From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

It has been suggested that this article or section be merged with Patriarchy (anthropology) . (Discuss)

The neutrality of this article is disputed. Please see the discussion on the talk page.(December 2007) Please do not remove this message until the dispute is resolved.

Patriarchy describes the structuring of society on the basis of family units, in which fathers have primary responsibility for the welfare of these units. In some cultures slaves were included as part of such households. The concept of patriarchy is often used, by extension, to refer to the expectation that men take primary responsibility for the welfare of the community as a whole, acting as representatives via public office (in anthropology and feminism, for example).

The feminine form of patriarchy is matriarchy, but there are no known examples of matriarchies from any point in history.^{[1][2][3][4][5][6]} Encyclopædia Britannica says it is a "hypothetical social system".^[7] The Britannica article goes on to note, "The view of matriarchy as constituting a stage of cultural development is now generally discredited. Furthermore, the consensus among modern anthropologists and sociologists is that a strictly matriarchal society never existed."^[8]

The anthropologist Margaret Mead said, "All the claims so glibly made about societies ruled by women are nonsense. We have no reason to believe that they ever existed. ... men everywhere have been in charge of running the show. ... men have been the leaders in public affairs and the final authorities at home."^[9] For moral comment on this see Feminist criticism below; for a scientific explanation of why, see Biology of gender below.

"In the process of struggling for gender equality in their own societies, some Euro-American feminists have turned to other cultures for inspiration. ... In the mid-1970s, the search for gender-egalitarian societies reached its peak. ... Not surprisingly, no agreement has been reached on vesting a single society with the title 'gender egalitarian'."^[10] "Interestingly, the few scholars who use the term 'gender-egalitarian' to describe the societies they study include some indigenous people who declare that their own cultural traditions are gender-egalitarian and thereby challenge the idealistic biases embedded in mainstream feminism."^[11] "In contrast to the predominant denials of the existance of gender-egalitarian societies, [various] studies have presented evidence and interpretations that collectively contribute to our understanding of gender equality."^[12] For example, Sherry Ortner rejects the use of categorisation, such as patriarchy or matriarchy. She claims this is in decline among anthropologists today. She also claims the gender ideologies and gender roles existing in many societies are "overlapping" and contradictory.^[13]

Contents 1 Etymology 2 Related words 3 Related customs 4 Benefits of patriarchy 5 Feminist criticism 6 Steven Goldberg 7 Biology of gender 8 Appendix 9 Table 10 List 11 See also 12 References 13 External links 14 Literature

The word patriarchy comes from two Greek words – patēr (πατήρ, father) and archē (αρχή, rule). In Greek, the genitive form of patēr is patr-os,^[14] which shows the root form patr, explaining why the word is spelled patr-iarchy. The letter i in patr-i-archy occurs because patēr comes into English via Latin, which had a different vowel flavour to Greek in the genitive (pater/patris). For example, the abbreviation DVP stands for Decessit Vita Patris (literally, she died in the life of the father). The basic meaning of the Greek word archē is actually "beginning" (hence arche-ology or men-arche)^[15] – the first words of Genesis in Greek (see Septuagint) are En archē ("In the beginning").^[16] However, archē is also used metaphorically to refer to ruling, because rulers are perceived to "start" things.^[17] This use of archē is especially common in compound words, for example hier-archy and an-archy.

A patriarch is a man who has great influence on his family or society. Some historical societies claimed descent from one great man. For example, the Romans believed they were descended from Romulus who founded Rome. The traditional founder of Athens is Erectheus, and of Sparta Lacedæmon. Similarly, the Jewish tradition in the Torah says Jews are descended from Abraham through Isaac. Both the Torah and Qur'an say Arabs are descended from Abraham through Ishmael,^[18] [19] Abraham's first son, Isaac's half-brother. Traditional founders are often called patriarchs. The feminine form of patriarch is matriarch, for example see Matriarchs (Bible). Patriarch is also a name for the most senior leaders of Eastern Christianity, roughly comparable to the western arch-bishop (archē as above).

The adjective for patriarchy is patriarchal; and patriarchalism and, more commonly, paternalism refer to the practice or defence of patriarchy. Patron is a related word used generically (that is, it is not gender or sex specific). Women and men who provide financial support to activities within a community can be termed patrons. The verb form patronize can be used positively, to describe the activity of patrons, or negatively, to describe adopting a superior attitude. If the superior attitude is adopted by a man, he can be called paternalistic.

