Theory of Indivisibility: Evolutionary Origins, Current Complexities, and Transitioning Away from Patriarchy

Published in

Theory of Indivisibility Publications

12 min readFeb 26, 2022

This transcription corresponds with Episode 6 of my podcast Theory of Indivisibility. The show is now available on Google Podcast, Apple Podcast, Spotify, Stitcher, and Castbox. If you’d like to support my work, please visit my Patreon page.

“The type of man that just about every woman has dealt with at one point or another is prideful, egotistical, untrustworthy, immature, selfish, greedy, and emotionally unstable. In my opinion, the typical man is a liar and a cheater, and that’s only scratching the surface of his character. I wonder how and when men became this way.” — Gretta DeArman

That scathing assessment of men was from Gretta DeArman, Co-author of a book entitled Life Interruptions — Sisters Turn And Take Your Journey, which is a compilation of short stories by six African American woman who share stories from defining moments in their lives.

I know for a fact that all men aren’t what she describes. I also know that many are and that all women would agree with Gretta’s statement.

The question that Gretta asks at the end of her quote, “I wonder how and when men became this way?”, is a perfect segue into exploring the evolutionary origins of Patriarchy. I believe that this exploration will give us some context for Gretta’s assessment of what she calls “the typical man”. Please note, this is not a man-bashing platform…in fact, I hope that you’ll learn that Patriarchy isn’t first and foremost about men.

Patriarchy is a social system with certain rules and norms that privilege men…men who conform to it’s strict set of rules, that is.

Sociologists define Patriarchy as a social system in which men hold primary power and predominate in roles of political leadership, moral authority, social privilege and control of property.

Let’s revisit our concentric circles diagrams for a visual explanation because I think that it’s important to keep in mind that everything is a system, every system is always changing and evolving, and that each system is interconnected and interdependent. Concentric circles provide us with a chronological perspective for how systems evolved. The larger circles consist of systems that preceded the smaller circles in terms of their evolution.

A concentric circles diagram of our human-made systems and how we arrived at patriarchy would evolve like this…First humans evolved. From humans, our social systems evolved. From our social systems, power-over evolved. And from power-over, patriarchy evolved.

Just like natural systems, human-made systems are interconnected, interdependent of one another, and always evolving. Social systems were and are created by humans as a means of communicating with one another and supporting each other’s safety and existence.

Now that we have a systems-level perspective on how patriarchy evolved, let’s zoom in to discuss what factors influenced this evolution at the human level.

For the first approximately 290,000 years that our homo sapien ancestors roamed the earth, they lived egalitarian in small hunter-gather bands of 25–50 people. They shared everything and while there may have been distinct roles between males and females they both shared equal social power, decision making power, and sexual freedom.

Anthropologists believe that patriarchy evolved as a result of the Agricultural Revolution 10,000–12,000 years ago. For the first 97% of human existence, our ancestors lived in cooperative egalitarian societies.

The physical demands of early agriculture and the ability to create more children due to more sedentary, stationary living paved the way for men to be the producers on the farms and the decision makers in the council meetings of early tribal societies. Over time, the primary role of women became rearing children and maintaining the household, which was considered less valuable than the work of men, and this de-valuing led to patriarchy: men having power over women. Power-over and control dynamics are at the root of patriarchy.

Marriage as we know it today didn’t exist prior to patriarchy. With the advent of agriculture, humans had the ability to stay in one place for the first time, cultivate the land, and accumulate resources. This made paternity important for the first time because men wanted to pass down their land and possessions to their heirs. The control of women evolved under these conditions because only by owning a woman through marriage could a man be certain that he was the father of her children, and they were his rightful heirs. Under patriarchy, women existed under the control of their fathers and then husbands, whose duty it was to monitor and control her social and sexual life.

Based on the social and economic conditions during that time, patriarchal societies evolved to become societies of power-over, control, and individuation.

I think this gives us some context for an answer to Greta’s question: “I wonder how and when men became this way?”

But what about her other statements…?

“The type of man that just about every woman has dealt with at one point or another is prideful, egotistical, untrustworthy, immature, selfish, greedy, and emotionally unstable. In my opinion, the typical man is a liar and a cheater, and that’s only scratching the surface of his character.”

