Book Review: Walby, Sylvia. Theorizing patriarchy. Basil Blackwell, 1990.

The rapidly changing modes of economic production and social norms make the theoretical categories obsolete after same time. Various school of thoughts generate some kind of framework to study the social reality. The generated frameworks generally make some assumptions about the social reality. Sylvia Walby in the book “Theorizing Patriarchy” finds that different feminist schools of thought are not able to show contemporary reality of the society. So, she tries to find out the problems in the dominant schools of feminist thoughts. She has divided the book into eight chapters and in the first chapter “Introduction” lays out the problems of contemporary women and the explanations given by various theories. She finds four different theoretical perspectives in feminist thoughts--  Radical feminism, Marxist Feminism, Liberal Feminism and Dual-Systems Theory. In all the chapters, she discusses the arguments posed by these schools of thoughts and the counter arguments to show problems in these theory to understand the system of patriarchy. However, Her main focus is on changing forms of patriarchy from 19th Century to 20th century which she termed as transformations from private patriarchy to public patriarchy.

Radical feminism is distinguished by its analysis of gender inequality in which the system of patriarchy allows men to dominate over women and this system of patriarchy is not the product of capitalism. Every personal aspects of life is seen as part of this, as the slogan 'the personal is political' indicates (3). She criticises this approach for 'false universalism' which cannot understand historical changes and take sufficient account of divisions between women based on the category of ethnicity and race. In this approach, sexuality is seen as a major site of male domination over women and heterosexuality is socially institutionalised in contemporary society and 'organizes many other aspects of gender relations'(3). Marxist feminist analysis differs from that of radical feminism especially in considering relationship between gender inequality and capitalism and it says that gender equality derives from capitalist mode of economic production and it should not be constituted as 'an independent system of patriarchy'(4). So, domination of male over women is the by-product of capital's domination of labour. The main criticism of this school is that it is not able to explain the exploitation of women in non-capitalist society. Liberalism sees women's exploitation as the summation of numerous small-scale deprivations. There are two main foci of analysis in this approach first is denial of equal rights to women in education and in employment, which is due to prejudice against women and the second related theme is of sexist attitudes which acts to sustain the situation. It is criticized for its failure to deal with the deep root of gender inequality and the interconnections between its different forms (5). Also, it does not provide the explanation of how gender inequalities first developed. The Dual-Systems approach which bases the system of exploitation on the basis of dual concepts of capitalism and patriarchy. She criticizes Hartman for underestimating the amount of tension between capitalism and patriarchy and failing to take account of aspects of patriarchy such as violence and sexuality (6).

The concept of patriarchy is central in the analysis of Walby and she says that it should be central aspect in the feminist understanding of society. She says that '“Patriarchy” is indispensable for an analysis of gender inequality'(20). However, she provides a very novel definition of Patriarchy and argues that there are six patriarchal structure which restrict women and provides male domination in the society. These are paid work, patriarchal relations within the household, patriarchal culture, sexuality, male violence towards women, and the state. These patriarchal structures are independent from one another but also they can affect one another, reinforcing or weakening patriarchy in different structures (20). Each structure is reproduced or changed by the actions of men and women but the existence of these structures also restricts the choices that humans, particularly women, can make. She also distances from radical feminism's notion of fixity of patriarchy and says that its 'strength and forms changes over time' (22). She cites the example of Britain and says that it has highest rate of divorce in Europe and also the joint lowest percentage of women elected to Parliament of any European country except Greece. So, she sees a shift from private patriarchy to public patriarchy. Further, she discusses the way patriarchy, capitalism and racism interact and the relationship between men and women is not the only source of inequality and women are divided on the basis of ethnicity and class(24).

