Just what is "The Patriarchy"?
Since there are a lot of new members participating in this group, I'd like to clear up some misconceptions about some very basic concepts which are central to feminist issues.
First and foremost: The Patriarchy.
It would benefit anyone participating here to have a basic understanding of this concept, so as not to take personal offense when the patriarchy is referred to as the enemy. The patriarchy is the enemy, but this is not the same thing as saying that men are the enemy.
FAQ: Isn’t "the Patriarchy" just some conspiracy theory that blames all men, even decent men, for women’s woes?
Patriarchy: one of the most misunderstood critical-theory concepts ever, often wilfully misunderstood. Patriarchy is one form of social stratification via a power/dominance hierarchy – an ancient and ongoing social system based on traditions of elitism (a ranking of inferiorities) and its privileges. Societies can be (and usually are) patriarchal, oligarchal and plutocratic all at the same time, complicated by current and/or legacy features of sectarianism, imperialism and colonialism, so the gender hierarchy is only one source of social disparity. Because of the limited capacity of the word “patriarchy” to describe the full operation of intersecting oppressions, some now prefer to use the word “kyriarchy” instead, but it is not yet in common use.
Kyriarchy – a neologism coined by Elisabeth Schussler Fiorenza and derived from the Greek words for “lord” or “master” (kyrios) and “to rule or dominate” (archein) which seeks to redefine the analytic category of patriarchy in terms of multiplicative intersecting structures of domination…Kyriarchy is best theorized as a complex pyramidal system of intersecting multiplicative social structures of superordination and subordination, of ruling and oppression.
Patriarchy – Literally means the rule of the father and is generally understood within feminist discourses in a dualistic sense as asserting the domination of all men over all women in equal terms. The theoretical adequacy of patriarchy has been challenged because, for instance, black men to not have control over white wo/men and some women (slave/mistresses) have power over subaltern women and men (slaves).
- Glossary, Wisdom Ways, Orbis Books New York 2001
Historically, patriarchy operates through the disproportionate (sometimes exclusive) conferring of leadership status (and formal titles indicating that status) on men, a tradition characterised by casting all women as naturally unsuited to lead men, no matter what talents and expertise they might possess (unless there are exceptional circumstances resulting from intersections with other social hierarchies conferring high status that gives rare women political authority e.g. the royal lineage of Elizabeth I, or the divine claim to authority of Joan of Arc). This view of women normalises the restriction of women’s opportunities and choices throughout the whole of society via strict gender expectations which constrain individualist expressions.
(snip)
Not all men are Patriarchs. A Patriarch is a man who has special power and influence over not just his family but also in society, due to privileges gathered through intersections of age, wealth, achievement, lineage, patronage and the exploitation of others as these attributes add to his place in the elite social hierarchy.
....
= new reply since forum marked as read
You are part of it.
I've been trying to tell women what it means for decades, but they just clutch their Bibles, and wait for a man to open the door.
EDIT: 
This is very interesting and educational! Appreciate it! 
it's one of my favorite topics after all.
From the hearing on birth control today
No words for how angry this makes me.
scatterplot, where people cluster in different places along a bunch of axes, and all the clusters have complex relations to each other.
The problem I always feel with terms like these however, is the tendency to apply them to specific individuals rather than general conditions. This article even does it ("A Patriarch is a man..."
and I feel like that weakens and muddies the argument - the power dimensions are rarely so clear cut, every specific example has a counter, and every individual can find a way to excuse himself from the continuum. But as a description of the system, the concept has power - it's about the tide, not the water molecule...