In an article titled “The History of Patriarchy: it’s not about men; it’s a social system that’s only 10K years old”, by Elle Beau states,

“Although there is a substantial element in patriarchal systems of males having power and primacy over females, it is fundamentally a dominance hierarchy, one which detrimentally affects men also, particularly those who are not at the pinnacle of the hierarchy.
One of the things that make it difficult to speak about patriarchy, or any other system, to a mostly North American audience, is that the capacity to see systems as distinct from the individuals that live within and are affected by them has been systematically rooted out of most people’s awareness. Instead, everything is seen as an individual issue with only individual solutions.
In other words, although it is difficult for many people to readily grasp this, patriarchy is not about men as individuals, per se. In fact, women may play a significant role in maintaining the social system of patriarchy as well, in part by helping to enforce the rules of the so called ‘man box’.” (Beau, 2018)

I love the way that Elle points out the challenge of seeing the system as distinct from the individuals within it. Especially in America, the message of “rugged individualism” makes it difficult for most people to see patriarchy as a systemic issue rather than a problem with individual people. I am reminded of a comment that a friend of mine, Pam Iverson, wrote on one of my Facebook posts. Pam stated that there is no “do better” on an individual level without first dismantling the systems that don’t work for everyone and creating ones that do.

Elle Beau goes on to explain what she means by the “Man Box” by referencing another article on the topic:

“According to Glickman and others, the Man Box is a set of rigid expectations that define what a “real man” is. A real man is strong and stoic. He doesn’t show emotions other than anger and excitement. He is a breadwinner. He is heterosexual. He is able-bodied. He plays or watches sports. He is the dominant participant in every exchange. He is a firefighter, a lawyer, a CEO. He is a man’s man.
This “real man,” as defined by the Man Box, represents what is supposedly normative and acceptable within the tightly controlled performance of American male masculinity. He dominates our movies and television. He defines what we expect from our political leaders. He is the archetypal sports star. He is our symbol for what is admirable and honorable in American men. And if he happens to get aggressive, belligerent and violent sometimes, well, that’s just the price of real masculinity.
And to be clear, although the Man Box defines and enforces what is considered to be “real manhood” women are as culpable as men in the policing and the enforcing of its harsh rules. When American men attempt to express masculinity in more diverse ways, it can often be the women in their lives who force them back into the Box. This can be due to fears of economic and social isolation or out of a refusal by those women to engage in the kind of self-reflective emotional discourses that exiting the Man Box can trigger.” (Beau, 2018)

I can think of so many examples of keeping men in their box: phrases like “he looks real good — no homo!” and “that’s so gay” keep men in the heterosexual box that patriarchy requires them to exist within.

To assist us with analyzing and synthesizing the current complexities of patriarchy, we’re going to look at a cluster map. Cluster maps are an important tool because they help us to see the interconnections, interdependencies, and dynamic complexities of the elements (subsystems) that make up a system. To make a cluster map, draw a large circle and write all of the elements that make up whatever system you’re exploring. Whatever comes to mind when you think about patriarchy, write it down in the circle.

My cluster map of patriarchy looks like this:

cluster map of patriarchy includes gender inequality, violence, toxic masculinity, capitalism, and homophobia

Next, let’s discuss some of the interconnections and interdependencies that I was able to draw and how they apply to some of the current complexities of patriarchy. You probably noticed that I included most of the behaviors that Gretta DeArman attributes to “the typical man” in her scathing description of the type of man she believes most women have dealt with.

I think this exercise will help answer the question of “why and when did men become this way?” and provide context for why these behaviors are systemic.

cluster map with connections among interdependent parts of the system of patriarchy

What are the aspects of patriarchy?

Toxic Masculinity: A phrase derived from studies that focus on violent behavior perpetrated by men, and — this is key — describes not masculinity itself, but a form of gendered behavior that results when expectations of “what it means to be a man” go wrong.

The Good Men Project defines it this way: “Toxic masculinity is a narrow and repressive description of manhood, designating manhood as defined by violence, sex, status and aggression. It’s the cultural ideal of manliness, where strength is everything while emotions are a weakness; where sex and brutality are yardsticks by which men are measured, while supposedly “feminine” traits — which can range from emotional vulnerability to simply not being hypersexual — are the means by which your status as ‘man’ can be taken away.”

Toxic Masculinity is connected to the following words on my cluster map: Violence, Liar, Feminism, Ownership & Control, Hierarchy, Power-Over, Homophobia, Distrust.

#MeToo is a movement against sexual harassment and sexual assault.

#MeToo is connected with the following words on my cluster map: Violence, Feminism, Stigmatism, Misogyny, Capitalism

Greed: Because capitalism is about growth growth growth and because it rewards people who have the most resources, it perpetuates competition and over-consumption.

Misogyny is the hatred of, contempt for, or ingrained prejudice against women or girls. Misogyny manifests in numerous ways, including social exclusion, sexual discrimination, hostility, androcentrism, patriarchy, male privilege, belittling of women, disenfranchisement of women, violence against women, and sexual objectification.

You can see from these examples the dynamic complexity of it all…everything connects either directly or indirectly, meaning each of these seemingly separate elements within patriarchy actually depend on one another to exist.

Religion and capitalism, staples in our society, are also connected to and dependent on patriarchy, which gave way to sexism, violence, misogyny, and sexual assault.