In the second chapter Paid Employment, she shows how paid employment has been and is creating disadvantages for women. The three main empirical features of gender relations in employment i..e. less earning of women in comparison to men, less engagement of women in paid labour than men and different jobs for women are the main concerns for her in this chapter. The regulations of 19th Century Britain excluded women from whole areas of work altogether and male dominated trade-unions and the state ensured that women's opportunity were severely restricted. In 20th century, women were able to take employment but not equal terms that of men. In contemporary times, the wage differentials between men and women has reduced very slightly and women continue to dominate in 'informal sectors' and part time jobs. However, the state pursued policies of equal opportunities for men and women but in practice these are not implemented. In her analysis, labour market has more influence than family in the decision making of women to take or not to take employment(35). Basically, it is the restrictions posed on women in labour market which make women to decide not to seek paid employment. Whenever opportunities have been provided to women in labour market, they have taken advantage of that like in World War II when restrictions were lifted from married women in labour market, the number of women employment increased (51). Feminist struggles and capitalism's demand for cheap labour have created a big increase in women's employment but have failed to prevent exploitation at work (38). “The combined result of capitalist forces and feminist struggles have been primarily responsible for the change from private towards public patriarchal exploitation of women's labour”(59).

In the third chapter, Household Production, she discusses about the importance attached to the social institution of family and household in everyday discourse and posits a critical argument where she finds it is not as important as it is being projected. The family is seen as a pillar of stability and as fundamental to social order in both Marxist feminist thought and Parsonian functionalism. But, individual men directly exploit women by gaining benefits from household works of women. In the 19th century, women were forced into patriarchal relations of production through their exclusion from labour market. In the next century, some women entered the labour market and exploitation within the structure of household reduced. Also, the relaxation in divorce law means that women 'are no longer necessarily bound to an individual husband who expropriates their labour till death does apart”(63). However, Black feminism finds family can be “a site of resistance to racism”, and life within family the family may be less exploitative for black women than life in the labour market where they tend to receive the least desirable jobs(76). However, Walby does not find the contemporary developments is causing disappearance of exploitation of women in the household. The quantity of time spent in the domestic work by women is same of earlier times. Single mother are disadvantaged in a 'patriarchally structured labour market' (81). There have been no such establishment of conditions in the labour market where women can 'liberate' themselves from household production system and find an alternative opportunity. Therefore, some women continue to allow themselves exploited by their husbands. The oppression which exists in the domain of family is sometimes manifested in sexuality and violence.

In the fourth chapter, Culture, she finds that western culture has distinguished between men and women and has expected different kinds of behaviour from them. She says that 'while variable across class, ethnicity, and age in particular, femininity is consistently differentiated from masculinity over the last century and a half'(108). However, although the differentiation has remained strong, the characteristics which are seen as making a women feminine has changed significantly over time. In 19th century, domestic activities were the sign of femininity and now sexual attractiveness to men has become the notion of femininity and it is not younger women whose femininity is connoted in this way but even the femininity of older women. However, sexual attractiveness was important in Victorian times but less important than today. It was also 'relatively undercover' compared to contemporary culture. The women's escapement from domestic activities have created greater freedom for them but the new emphasis on sexuality through modern means like sexuality has, again, threatened the freedom of women. To Walby, 'the male gaze, not that of women, is the viewpoint of pornography', and pornography encourages the degradation of women by men and sometimes promotes sexual violence(98).

The patriarchal structure of society has constituted heterosexuality as the accepted norm of society. However, the nature of this has undergone some changes. Sexuality, the fifth chapter of the book sees how Patriarchal structure has constituted heterosexuality and changes in it. In the 19th century, Women's sexuality was subject to strict control and was largely confined by a 'plethora of practices' to sex within marriage. Therefore, women's sexuality has to be directed towards one patriarchal agent for lifetime, although the result was to reduce women's 'sexual interest in anything including marriage'(124). In the 20th century, it became easy for women to become sexually active and improved contraception reduced the risk of unwanted pregnancy, and the increasing availability of divorce created the possibility of exchanging 'an inadequate husband for a new one'. She refers to a study of Lawson and Sampson conducted in 1988 which found that in comparison to women married in 1960s, the women's of 1970s were less 'faithful' in the first ten years of their marriage. Women were not the passive victims of patriarchal sexuality rather they fight for sexual freedom in campaigning for birth control, abortion and easier divorce, but sexual liberalisation has not worked in their favour in every respect. She says that the sexual double standard is still alive and well. Young women who are sexually active are condemned by males as 'slags' and those who are not seen as 'drags'(127). On the other hands, males with many sexual conquests are admired for their supposed virility.