Patrimonalism uses the Greek word monos (μόνος, sole) to describe the view of a state as the extended household of a mon-arch (sole ruler, archē as above) or deity. There are records of patrimonalism almost as far back as the earliest writing itself (about 5000 years ago). In fact, this is probably because patrimonalism directly facilitated the invention of writing – the first hereditary monarchs gained so much wealth as to need to keep accounts, and enough to pay those accountants. The earliest records of patrimonalism come from Ancient Near Eastern legal documents, the best known being the Code of Hammurabi and the Torah. Some aspects of patrimonalism can still be found in the few remaining monarchies in the world today, for example, British law concerning real estate (see Crown lands), especially in Australia. For more detail regarding patrimonalism see Traditional authority.

Some social customs reflect what is termed patrilineality or patrilocality.

Patrilineal describes customs where family responsibilities and assets pass from father to son. By contrast, contemporary Judaism considers people to be Jewish if their mothers were Jewish, which makes this aspect of contemporary Judaism matrilineal. Biblical Judaism is, however, a classical example of a patriarchal society. Matrilineal is a particularly useful term in genetics, where some genetic features are more or less passed via the maternal line, notably Mitochondrial DNA and severe X-linked genetic conditions. An X chromosome from the mother is always passed to offspring, male and female. However, daughters do not receive a Y chromosome, and sons do not receive an X chromosome from their fathers (see Sex-determination system, Heredity and Genetic genealogy).

Patrilocal describes the custom of brides relocating to the geographic community of the husband and his father's family. In a matrilocal society, a husband will relocate to the home community of his wife and her mother (see also Marriage). Matrilocality can substantially increase the social influence of women in a culture, however, given that tribal and family leaders are still men in all known matrilocal societies, matrilocality is not equivalent to matriarchy, see main entry Patriarchy (anthropology).

By contrast with these other customs, patriarchy can be seen to be distinctly about gender and the nuclear family, gender and public office, and about female-male relationships in general.

Patriarchy is advanced as being advantageous for human evolution and social organization on many grounds, crossing several disciplines. Although biology may explain its existence (see below), arguments for its social utility have been made since ancient times.

Please help improve this article or section by expanding it. Further information might be found on the talk page or at requests for expansion. (November 2007)

The examples and perspective in this article or section may not include all significant viewpoints. Please improve the article or discuss the issue on the talk page.

Main article: Patriarchy in feminism

Most forms of feminism have challenged patriarchy as a social system that is adopted uncritically, due to millennia of human experience where male physical strength was the ultimate way of settling social conflicts – from war to disciplining children. John Stuart Mill wrote, "In early times, the great majority of the male sex were slaves, as well as the whole of the female. And many ages elapsed ... before any thinker was bold enough to question the rightfulness, and the absolute necessity, either of the one slavery or of the other."^[20]

During the democratic and anti-slavery movements of early 19th century Europe and America, kingdoms became constitutional monarchies or republics and slavery was made illegal (see abolitionism). The civil rights movements of 20th century America also sought to overthrow various existing social structures, that were seen by many to be oppressive and corrupt. Both social contexts led naturally to an analogous scrutiny of relationships between women and men (see Mill above). The 19th century debate ultimately resulted in women receiving the vote; this is sometimes referred to as first-wave feminism. The late 20th century debate has produced far ranging social restructuring in Western democracies – second-wave feminism. Although often credited with it, Simone de Beauvoir denied she started second wave feminism, "The current feminist movement, which really started about five or six years ago [1970-71], did not really know [The Second Sex]".^[21] Some consider the "second wave" to be continuing into the 21st century, others consider it to be complete, still others consider there to be a "third wave" of feminism active in contemporary society.

In feminist theory, the opposite of feminism is not masculism but patriarchy. It is not surprising, therefore, that the word patriarchy has a range of additional, negative associations when used in the context of feminist theory, where it is sometimes capitalized and used with the definite article (the Patriarchy), likely best understood as a form of collective personification (compare "blame it on the Government" to "blame it on the Patriarchy"). The use of the word patriarchy in feminist literature has been arguably overused as a rhetorical device, becoming so loaded with emotive associations, that some writers prefer to use an approximate synonym, the more objective and technical androcentric (also from Greek – anēr, genitive andros, meaning man).

Fredrika Scarth (a feminist) reads Simone de Beauvoir's The Second Sex to be saying, "Neither men nor women live their bodies authentically under patriarchy."^[22] Mary Daly wrote, "Males and males only are the originators, planners, controllers, and legitimators of patriarchy."^[23] Carole Pateman, another feminist, writes, "The patriarchal construction of the difference between masculinity and femininity is the political difference between freedom and subjection."^[24]

Most feminists do not propose to replace patriarchy with matriarchy, rather they argue for equality (though some have argued for separation). However, equality is a difficult idea (see Egalitarianism), "People who praise it or disparage it disagree about what they are praising or disparaging."^[25] It is particularly hard to work out what equality means when it comes to gender, because there are real differences between men and women (see Sexual dimorphism and Gender differences). Recent feminist writers speak of "feminisms of diversity", that seek to reconcile older debates between equality feminisms and difference feminisms. For instance, Judith Squires writes, "The whole conceptual force of 'equality' rests on the assumption of differences, which should in some respect be valued equally."^[26]

For a leading feminist who writes against patriarchy see Marilyn French; and for one who is more sympathetic see Christina Hoff Sommers.

In summary, recent feminist writers have shown a tendency to admit misandry among some members of the movement, and acknowledge real differences in men and women that make diversity a more meaningful aim than reductionistic equality (for example Judith Squires above). However, the basic issue stands out even more clearly now than at the peak of second wave activism in the early 1970s. Decades of legislation and affirmative action have not yet changed the fact that western culture is male dominated, and that it remains patriarchal. Women can vote in most countries of the world, and they outnumber men in higher education in many countries.

“

In terms of academic achievement, international education figures from 43 developed countries, published by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development in 2003, showed a consistent picture of women achieving better results than men at every level, particularly in literacy assessments.[27]

”

However, heads of state, cabinet ministers and the top executives of major companies are still mostly men (see glass ceiling). Also, women's average income is still significantly lower than men's average income. Sally Haslanger claims women are still marginalized within academic philosophy departments.^[28]

Main article: Why Men Rule

To date, feminists have achieved many of their goals, however there have also been failures. Greater failures have been predicte in 1973 by Steven Goldberg.

“

In every society a basic male motivation is the feeling that the women and children must be protected. But the feminist cannot have it both ways: if she wishes to sacrifice all this, all that she will get in return is the right to meet men on male terms. She will lose.[29]

”

Goldberg (born 1941) was chairman of the department of sociology at City College of New York, and has written two books on patriarchy. In his second book on patriarchy he wrote:

“

There is nothing in this book concerned with the desirability or undesirability of the institutions whose universality the book attempts to explain. For instance, this book is not concerned with the question of whether male domination of hierarchies is morally or politically 'good' or 'bad'. Moral values and political policies, by their nature, consist of more than just empirical facts and their explanation. 'What is' can never entail 'what should be', so science knows nothing of 'should'. 'Answers' to questions of 'should' require subjective elements that science cannot provide. Similarly, there is no implication that one sex is 'superior' in general to the other; 'general superiority' and 'general inferiority' are scientifically meaningless concepts.[30]

”

His first book was published in 1973 – the early days of second wave feminist activism. Like feminists, he started with the data that all known societies have constructed patriarchies. This data requires both moral comment and scientific explanation. Consider the theory that "all power corrupts". If all known cases of people with power result in some form of corruption, we need to study both the moral question of eliminating corruption, and the scientific question of how power leads to corruption – perhaps a just society should eliminate power structures; perhaps it only needs to modify them. In the case of patriarchy, feminism largely provides moral comment, while Goldberg tries to provide the scientific explanation. Goldberg's aim is neither to recommend nor to condemn patriarchy. He simply provides a hypothesis to explain it. Science is neither superior nor inferior to ethics. Science and ethics advance human knowledge in different directions by asking different types of question. Ideally the two assist one another.

In Goldberg's first book, he seeks an explanation for three specific aspects of male dominance behaviour in human societies. Patriarchy is the first of these. He also considers the phenomenon of male status seeking, which he calls "male attainment". He is influenced by Margaret Mead in identifying this phenomenon. She says, "Men may cook, or weave or dress dolls or hunt hummingbirds, but if such activities are appropriate behavior for men, then the whole society, men and women alike, votes them as important. When the same occupations are performed by women, they are regarded as less important."^[31] Finally, he considers the way men seem to dominate in one-to-one relationships with women. Marriage is just one example of such relationships. Goldberg comments, "A woman’s feeling that she must get around a man is the hallmark of male dominance."^[32]

Goldberg proposes the hypothesis that the statistical averages of all these forms of behaviour are partly explained by the necessary (but not sufficient) condition of neuroendocrinological effects – namely, testosterone. The title of his first book makes his hypothesis very clear, it was called The Inevitability of Patriarchy: Why the Biological Difference between Men and Women always Produces Male Domination. At the time he wrote (1973), there were only very limited results from biological researchers to support his hypothesis. The situation has changed a lot since then.

For other writers who make similar points to Goldberg see Steven Pinker and Donald Brown in the literature below.

For current feminists and writers with considerably more biological knowledge than Goldberg, who accept his hypothesis, but consider issues beyond the biological, see Helena Cronin and Louann Brizendine.