My Theory of Indivisibility is rooted in the belief that we need to move away from social systems rooted in power-over and control of others, and transition to social systems rooted in power-with dynamics like collaboration, agency, and consent that are rooted in sustainability, liberation and unconditional love.

The movement away from patriarchy began in the 1800s. The women’s suffrage movement started in 1848 and in 1920, women of European descent were finally granted the right to vote.

Turning Point Suffrage Memorial says that,

“African American women were in a difficult position. Sometimes they worked in their own clubs and suffrage organizations, sometimes with EA suffragists. AA women did not accept their exclusion from EA suffrage organizations or the racist tactics employed by EA suffragists. In the twentieth century, more and more AA women joined the ranks of suffragists as the movement progressed.”

In the 1800’s and 1900’s, women of European descent fought for and won things like property rights and more equal pay. In the later 1900’s, women became pastors and church leaders, even CEOs.

In more recent times, we’ve seen same-sex marriage laws passed and we’ve seen more expressions of sexual freedom in the media. We’ve seen many single stall public bathrooms replace gendered signs with unisex markings. There are even some places with multi-stall restrooms where the signage reads: “Men & Non-Binary” and “Women & Non-Binary”, indicating that individuals can choose whichever restroom feels comfortable to them based on their gender identity.

We’ve seen the LGTBQ movement evolve into the LGBTQIAP+ movement, an acronym that stands for: Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Queer, Intersex, Asexual, Pansexual, + (meaning: “not limited to”).

Up until recently, many people who existed on the LGBTQIAP+ spectrum were ignored, ostracized, and punished by society. For centuries there weren’t even words to describe these people in America and other countries colonized by Europeans. However, LGBTQIAP+ people have always existed, and for centuries they’ve had to compromise their true identity to fit in, primarily for their own safety.

I didn’t know until about five years ago that there was a true difference between the terms “sex” and “gender”.

Sex refers to one’s biological sex they are born with relating to their chromosomes, hormones, genitalia and reproductive system, etc. Sex is generally described as “male”, “female” or “intersex”.

Gender refers to the identity you choose regardless of your sex, which relates to your societal and cultural portrayal of sexuality and gender. It is a broad spectrum that differs from one person to the next.

There is a podcast that I heard last year by Moji Yai who I’ve gotten to know while we’ve both been engaging with liberation and social activism work on several fronts.

In this podcast, Moji shares how her native African language, Yoruba, doesn’t have gendered language — the type of language that informs the patriarchy and gender-based hierarchy that I grew up thinking was normal.

Within the last few years, I learned that the gender binary (man & woman) is a man-made social construct and that many indigenous cultures and languages that were never colonized don’t have gendered language like man and woman, or gendered pronouns like he and she.

These facts stand up against everything I learned about sexuality and gender growing up and learning these new perspectives has opened my mind tremendously….

These examples may give us a sense of hope that we are already moving in the right direction, yet there is more that needs to be done… I think that real change starts with each of us as individuals choosing to reject any beliefs and teachings that encourage us to perpetuate patriarchy by judging others.

Here is a list of what liberation from patriarchy means to me…

rejecting the ingrained belief that men are superior to women
rejecting the conditioned belief that being LGBTQIAP+ is morally wrong
no longer participating in the social policing of the “man box”. For example, you’ll never hear me say, “what kind of man paints his fingernails?”, or anything like that
eliminating the use of moral judgment as a tool to police others
accepting all gender expressions and eliminating the idea that man/woman exist as a binary
ending gender roles and the social enforcement of them through shame and stigma
accepting that each individual owns their own sexuality and has the right to express it however they choose without judgment from others
walking away from religious practices that privilege men, or anyone, as moral authorities over others
collaborative governance models for businesses and governments
collaborative economies that meet the basic needs of all people

All over America and around the world, people are choosing power-with ideals and practices while rejecting power-over and control dynamics like patriarchy. We still have a long way to go on the road towards true sustainability, liberation, and unconditional love. Still, the process has long been underway.

A primary driver for patriarchy becoming so systematically ingrained in society for the past 10–12 thousand years, and one of the biggest obstacles to fully eradicating it, is religion. Next, we’ll explore how and why religion and patriarchy are connected.

Until next time,

I love yall, Peace!

Dr. Sundiata Soon-Jahta

2022. Podcast brought into written form by Ray Lightheart

___________________________________________________________________

Resources and References

Key Terms:

Patriarchy is a social system in which men hold primary power and predominate in roles of political leadership, moral authority, social privilege and control of property.

Sexism is prejudice or discrimination based on a person’s sex or gender. Sexism can affect anyone, but it primarily affects women and girls. It has been linked to stereotypes and gender roles, and may include the belief that one sex or gender is intrinsically superior to another.

Concentric circles diagram for patriarchy: