accepted assumptionsabout the gender balance were the liberation of free women, their formally fairstandard 2 and the gender difference or the predominant method of CatherineMcKinnon (Carastathis, 2014, p. 314). A liberal, formally fair feministstandard requires that the public’s understanding of the balance be also ajudicial inquiry.
“McKinnon’s discontinuous approach came to standardizethe discourse of legality regarding gender equality, but both are cleared attheir center and do not contain controversial respect for patriarchy. Dominance Feminism TheoryUnderstandingthe question of formal letters is the starting point for understandingMcKinnon’s choices, gaps or strengths. McKinnon notes that when men and womenmatter, liberalism provides insurance for women. Whenever there is norelationship between relatives and men, the rationale is that some differencesmay seem important – norms are not applicable (Smith, 2010, p. 15). Therefore,formal justice is provided by a qualification based on any difference. Despitethis, the more unequal women and men, the more they will be compared and themore significant the differences will be.
Thus, as McKinnon shows, the moregender differences in a public place, the fewer standards of freedom andcoherence. To determine, in our way of life, heterosexuality and any obscenityare a patriarchal structure that makes a significant contribution to thesubordination of women. 5 However, men’s access to the sexuality of women isnot the main driving force of patriarchy. His main driving force is the fear ofmen in front of other men, as well as the need to complete his power andcontrol in order to retain control over other men (Smith, 2010, p. 15). SylviaWalby’s structures of patriarchyFor Sylvia Wallby, the concept ofpatriarchy must correspond to the feminist understanding of society. She claimsthat there are six patriarchal structures that limit and maintain domination ofpeople.
The existence of these structures limits the flexibility and lifechances of women to oppose men. Despite this, she acknowledged that women ofall classes and ethnic groups, as well as unique sexual introductions, facethese structures in different ways. Similarly, Volcker believed that thestructure of patriarchy could change, and they could be affected by the actionsof two men and women – later in her discussion of “sexualorientation” instead of patriarchy reflecting this more visible ease,Sylvia Valbi contributed to the creation of society for almost 100 years fromprivate to public patriarchy in “rational patriarchalism” (Walby,1989, pp. 213-234). Although this development to some extent increases thestatus of women, society remains patriarchal and remains a victim of women.With private patriarchy women are deprived of any paid work.
They basicallyrely on the person as a spouse or father, that is, the patriarch. Under thesocial patriarchy, women can work for paid work, but they are subordinate tothe public sphere, that is, they are separated from men, have a lower statusand pay less. The first – a wave of feminist triumphs, which give women themeans to exit from private patriarchy. Women increased their politicalcitizenship, voting rights, access to training and convocation, propertyownership and the privilege to leave trade unions. Voltaire believed that theemergence 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 atlower prices; (b) a fierce feminist movement.
The truth was said that, in heropinion, the free enterprise of an unknown reason is a patriarchal structure,and the private patriarchate is controversial. MarxistFeminist viewsMarxist feminists emphasize how theprivate sector can use domestic violence against women and the unsafeconsequences of the family for the lives of women. For example, MargaretBenston (1972) argues that the private sector enjoys a large armed force ofwomen, unpaid labor, as women are socialized, Women support future workers,thinking about similar ways. Benston said: “The wide range of unpaidworking 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 creatingchildren as future votes.
Experts also refer to the formation of ideology. ForMarxist feminists, the family is also a place of spreading social strata. Thetreatment from a Marxist feminist point of view comes from sociologists who arecharacterized by: Marxist women.
The right to pay significant attention tonuclear families and to neglect a decent family diversity (like functionalists)also expects retirement with women, for example minority women can effectivelychoose their social role as spouses and mothers A few women may have a”dynamic” matriarchal clan, and not an “isolated” accidentof “patriarchy” (Cudworth, 2005, p. 76) MarxistFeminist criticisms such as functionalismFunctionalists consider society a humanbody. Each person relies on the proper functioning of various organs withspecific end goals. As the functionalist notes, society acts in the same way,because it relies on the cooperation of various social funds (families, schoolsand governments) to maintain the legal functioning of social institutions. Onthe contrary, Marxists believe that society only brings profit for classes ofdecision-making. The social design of our working class is designed to meet theneeds of politicians who use the entrepreneur’s financial base to derive thegreatest benefit from social order. On this route schools and families existexclusively for the proper work of zealous service to the needs of freeenterprise.
Then feminists again think of society as a solution to maleproblems and aspirations (patriarchy) (Cudworth, 2005, p. 100). The patriarchalsocial order is aimed at meeting the needs and needs of men throughinstitutions such as family and guidelines. Under this premise, feminists saythat women are farmers. ChristineDelphy perspectiveChristina Delphi saidthat if we need to change the world, we can not just ignore it, as if it doesnot exist.
This reality means patriarchy. Without a just view, we can fight thepatriarchate 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 thatwe failed before the hostilities began. In any case, this main priority is thefight against any serious framework.