“

It all stems from muddling science and politics. It's as if people believe that if you don't like what you think are the ideological implications of the science then you're free to reject the science – and to cobble together your own version of it instead. Now, I know that sounds ridiculous when it's spelled out explicitly. Science doesn't have ideological implications; it simply tells you how the world is – not how it ought to be. So, if a justification or a moral judgement or any such 'ought' statement pops up as a conclusion from purely scientific premises, then obviously the thing to do is to challenge the logic of the argument, not to reject the premises. But, unfortunately, this isn't often spelled out. And so, again and again, people end up rejecting the science rather than the fallacy.[33]

”

This article or section may contain an unpublished synthesis of published material that conveys ideas not attributable to the original sources. Please help Wikipedia by adding sources whose main topic is "Patriarchy". See the talk page for details.(November 2007)

Main article: Biology of gender

The biology of gender is scientific analysis of the physical basis for behavioural differences between men and women. It is more specific than sexual dimorphism, which covers physical and behavioural differences between males and females of any sexually reproducing species, or sexual differentiation, where physical and behavioural differences between men and women are described. Biological research of gender has explored such areas as: intersex physicalities, gender identity, gender roles and sexual preference.

It has long been known that there are correlations between the biological sex of animals and their behaviour.^{[34] [35] [36]} It has also long been known that human behaviour is influenced by the brain.

The late twentieth century saw an explosion in technology capable of aiding sex research. John Money and Milton Diamond made great progress towards understanding the formation of gender identity in humans. Extensive advances were also made in understanding sexual dimorphism in other animals. For example, there were studies on the effects of sex hormones on rats. The early twenty first century started producing even more amazing results concerning genetically programmed sexual dimorphism in rat brains, prior even to the influence of hormones on development.

“

Genes on the sex chromosomes can directly influence sexual dimorphism in cognition and behaviour, independent of the action of sex steroids.

”

Skuse, David H (2006). "Sexual dimorphism in cognition and behaviour: the role of X-linked genes". European Journal of Endocrinology 155: 99-106. 

Some specific relevant results are as follows. The brains of many animals, including humans, are significantly different for females and males of the species (Goy and McEwen, 1980).^[37] Both genes and hormones affect the formation of many animal brains before "birth" (or hatching), and also behaviour of adult individuals. Hormones significantly affect human brain formation, and also brain development at puberty. Both kinds of brain difference affect male and female behaviour.

Brain differences also have a statistically measurable effect on an array of abilities. In particular, on average, women are more capable in nearly everything to do with sensory processing (a bit like comparing the red group to the purple group in the diagram). On the other hand, male brains seem to be "pushed" towards extremes of low ability or high ability in various forms of mental abstraction, especially those related to space and logic. This means the average scores of young women and men in mathematics, for example, will be close, but there will be more men than women in the very low scores and in the very high scores (like red and green, or red and blue).^[38] There is evidence to suggest that forms of autism may be essentially extreme expressions of certain typically male characteristics.^[39] [40] Hormones have also been linked with male aggression.^[41]

In short, science has caught up with what feminists,^[42] Goldberg and common sense have said for a long time – on average, men are more aggressive in social behaviour. This does not justify patriarchy, it merely partially explains it. The explanation is only partial because there is a lot of variation in women and men that is not yet understood. It cannot be proven that female-ness or male-ness is 100% biological (in fact it almost certainly isn't), but what has been shown is that female-ness and male-ness are certainly not 100% determined by upbringing and culture (social determinism). These things are an exciting area of future research, with profound relevance for people of many different types.

For an illustrated description of clear differences between female and male brain response to pain see Laura Stanton and Brenna Maloney, 'The Perception of Pain', Washington Post (19 December 2006).

For those who can understand technical biological language, Alexandra M. Lopes and others, recently published that:

“

A sexual dimorphism in levels of expression in brain tissue was observed by quantitative real-time PCR, with females presenting an up to 2-fold excess in the abundance of PCDH11X transcripts. We relate these findings to sexually dimorphic traits in the human brain. Interestingly, PCDH11X/Y gene pair is unique to Homo sapiens, since the X-linked gene was transposed to the Y chromosome after the human–chimpanzee lineages split.[43]

”

The important thing to note about the biological research is that most of it was generally motivated by seeking the causes of diseases in human beings, and ways of treating or preventing those diseases. Research results are relevant to gender issues, but that is not their direct concern. Sexual dimorphism in the brain is important to study, because we may need to apply different kinds of treatment to women and to men.

Patriarchies in dispute

The table shows all societies that have been claimed at one time or another to be matriarchal. The list, that follows the table, provides quotes from the first western women and men who studied these societies. In every case the ethnographers report that the societies were patriarchal not matriarchal, even before changes brought by contact with western culture. What some of the societies do typify, however, is matrilinearity or matrilocality, not matriarchy, because of clear features of male dominance, see the main entry Patriarchy (anthropology). This is the evidence that supports the statements made by Encyclopædia Britannica, Margaret Mead, Cynthia Eller and Steven Goldberg elsewhere in this article, and has been mainly located using their bibliographies. There are a lot of cultural groups in this appendix. No bias is intended against the more than 1,000 uncontroversially patriarchal groups, nor against the matrilocal or matrilineal cultural groups, whose patriarchal system of government has never been disputed.

Note: "separate" in the marriage column, refers to the practice of husbands and wives living in separate locations, often informally called "walking marriages". See the articles for the specific cultures that practice this for further description.

Patriarchal cultures that have been claimed to be matriarchal

Autonym	Continent	Country	Marriage	Property	Government	Ethnographer	Date	F/M
Alor	Asia	Indonesia			patriarchy	Cora du Bois	1944	female
Bamenda	Africa	Cameroon	patrilocal	only Kom matrilineal	patriarchy	Phyllis Kaberry	1952	female
Bantoc	Asia	Philippines			patriarchy	Albert S Bacadayan	1974	male
Batek	Asia	Malaysia	patrilocal		patriarchy	Kirk Michael Endicott	1974	male
Boyowan	Australasia	Papua New Guinea	patrilocal	matrilineal	patriarchy	Bronisław Malinowski	1916	male
Bribri	North America	Costa Rica	matrilocal	matrilineal	patriarchy	William Moore Grabb	1875	male
Çatalhöyük	Asia	Turkey	na	na	na	James Mellaart	1961	male
Chambri	Australasia	Papua New Guinea			patriarchy	Margaret Mead	1935	female
Filipino	Asia	Philippines			patriarchy	Chester L Hunt	1959	male
Gahuku-Gama	Australasia	Papua New Guinea			patriarchy	Shirley Glasse (Lindenbaum)	1963	female
Hopi	North America	United States of America	matrilocal	both	patriarchy	Barbara Freire-Marreco	1914	female
Iban	Asia	Borneo	both	neither	patriarchy	Edwin H Gomes	1911	male
Imazighen	Africa	North Sahara			patriarchy	George Peter Murdock	1959	male
Iroqois	North America	North East North America	matrilocal	matrilineal	patriarchy	Lewis Henry Morgan	1901	male
Jivaro	South America	West Amazon			patriarchy	R Karstan	1926	male
Kenuzi	Africa	Sudan			patriarchy	Ernest Godard	1867	male
Kibutzim	Asia	Israel	neither	neither	patriarchy	Judith Buber Agassi	1989	female
!Kung San	Africa	Southern Africa			patriarchy	Marjorie Shostak	1976	female
Maliku	Asia	India	separate	matrilineal	patriarchy	Ellen Kattner	1996	female
Minangkabau	Asia	Indonesia		both	patriarchy	PJ Veth	1882	male
Naxi	Asia	China	only Mosuo separate	only Mosuo matrilineal	patriarchy	Joseph Francis Charles Rock	1924	male
Nayar	Asia	India			patriarchy	E Kathleen Gough	1954	female
Tlingit	North America	United States of America	matrilocal	matrilineal	patriarchy	Aurel Krause	1885	male
Vanatinai	Australasia	Papua New Guinea	matrilocal	matrilineal	no government patriarchy	Maria Lipowsky	1981	female
Wemale	Asia	Indonesia			patriarchy	Adolf E Jensen	1939	male
Woorani	South America	Ecuador			patriarchy	John Man	1982	male
Yegali	Africa	Madagascar	na	na	na	na	na	na