In the sixth chapter, violence,Walby starts with male violence against women including rape, sexual assault, wife beating, workplace sexual harassment and child sexual abuse(128). The instrument of violence discourages women to challenge patriarchy and violence is being manifested in these crimes against women. She says it is very difficult to compare earlier times with contemporary times due to lack of evidence and it is inconclusive that violence against women has increased or decreased over time. However, it is possible to detect change in the responses of women towards male violence. The state and the police are now more proactive to act against worst offenders. However, in domestic sphere, violence against women are neglected and crime against women in domestic sphere is still frequent and punishment of husband is infrequent.

In the seventh chapter, State, she first defines state as the conglomeration of social institutions, which has monopoly over legitimate violence and coercion. The policies of state related to gender have changed over time but 'the state is still patriarchal as well as capitalist and racist'. State policies are no longer directed at confining women to the private sphere of the home, yet there have been little real attempt to improve women's position in the public sphere. Women still receive lower wages as compared to men and legislations related to equality of opportunities are not enforced properly. Single mother households receive little state benefits and the greater availability of pornography in public sphere has harmed women more. While, with the change in time frame, state has not remain as patriarchal as it used to be but it has done very slight changes in the legal and political system to protect women from patriarchal power in society.

In the last chapter, From Private to Public Patriarchy, she analyses the notion of 'progress'. In each of the structures of Patriarchy, Walby recognizes that important changes have taken place in every aspects of gender relations. Liberal feminists see this as progress. Radical feminists find a little change and argues that patriarchal dominations remains firmly intact. Marxist Feminists finds that rapid industrialisation and the advent of capitalism led to deterioration in the position of women and since the industrial revolution little has improved. She rejects all these views and says that there is a change in the nature of patriarchy. The different aspects of patriarchy are interrelated and together they produce a system and it is this system of patriarchy which has changed. She finds a transformation from 19th century's predominantly 'private patriarchy' to 20th century's 'public patriarchy'. In private patriarchy, it is 'the man in his position as husband or father who is the direct oppressor and beneficiary, individually and directly, of the subordination of women'(178). So, women's entry to public sphere is blocked by patriarch and it is the main cause for their oppression in those societies. It does not mean that household structure is the only site of domination of the system of patriarchy but without the domination in this sphere, women cannot be excluded from other spheres. During the first wave of feminism, between 1850 and 1930, women in the USA and Britain campaigned for much more than just voting rights and this took place in the background of expanding capitalists enterprises and these enterprises needed a larger workforce. So, a compromise was reached and women were given entry into workforce by male dominated trade-unions. So, now women found a place in the system of industrial workforce and there emerged a new public form of patriarchy(185). So, capital's demand for labour created public patriarchy.

Public patriarchy 'is a form in which women have access to both public and private arenas. They are not barred from the public arenas, but are nonetheless subordinated within them'. Basically, the entry of women into public sphere was not done on equal terms with men. In the public sphere, women tend to be segregated into certain jobs which are lower paid and are given a lower status than men's jobs. The state and employment becomes the dominant structure of patriarchy but the other structures remains important. Women are no longer exploited so much by individual patriarchs but instead are exploited collectively by men in general through their subordination in public arenas. As Walby writes “Women are no longer restricted to the domestic hearth, but have the whole society in which to roam and to be exploited'.

Therefore, Walby proves her point that the system of patriarchy has undergone changes in the history of mankind and it is not static system as devised by radical feminists. So, it came as the first step towards reconceptualising patriarchy and revise the conceptual failures in the system of oppression of women. However, the book has mostly examples and empirical data from Britain and USA but she gives the method by which one can use it in other countries. Her focus is mainly on state and capitalist system in the discussion of contemporary system of public patriarchy. She finds that in some countries state is playing important role to establish the structure of patriarchy and at some place, it is the labour which has decisive role in the perpetuation of system of patriarchy. However, her discussion seemed to centered on the site of patriarchal domination and the lived subordination of women but she does not discuss clearly that how it can be distinguished from the analytical system from which it is emerging.Also, when she discusses about the division of women on the basis of ethnicity and class and how race is one of the condition where private system of patriarchy might be beneficial then the emerged public patriarchy but she does not elaborate that race is one of the mediating factor or the mediating factor between system of patriarchy and women.