Is Patriarchy Obsolete?
Male leadership of societies, or patriarchy, pervades human history and culture to the present. What is the evolutionary basis of this persistent male domination?
Is this basis still relevant in modern, developed societies?
Biological Basis of Patriarchy in a Single Human Couple (spanning ~100 years):
About the Work
Sexual differences in physical capability and ecological vulnerability:
This work depicts female and male physical capability and ecological vulnerability across a typical human life span, and then across generations. The labeled figure below identifies four key variables. The width of the first figure equals approximately 100 years.
Physical capability consists of things like muscle strength and endurance, lifting ability, sprint speed, and work capacity. Ecological vulnerability represents susceptibility to injury or death from factors such as thermal challenges (cold or heat), dehydration, starvation, illness, predation, and social hostility. The myriad incoming arrows symbolize all such challenges. (Definition distinction: Ecological vulnerability of an individual organism is different than ecosystem vulnerability, which reflects the fragility of an ecosystem in the face of environmental challenges.)
Before puberty, few if any gender differences exist. Puberty leads to greater male vs. female physical capability, and thus lesser male ecological vulnerability, each of which persist into adulthood. However, these differences alone don’t necessarily underlie patriarchy, because the physical disparities don’t necessarily lead to dependence of women on men.
The ecological vulnerability of childbearing requires dependence.
Starting at age 19, the example woman had six children about 2 – 3 years apart. The process of delivering a child temporarily yet severely limits a woman’s ability to defend herself and the newborn from ecological challenges, as shown by the spikes in her ecological vulnerability from ~ ages 20 – 40. The childbearing woman depends almost entirely on others for care and protection, and the newborn infant depends on her. In our evolutionary history, the primary other person most responsible and directly involved is the father. His physical capability and ecological vulnerability remain stable and uncompromised. Dependence of a new mother and infant on the father during the perilous peripartum period provides one possible premise for patriarchy and its persistence.
Care and protection of the most vulnerable equals leadership.
Jefferson posited, “dependence begets subservience”. Procreation and thus evolutionary success depend on the protective envelope provided by male strength and low, stable male ecological vulnerability. This transient yet vital dependence of childbearing mother on father may underlie the evolution of patriarchy in human societies.
Is this possible foundation of patriarchy relevant today?
This is an open and important question. The answer may depend on the development and sophistication of specific societies. Patriarchy may remain well-entrenched in cultures with ongoing general ecological vulnerability, yet may be left behind by highly developed and ensconced civilizations. On the other hand, biologically founded drivers of male dominance may persist even after they serve no evolutionary purpose.
What do you think?
Part 2 - Male Protection of Human Generations through Time:
This idealized depiction of the evolutionary basis of patriarchy spans approximately 10 human generations, or very roughly, 500 years.
It basically shows how the superiority and stability of male physical attributes and untrammeled ecological vulnerability provide a “tunnel through time” for survival and procreation of our species.
Some wonder whether or not this foundation of patriarchy remains relevant to modern developed societies. We’ve created sophisticated technologies and infrastructure to protect us from most physical, medical, and environmental threats that plagued our distant ancestors. However, are we our own worst enemy, by virtue of our patriarchal heritage?
There is speculation that patriarchy could be self-destructive to our species, in that it imposes a reflexive defensiveness on societies and governments that may not always be the best reaction for the long-term. Put bluntly: men tend to choose war to resolve conflict. War not only kills, but also plants seeds of hatred and future conflict. This amounts to procreation of death, which of course leads to extinction.
Given their more critical role in procreation, are women also more prone and able to defuse, discuss, and constructively resolve disputes? How would matriarchal societies and governments operate compared to patriarchies? Would there be less war? What are your thoughts?
REFERENCES
“The enemy is not men. The enemy is the concept of patriarchy, the concept of patriarchy as the way to run the world or do things.” - Toni Morrison
Sex differences in athletic performance emerge coinciding with the onset of male puberty.
Handelsman, 2017.
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/cen.13350
European normative values for physical fitness in children and adolescents aged 9-17 years: results from 2 779 165 Eurofit performances representing 30 countries.
Tomkinson et al., 2018.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29191931
Examining age and gender effects in physical performance in young athletes aged 12–16 years.
Yanci et al., 2016.
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/1747954116655052
Sex difference in muscular strength in equally-trained men and women.
Bishop et al., 1987.
Greater Strength Drives Difference in Power between Sexes in the Conventional Deadlift Exercise.
Jones et al., 2016.
https://www.mdpi.com/2075-4663/4/3/43/pdf
Sex differences in thigh muscle volumes, sprint performance and mechanical properties in national-level sprinters.
Nuell et al., 2019.
https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0224862
A concept analysis of women's vulnerability during pregnancy, birth and the postnatal period.
Briscoe et al., 2016
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/jan.13017
Age and Gender Differences in Physical Capability Levels from Mid-Life Onwards: The Harmonisation and Meta-Analysis of Data from Eight UK Cohort Studies.
Cooper et al., 2011.
https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0027899
The influence of aging and sex on skeletal muscle mass and strength.
Doherty, 2001.