Patriarchy in ethnographies

Autonym	Comments	Image
Alorese	"Marriage means for women far greater economic responsibility in a social system that does not grant them status recognition equal to that of men while at the same time it places on them greater and more monotonous burdens of labor." Bois, Cora du (1944). The People of Alor: A Social-Psychological Study of an East Indian Island. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.	Indonesia
Bamenda	"They are under the political authority of a Village Head, who is usually the descendant of the first settler or of the most senior man of a small band of first settlers in the locality. Where the village is the largest autonomous political unit, he may exercise a titular claim to all land within the village boundaries, but the implications of this are political rather than economic. The right to reside in a village and cultivate its land is contingent on obedience to the Village Head and conformity to custom." [Page 29.] "I stress this point since the European observer, confronted by the spectacle of women bending over their hoes through the day while a number of men may be seen lounging in the compounds, are apt to regard the division of labour as not only inequitable but as an exploitation of the female sex. Such an attitude, however, fails to take into account the contribution made by the men in the heavier tasks, more especially in the dry season; and, secondly, the onus on them to earn money for household necessaries." [Page 27.] "Women are not eligible for the headship of kin or political groups." [Page 148.] Kaberry, Phyllis M (1952). Women of the Grassfields. London: Colonial Research Publications 14.	Cameroon
Bantoc	"As is typical of the Bantoc ... the Tanowong are organized into different dap-ay groups ... . The dap-ay ... is the men's house. The dap-ay are the religeous, social, and political centers of village life, where major decisions are made ... . While each dap-ay theoretically has a council of old men who make the decisions, in actual fact, especially at present, every mature man participates in the deliberations of the council." Bacadayan, Albert S (1974). "Securing water for drying rice terraces: irrigation, community organization, and expanding social relationships in a Western Bontoc group, Philippines". Ethnology 13: 247–260.	Philippines
Batek	"Wives usually go where their husbands want to go and the men seem to prefer their own home areas. ... The Batek have a system of headmanship which appears to go back some time. There are at least seven men in the Aring and Lebir Valleys today who are commonly regarded as penghulu ('headmen') and they have in their genealogy several generations of penghulu, menteri ('ministers' or 'chiefs'), panglima ('war captains'), and even a raja ('king'). ... The position of the penghulu descends to the sons of previous penghulu, ideally in order of birth. If the penghulu has no sons, it goes to his next oldest brother and then to his sons in order." Endicott, Kirk Michael (1974). Batek Negrito Economy and Social Organization. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Unpublished PhD thesis, 239–246.	Malaysia
Boyowan Kiriwina Trobriand Islands	Malinowski on Kiriwina These are matrilinear, patrilocal and patriarchal tribes. Maternal uncles are family heads, and the tribal chiefs are dynastic male monarchs, paid a tribute. "A district is formed by a number of villages, which are tributary to a particular headman of high rank, a chief." "A chief has a wife from each subject village." "The headman of a village is the oldest male of the dominant subclan." "Next to the chief and sorcerer, the garden magician is the most important person in the village. He may even be the chief. He is a hereditary specialist in a complex system of magic handed down in the female line." "Fishermen are organized into detachments, each of which is led by a headman who owns the canoe, performs the magic, and reaps the main share of the catch." "Although descent is matrilineal, postmarital residence is patrilocal." Quotes from an article sourced on Malinowski (see below) by Martin J Malone. Malinowski, Bronisław (1916). "Baloma: Spirits of the Dead in the Trobriand Islands". Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute 46: 354-430.  Malinowski, Bronisław (1918). "Fishing in the Trobriand Islands". Man 18: 87-92.  Malinowski, Bronisław (1920). "Kula: The Circulating Exchange of Valuables in the Archipelagoes of Eastern New Guinea". Man 20: 87-105.  Malinowski, Bronisław (1920). "The Economic Pursuits of the Trobriand Islanders". Nature 105: 564-565.  Malinowski, Bronisław (1921). "The Primitive Economics of the Trobriand Islanders". The Economic Journal 21: 1-16.  Malinowski, Bronisław (1922). Argonauts of the Western Pacific. Seattle: Washington University Press.  Malinowski, Bronisław (1936). "The Trobriand Islands of Papua". Australian Geographer 3: 10-12.  There is an amusing anecdote of cross-cultural contact on Kiriwina. The local yam is part of the staple diet and has something of a contraceptive effect. The Kiriwina tribes were initially reluctant to believe western stories of sex causing pregnancy.	PNG
Bribri	"(The brother) ... or in the default of a brother, a cousin or uncle, [has a ruling voice in any family council or discussion]." Gabb, William Moore (1875). "On the Indian tribes and languages of Costa Rica". American Philosophical Society Proceedings 14: 483–602.	Costa Rica
Çatalhöyük	"The archaeological evidence of female oriented ritual at Catal Hüyük is no more a substatial demonstration of matriarchy than some future excavations of a contemporary shrine of La Virgin de Guadalupe (or some other cult of the Madonna) might uncover." Webster, Steven (1973). "Was it Matriarchy?". New York Review of Books: 37–38.	Turkey
