In a family, as in any other association of humans, there arise disagreements on various matters of varying degrees of importance. When the family is functioning properly, these disputes are resolved to everyone’s satisfaction. When disputes cannot be settled in this way, however, people resort to violence, literally beating the other party into submission. Naturally enough, men tend to win these contests when conditioning does not restrain them from striking a woman.
However, wife beating is not a productive activity, and a high-trust family is superior in virtually every way imaginable to one in which the spouses glower at each other across the dining room table. Thus, there developed rules for settling familial disputes without violence, the most successful of which being patriarchy. Under patriarchy, the man holds the final say on all family matters. This systems works because if disputes were instead referred to the court of the ultima ratio, the man would win; it simply makes sense to give authority to the person who would win the argument anyway.
As with all technologies, there are appropriate and inappropriate applications of patriarchy. If the man uses his authority to become a despot, completely disregarding his wife’s concerns, then he is effectively ruling by pure force shrouded in the garb of patriarchy. Anyone with power will of course use it to his own benefit, but a true patriarch rules his family in the interest of himself and his wife both, as well as any children they may have together.
If we are to dispense with patriarchy, then we must find an alternative arrangement which also discourages domestic violence. At present, domestic violence is illegal in all fifty states; that is to say that if a man beats his wife, other men will come and punish him. This rule is enforced with varying degrees of strictness in different communities, and it is impractical to actually police all families in this way, but the principle remains.
There are two alternatives to patriarchy currently in favor. One is divorce: if a couple cannot settle an issue, they simply dissolve their union and go their separate ways. Current divorce laws favor the women in this case, but in principle the practice is egalitarian.
The other option is matriarchy. Under current laws, a woman may both harass her husband and withhold sex from him, and the man has no recourse (other than divorce). This arrangement gives women the upper hand in disputes which previously belonged to men. Since men wish to avoid conflict, they yield to their women without fighting, just as women do to their men under patriarchy.
The problem with matriarchy is that it is simply patriarchy waiting to happen. It relies on men declining to use their superior strength to win arguments on account of punishment which other men will inflict upon them if they do so. If these other men decide that the prohibition against wife beating is not worth enforcing, then matriarchy rapidly dissolves.
Matriarchy relies on men policing other men for the benefit of women and so is unstable. Patriarchy relies on recognition of men’s natural superiority. Patriarchy is not necessarily kinder or more pleasant than matriarchy, but it is more stable.
The Katabasis 