Patriarchy, the social system where men predominantly hold power and leadership roles, has been a defining structure of human history. Yet, its origins and perpetuation remain enigmatic. Scholars like Yuval Noah Harari describe patriarchy as a puzzle—deeply ingrained yet difficult to explain with biological, cultural, or philosophical certainty. In this exploration, we delve into the roots of patriarchy, challenging the assumptions of biological determinism and analyzing its ideological foundations, particularly within the philosophical traditions of India.
Biology: The Flawed Argument for Patriarchy
The biological argument for patriarchy often centers on perceived differences in physical strength and reproductive roles. However, such claims crumble upon closer examination. The physical dimorphism between men and women in humans is not as stark as in other species, such as lions. While men may have marginally greater average physical strength, leadership in human societies has historically relied more on wisdom, strategy, and cunning than brute force.
Moreover, traits like violence or cunning are not inherently masculine. Women are capable of equal ferocity and ingenuity when circumstances demand. Studies even suggest that women, physiologically less likely to faint at the sight of blood, may handle stressful situations with remarkable resilience. The argument that women’s reproductive roles limited their participation in early societal structures also falters, as caregiving was not exclusive to women; older men and community members also played significant roles.
Patriarchy as an Ideology: The Myth of Detached Duty
The perpetuation of patriarchy lies not in biology but in ideology. Central to this ideology is the glorification of Nishkama Karma—action without attachment—as a masculine ideal. Indian philosophy, particularly classical Sāṃkhya and the Bhagavad Gītā, has significantly contributed to this narrative. The male archetype, as seen in characters like Arjuna, Rama, and Dasaratha, is defined by the willingness to sacrifice personal relationships for a perceived higher duty.
Key Examples:
- Arjuna: In the Mahabharata, Arjuna’s readiness to kill kin for the sake of dharma epitomizes the patriarchal ideal of detachment. The litmus test of masculinity in this framework is the ability to subordinate personal bonds to duty.
- Dasaratha: The mythological king who sacrifices his son for the sake of a promise embodies the patriarchal expectation of unwavering commitment to one’s word, even at the expense of personal grief.
- Rama: The abandonment of Sita, despite her innocence, reflects the inhuman ideal of Rajdharma—placing societal expectations above personal relationships.
Such ideals create an image of masculinity that values stoicism, detachment, and duty over empathy and connection. In contrast, women, culturally and biologically associated with nurturing and caregiving, are seen as less suited to this ideal, reinforcing the gendered division.
Patriarchy and Indian Philosophy
Indian philosophical traditions have played a pivotal role in justifying patriarchy. Classical Sāṃkhya, with its dualistic framework of Purusha (consciousness, male) and Prakriti (nature, female), lays the groundwork for a gendered hierarchy. While Prakriti is dynamic and creative, it is subordinated to the passive observer, Purusha. This dichotomy philosophically aligns with patriarchal structures, where men (Purusha) are leaders and women (Prakriti) are relegated to supportive roles.
Additionally, the ideal of renunciation, as seen in the lives of figures like the Buddha, valorizes detachment from familial bonds—a trait historically associated with masculinity. Gautama Buddha’s abandonment of his wife and child for spiritual enlightenment symbolizes the ultimate rejection of personal ties for a higher purpose, reinforcing patriarchal narratives.
The Role of Myth and Literature
Mythological narratives and historical literature have further cemented patriarchal ideals. For instance:
- Bankim Chandra’s “Anandamath” opens with a celebration of sacrificial duty, illustrating the philosophical underpinning of patriarchy in the context of nationalism and Rajdharma.
- Sunil Ganguly’s “Raja, Rani O Rajsabha Madhavi” explores the dynamics of power and duty in a patriarchal society, highlighting how even those who initially resist are eventually subdued by its ideology.
Virginia Woolf’s reflection in Shakespeare’s Sister also resonates here. She argues that women, denied equal opportunities, could not thrive in the same way as men, perpetuating a vicious cycle where lack of empowerment reinforces patriarchy.
The Paradox of Patriarchy: Strength in Vulnerability
Interestingly, patriarchy’s emphasis on detachment often contradicts human reality. Men are not naturally devoid of emotion or attachment, and the ideal of stoicism can be both unrealistic and damaging. Raymond Williams’s question—”When did men stop crying in public?”—captures the cultural suppression of male vulnerability, a cost of adhering to patriarchal norms.
The myth of masculinity as invulnerable and self-sacrificial often isolates men, forcing them to suppress emotions and conform to rigid ideals. The viral statement “Men don’t cry” is less a biological truth and more a cultural imposition.
Deconstructing Patriarchy: Towards a Balanced Society
Patriarchy is not immutable. By questioning its philosophical justifications and cultural narratives, we can begin to dismantle it. The following steps are crucial:
- Revaluing Emotion: Emotions and relationships, traditionally associated with femininity, must be recognized as strengths rather than weaknesses.
- Equal Opportunities: As Woolf argued, empowering women through education and opportunity can break the cycle of patriarchy.
- Challenging Ideals: The glorification of detachment and sacrifice as masculine virtues must be reevaluated. Societies can honor duty without dehumanizing individuals.
Conclusion: An Ideology, Not a Destiny
Patriarchy, as Yuval Harari suggests, is an enigma, but its roots lie not in biology but in ideology. By understanding its philosophical underpinnings, particularly the ideal of Nishkama Dharma, we can see how it has shaped societal norms. However, to explain is not to condone. Deconstructing these ideals is the first step toward a more equitable society—one that values both masculinity and femininity as complementary rather than hierarchical. Only by challenging the myths of detachment and duty can we move beyond patriarchy to a world where leadership, wisdom, and strength are human qualities, not gendered ones.
(Information Source: Dr. Tamal Dasgupta FB page)