Chambri (Tchambuli)	"Nowhere [in Sex and Temperament in Three Primitive Societies] do I suggest that I have found any material which disproves the existance of sex differences [in Tchambuli Society]. ... This study was not concerned with whether there are or are not actual and universal differences between the sexes, either quantative or qualitative." Mead, Margaret (1937). "Letter". The American Anthropologist 39: 558-561.  "All the claims so glibly made about societies ruled by women are nonsense. We have no reason to believe that they ever existed. ... men everywhere have been in charge of running the show. ... men have been the leaders in public affairs and the final authorities at home." Mead, Margaret (1973). "Review of Sex and Temperament in Three Primative Societies". Redbook October: 48.	PNG
Filipinos (and Filipinas)	"This combination of patterns has brought the Filipino woman to a point where, although denied some of the adventurous freedom of the male, she may be even better prepared for economic competition. The acceptance of the boredom of routine work may be seen as part of 'patient suffering' which is said to characterize the Filipino female to a greater extent than the male. Her responsibile role in the household means that the wife is charged with practical affairs while the husband is concerned to a greater extent with ritualistic activity which maintains prestige." Hunt, CL (1965). "Female Occupational Roles and Urban Sex Ratios in the United States, Japan, and the Philippines". Social Forces 43: 144.	Philippines
Gahuku-Gama (Fore)	"At marriage a Fore woman ... is expected to be ... an obedient spouse, a prolific childbearer, and generous with gifts of food to her affines and her husband's friends." Glasse (Lindenbaum), Shirley (1963). The Social Life of Women in the South Fore. Port Moresby: Department of Public Health, Territory of Papua and New Guinea, 1.  What is tastefully left out of this description is that food sometimes consisted of recently deceased members of the tribe. A disease called kuru, probably spread by this canibalism, affected more women, children and elderly than men. [Note again that anthropologists provide scientific observations not moral judgements.]	PNG
Hopi	"It seems that brothers are assumed to be senior to sisters, and entitled to respect as such, in the absence of evidence to the contrary." Freire-Marreco, Barbara (1914). "Tewa Kinship Terms from the Pueblo of Hano, Arizona". American Anthropologist new series 16: 269–287.  "Within the family, the mother's brother, or, in his absence, any adult male of the household or clan, is responsible for the mainenance of order and the discipline of younger members." Dozier, Edward P (1954). "The Hopi-Tewa of Arizona". American-Archaeology and Ethnology 44: 339.	USA
Iban	"Typically, every bilek family has as its head a man who is responsible for the general management of the farm." (page 81) The original ethnography is cited in Whyte, William King (1978). The Status of Women in Pre-Industrial Societies. Princeton: Princeton University Press.  "The tuah rumah is the administrator and custodian of adat, Iban customary law, and the arbiter in community conflicts. He has no political, economic, or ritual power. Usually a man of great personal prestige, it is through his knowledge of custom and his powers of persuasion that others are induced to go along with his decisions. Influence and prestige are not inherited. The Iban emphasize achievement, not descent." Quote from Martin J Malone's cultural summary drawn from sources including: Gomes, Edwin H (1911). Seventeen years among the Sea Dyaks of Borneo: a record of intimate association with the natives of the Bornean jungles. London: Seeley.  The main Wikipedia entry above includes a short recent history of colonial politics and wars involving the Iban, up to the co-operation between Iban and Australians against Japanese in World War II. The film, The Sleeping Dictionary, is set among the Iban.	Malaysia Indonesia
Imazighen (Berbers)	Imazighen "Nuclear families are reported to be independent social groups only among the Mzab. Elsewhere they are aggregated into patrilocal extended families, each with a patriarchal head." Murdock, George Peter (1959). Africa: Its people and Their Cultural History. New York: McGraw-Hill, 117.	Libya Algeria
Iroquois	"The Indian regarded woman as the inferior, the dependent, and the servant of man, and from nurturance and habit, she actually considered herself to be so." Morgan, Lewis Henry (1901). League of the Ho-Dêé-No-Sau-Nee or Iroquois. New York: Dodd, Mead, and Company, 315.  "Ruling over the League was a council of 50 chiefs known as sachem[s] or lord[s]." From Marlene M Martin's cultural summary, which draws upon the text quoted above. Two interesting thing about this society are that the chiefs were elected, not hereditary, and that the voters were exclusively female. The council itself had a ruler, but he was elected by the council. See also: Richards, Cara B (1957), "Matriarchy or Mistake: The Role of Iroqois Women Through Time", Cultural Stability and Cultural Change, New York: American Ethnological Society, p. 36–45. Randle, Martha C (undated). "Iroqois Women, Then and Now". Bureau of American Ethnology Bulletin 149.  The main Wikipedia entry also provides enough circumstatial evidence to suggest what the anthropologists reported – the Iroqois were traditionally a matrilineal but patriarchal people.	Canada Quebec USA
Jivaro	"On relations between husband and wife it may be proper to say that it is regulated according to the principle 'the man governs, but the woman holds sway'." Karstan, R (1935). The Headhunters of Western Amazonia:The Life and Culture of the Jibaro Indians of Eastern Ecuador and Peru. Helsingfors: Finska Vetenskaps-societeten Helsingfors, 254.	Ecuador Peru