To reduce it, basically, one must avoidreality itself, the price of it is to abolish any ability that affects it. Allthat limits the patriarchy or its sense of reality are hypothetical and realwomen’s rights (Hartmann, 1979, p. 16). More importantly, the same is true ofthe verified or unambiguous argument that patriarchy has disappeared or almostdisappeared in society: this is an important start for women to move from theirslums to their special circumstances. In any case, if the patriarchatedisappears from society as an adventurous stone for this paranoid order, thisprejudice will become an adventurous stone of anti-feminist arguments for thedisappearance of the patriarchate. HeidiHartmann dual systems approachHeidi believes thatthe relationship between Marxism and the rights of women in each structure isstill unequal. Although the Marxist strategy and the feminist investigation areimportant for understanding the social order of entrepreneurs and theirinherent status of women, women’s rights certainly sound.
Heidi definespatriarchy as the organization of male social relations, and men have materialfoundations, but various social relationships establish connections andsolidarity between men so that they can lead women (Hartmann, 1979, p. 33).Despite all sorts of patriarchates, men and women of all strata, races andethnic groups also have a better place in the patriarchate. However, they alsojoined each other in their additional advantages and rely on each other forsuch skill. To a certain extent, the “work” of progressive systems ispartly due to their personal fairness under current conditions.
Those at ahigher level can “buy” these lower levels by giving control to thosewho are at a lower level. In the order of patriarchy, all men, regardless oftheir place in the patriarchate, are acquired through the ability to control ahandful of women. Radicalfeminist views Radical feminists tested thetraditional understanding of the issue of legislation in the motto”Individuality is politics”. This opened up a space for the politicalsphere of human experience, in a personal circle, however, these radical feministswere influenced by many different ideas, such as the progress of the modernsocial movement in relation to civil rights, the new left and Chinese Writtenwork of Guatemalan guerrillas of a lower class, including alienated andvulnerable new neighbors (Jackson, Scott, 2002, p. 93). In the 1970s, women metin small gatherings, where they established fruitful links between everydaylife and socio-political structures. Women need class identity and sisterhoodamong their members, so they emphasize closeness and distance from contrast.
This is a massive movement that requires radical action to change the lives ofwomen and the general public (Jackson and Scott, 2002, p. 93). The radicalrights of women have changed feminist exchanges and their goals. They complainof mistreatment of women as housewives, mothers and sexual partners, theyconsider marriage a formalization of women’s oppression. They emphasize certainparts of the male power that characterize gender inequality in the politicalarena, 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 Pollertand gendered power relationsAnna Pollert saidthat we need patriarchy to understand the eternal problem of gender imbalancesand 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 samefertilizer, like the decadent remnants of sexual orientation and theemancipation of women. This is all our refusal, and we are hands with theantibacterial nature of postmodernism (Pollert, 2003, p. 331). IntersectionalitytheoriesIn feminist assumptions, intersectionhas become the dominant method that conceptualizes the connection between theoffensive foundation for our innumerable traits and our social sphere in thedevelopment of energy and profitability (Wilson, 2000, p. 2015).
Focusing onthe intersection of multidimensional nature, interdisciplinarity and feminism,how the current western financial, legislative and cultural problems affect themature millenniums of whites can be seen due to the fact that these women, ingeneral, are neoliberal. There is significant contact in society, with whichthey expressed the desire for more outstanding monetary opportunities,independence and the desire for development. The term interactivity hypothesiswas proposed by Kimberly Crenshaw in 1989 to allow black women to understandtheir various contacts with the authorities (Becker, 2002, p. 57). ConclusionTheformal standard of coherence of liberal feminism is the community’s study ofthe community, as well as the court. “The concept of patriarchy shouldremain decisive for understanding the feminist society conditioned by thetheorized patriarchy that society created the patriarchy of the last 100 yearsfrom private to publicism that Marxist feminism Stressed are those whoemphasize how free enterprise exploits the family persecution of women and theunsafe consequences of the family for the lives of women . ReferencesBarrett, M.
, 2014. Women’s oppression today: The Marxist/feminist encounter. VersoBooks.
Becker, M., 2002. Care and Feminists. Wis.
Women’s LJ, 17, p.57.Carastathis, A., 2014. The concept ofintersectionality in feminist theory. Philosophy Compass, 9(5),pp.
304-314.Cudworth, E., 2005. Different Feminisms.In Developing Ecofeminist Theory (pp.71-100). Palgrave Macmillan, London.
Hartmann, H.I., 1979. The unhappy marriage ofMarxism and feminism: Towards a more progressive union. Capital & Class, 3(2), pp.1-33.Hartmann, H.
I., 1979. The unhappy marriage ofMarxism 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 equalopportunities 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 theFunctionalist Theory of Social Change. Routledge.Walby, S., 1989.
Theorising patriarchy. Sociology, 23(2), pp.213-234.Wilson, A., 2000. Patriarchy: feministtheory. Routledge InternationalEncyclopedia of Women: Global Women’s Issues and Knowledge. New York:Routledge.
Retrieved December, 15, p.2015.