[Gurdur]

Then there is the oft-repeated catchphrase of "patriarchy". I want to suggest here it is a major mistake to confuse patriarchy with sexism overall, and an extremely bad mistake to think that sexism equals patriarchy, and I'll also suggest that patriarchy is by and large no longer in power in much of western Europe.

Where I do see patriarchy in power, sometimes it is only still in power because women support it. For example, in the USA, the office of President (POTUS) has become so invested by the voting public with an incredible load of expectations that it is a very difficult office to fulfill satisfatorily, and given the long-term political breakdown in Congress, much of the POTUS office is rather handicapped. The POTUS is now expected by the voting public to be and behave like a kind of ceremonial king for 4 or 8 years, and there is a very strong patriarchal flavour to the modern POTUS office -- but because women among others seem to want it that way. Women form a very large part of the electorate, sometimes actually the majority of the electorate, and election after election show women usually voting more conservatively than men, and preferring male candidates to female candidates.

Despite the usual allegations of patriarchy in operation as a power mechanism in society, males really don't bond all that well much, and the era of the Old Boys' clubs in politics is effectively a thing of the distant past for the most part in national politics in the USA or Britain. The good ol' boys' networks may still rule in much of USA states' politics or on a more local level in Britain, but nationally, they don't. So one question that really has to be answered is why women often prefer to vote for male candidates rather than female candidates? The most usual answer you get to this question is some variant of the "false consciousness" view, that at bottom women have been browbeaten, blackmailed or bullied into only supporting male candidates, but I don't think I buy that view for a lot of things anymore.