Kenuzi	"The subservient position of women was determined by the Islamic religion." (page 133) "Women influence their husbands, but [their husband's] decisions are decisive." (page 89) The original ethnographies are cited in: Whyte, William King (1978). The Status of Women in Pre-Industrial Societies. Princeton: Princeton University Press.  It is also worth noting that in this society, girls are married before puberty (Godard, 1867), by adult men who inspect them manually for virginity (Kenedy, 1970). Female circumcision is later performed at puberty to ensure chastity (Barclay, 1964). [Once more we note that niether the anthropologists who report such practices, nor those who cite them, nor this article endorse these things in any way. These practices are mentioned only to explain why most scholars do not consider this society matriarchal.]	Sudan
Kibbutzim	"Some women serve as secretaries of kibbutzim, very few as treasurers; women as economic directors are still a rarity. Experience in the internal positions of power is the stepping stone to external positions of power. There has been one woman national secretary of a kibbutz federation. The kibbutz federations usually send into national politics one token woman at a time." Agassi, Judith Buber (1989). "Gender Equality: Theoretical Lessons from the Israeli Kibbutz". Gender and Society 3: 160-186.	Israel
!Kung	"N≠issa's descriptions ... of her relationship with her husband, Tashay, suggest that relations between the sexes are not egalitarian, and that men, because of their greater strength, have power and can exercise their will in relation to women. This confirms Marshall's (1959) finding that men's status is higher than women's." Shostak, Marjorie (1976), "A !Kung Woman's Memories of Childhood", in Lee and De Vore, Kalahari Hunter-Gatherers, Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press, p. 277 "The dominant impression one gets from accounts of patrilocal bands is one of semi-isolated, male-centered groups, encapsulated within territories." Lee, Richard B (1976), "!Kung Spacial Organization", in Lee and De Vore, Kalahari Hunter-Gatherers, Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press, p. 75 "There are inherited positions, such as the 'headman'." Marshall, Lorna (1976). The !Kung of Nyae Nyae, 125.  "Raising 2 or 3 children to competent maturity—the life's work of a successful woman—has typically required hard decisions about priorities, attentive management of social relations, ingenuity, luck, and decades of hard labor." Fielder, Christine; Chris King (2004). Sexual Paradox Complementarity, Reproductive Conflict, and Human Emergence. ISBN 1-4116-5532-X.	Angola Namibia Botswana
Maliku Minicoy	Maldives Royal Family 1888 "Maliku seamen then had small colonies in Burma, near Rangoon, and on the Andaman and Nicobar Islands. Nowadays, the men prefer to work on cargo ships owned by national and international shipping companies. Their 'Minicoy Seamen's Association' shifted from Calcutta to Bombay, where they teach the young men and supply employment." "Until 1960, all the villages selected an additional authority, the rahubodukaka (lit. the country's big brother), who was in charge of the rahuge (lit. house of the country). He and the rahuweriñ (lit. ruler of the country), a boduñ selected by the boduñ and niamiñ [high status groups], were responsible for all the affairs concerning the whole island and the access to the southern part for collecting firewood and coconuts." Kattner, Ellen (1996). "Union Territory of Lakshadweep: The Social Structure of Maliku". Institute for Asian Studies Newsletter 10.	India
Minangkabau	"In spite of the nominal 'matriarchate', Van Hasselt claims that the women are really the servants of the men. They not only prepare the meals of the men in their family, but they also serve them first, later eating with the children." Paraphrase of: Hasselt, AL van (1882), "Volksbeschrijving van Midden-Sumatra", in PJ Veth, Midden-Sumatra, Leiden, p. Third Part "The women have not the legal right to make a contract, not even to dispose of themselves in marriage." Both quotes from: Loeb, EM (1934). "Patrilineal and Matrilineal Organization in Sumatra: The Minangkabau". The American Anthropologist 36: 49.  More recently, Peggy Reeves Sanday observed the following: "The Minangkabau are guided by a hegemonic idealogy called adat, which legitimizes and structures traditional political and ceremonial life." [Page 146] "Thus, the Minangkabau make a distinction between female/weak and male/strong ..." [Page 149] "In the specifics of male and female role definition, adat [sic] ideology is decidedly androcentric." [Page 150] "First there are the ninik mamak, the men who have the authority to decide in accordance with adat law. The ninik mamak have authority over their nephews and nieces. [The ninik mamak] are the heads of the clan in the villages." [Page 151] Sanday, Peggy Reeves (1990), "Gender in Minangkabau Ideology", in PR Sanday and Ruth Gallagher Goodenough, Beyond the Second Sex, Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press Mohammad Hatta, the first vice president of Indonesia, was a Minangkabau.	Indonesia
Naxi Mosuo	"The Naxi Kingdom flourished from the eighth century until 1724 when it came under direct Chinese rule. ... Their predominant tribe is the Moso, the name by which the Naxi were originally known. The Moso of today carry on the matrilineal family structure in the Naxi tradition. ... Naxi is the only living pictographic language. ... Although a large percentage of Naxi ceremonies deal with exorcism, the Library's collection also includes a pictographic creation story, a sacrifice to the Serpent King, accounts of Naxi warriors and other people of high social standing ascending to the realm of deities, and love-suicide stories." From Library of Congress website. This secondary source describes the primary literature available regarding the Naxi. Unlike most of the other socieities in this list, the Naxi were literate and have left records of their beliefs and practices. The mention of "warriors" and "high social standing" and even "matrilineal" rather than "matriarchal", suggest an historically patriarchal society.	China
Nayar	"The Karanavan [mother's brother] was traditionally unequivocal head of the