Human societies can be described in anthropology in terms of being patriarchal, matriarchal or equiarchal (where gender is unrelated to attainment) systems. Most known societies have been defined as patriarchal by some researcher, varying in the degree that the society allows variance from the norm.
Despite the paucity of evidence for the existence of matriarchal societies and the worldwide preponderance of patriarchal ones, anthropologists have documented cases of egalitarianism, such as in Vanatinai. Such cases disprove the claim that patriarchy is universal. Furthermore, the use of discreet, dichotomous categories (such as patriarchy and matriarchy) is in decline among anthropologists today since these categories are incompatible with the overlapping and sometimes contradictory gender ideologies and gendered practices existing in many societies.
Still, the majority of the higher economic, political, industrial, financial, religious, and social positions of the world today are held by men. There are no known exceptions to this rule recognized by the American Anthropological Association. Anthropologist Donald Brown has claimed patriarchy to be a "human universal" (Brown 1991, p. 137), which includes characteristics such as age gradation, personal hygiene, aesthetics, food sharing, rape, and other sociological aspects, claiming that patriarchy is innate to the human condition.
All advanced industrial societies are variations of patriarchy. In countries such as Saudi Arabia, patriarchy is distinctly visible, and in the European nations patriarchy remains the underlying social structure in spite of some changes creating wider possibilities for both women and men. In both cultures, men still dominate public life. In Marxist cultures, there has also been an attempt to create an impression of egalitarian organizations based on gender equality.
In China, for example, the National People's Congress consists of an equal number of men and women. There are, however, no women within the ruling Politburo of the Communist Party of China. Prior to its dissolution, the Soviet Union's Congress of People's Deputies likewise consisted, by law, of equal numbers of men and women. However, the successor Russian Duma, which unlike the predecessor Congress actually has power and is not a rubber-stamp organization, presently has only 35 woman deputies among the 450 members.
Several researchers outside the field of anthropology have accepted the absence of matriarchy within history. However, others outside anthropology have speculated, contra anthropological consensus, that six thousand years ago (4000 B.C.E.), that the notion of fatherhood was "invented" making possible the "spread" of patriarchy.Feminist writers have also supported the analysis of ancient societies as patriarchal.
Already in 3100 B.C.E. of Ancient Near East, some scholars see evidence of sexual domination on women, a restriction on their reproductive capacity, and their exclusion from "the process of representing the construction of history". With the appearance of the Hebrew cult, there is also "the exclusion of woman from the God-humanity covenant".
Neo-Marxist scholars have argued that the global emergence of patriarchy as a seemingly hegemonic pattern of social organization is a function of the capitalist mode of production, while structuralists have attributed it to a universal tendency for societies to organize themselves around a binary of nature/culture that is mirrored in an opposition between female and male, the former being subjugated to the latter as nature is thought to be subjugated to culture. However, this structuralist position has been revised, as evidence against the universality of gender inequality has surfaced.
The worldwide preponderance of patriarchy is also often linked, among the others mentioned above, with the Kurgan hypothesis, by now widely accepted among scholars. At present, however, the historical reconstruction of this phenomenon remains contested among scholars.
This appendix provides one table and one list. The table shows all patriarchal societies that have been alleged at one time or another to be matriarchal. The list gives, where available, quotes from the anthropologists who originally studied them (ethnographers). In nearly every case it is clear from what the women and men who studied them report, that the societies were patriarchal not matriarchal, even before changes brought by contact with western culture. What some of the societies do typify, however, is matrilinearity or matrilocality, not matriarchy, because of clear features of male dominance. This is the evidence that verifies the statements made by Encyclopaedia Britannica, Margaret Mead, Cynthia Eller and Steven Goldberg elsewhere in this article, and has been mainly located using their bibliographies. There are a lot of cultural groups in this appendix. No bias is intended against the more than 1,000 uncontroversially patriarchal cultural groups, nor against the few matrilocal or matrilineal cultural groups not mentioned here.
| Autonym | Continent | Country | Marriage | Property | Government | Ethnographer | Date | F/M |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Alor | Asia | Indonesia | patriarchy | Cora du Bois | 1944 | female | ||
| Bamenda | Africa | Cameroon | patrilocal | only Kom matrilineal | patriarchy | Phyllis Kaberry | 1952 | female |
| Bantoc | Asia | Philippines | patriarchy | Albert S Bacadayan | 1974 | male | ||
| Batek | Asia | Malaysia | patrilocal | patriarchy | Kirk Michael Endicott | 1974 | male | |
| Boyowan | Australasia | Papua New Guinea | patrilocal | matrilineal | patriarchy | Bronisław Malinowski | 1916 | male |
| Bribri | North America | Costa Rica | matrilocal | matrilineal | patriarchy | William Moore Grabb | 1875 | male |
| Çatalhöyük | Asia | Turkey | na | na | na | James Mellaart | 1961 | male |
| Chambri | Australasia | Papua New Guinea | patriarchy | Margaret Mead | 1935 | female | ||
| Filipino | Asia | Philippines | patriarchy | Chester L Hunt | 1959 | male | ||
| Gahuku-Gama | Australasia | Papua New Guinea | patriarchy | Shirley Glasse (Lindenbaum) | 1963 | female | ||
| Hopi | North America | United States of America | matrilocal | both | patriarchy | Barbara Freire-Marreco | 1914 | female |
| Iban | Asia | Borneo | both | neither | patriarchy | Edwin H Gomes | 1911 | male |
| Imazighen | Africa | North Sahara | patriarchy | George Peter Murdock | 1959 | male | ||
| Iroqois | North America | North East North America | matrilocal | matrilineal | patriarchy | Lewis Henry Morgan | 1901 | male |
| Jivaro | South America | West Amazon | patriarchy | R Karstan | 1926 | male | ||
| Kenuzi | Africa | Sudan | patriarchy | Ernest Godard | 1867 | male | ||
| Kibutzim | Asia | Israel | neither | neither | patriarchy | Judith Buber Agassi | 1989 | female |
| !Kung San | Africa | Southern Africa | patriarchy | Marjorie Shostak | 1976 | female | ||
| Maliku | Asia | India | separate | matrilineal | patriarchy | Ellen Kattner | 1996 | female |
| Minangkabau | Asia | Indonesia | both | patriarchy | PJ Veth | 1882 | male | |
| Naxi | Asia | China | only Mosuo separate | only Mosuo matrilineal | patriarchy | Joseph Francis Charles Rock | 1924 | male |
| Nayar | Asia | India | patriarchy | E Kathleen Gough | 1954 | female | ||
| Tlingit | North America | United States of America | matrilocal | matrilineal | patriarchy | Aurel Krause | 1885 | male |
| Wemale | Southeast Asia | Indonesia | patriarchy | Adolf E Jensen | 1939 | male | ||
| Woorani | South America | Ecuador | patriarchy | John Man | 1982 | male | ||
| Yegali | Africa | Madagascar | na | na | na | na | na | na |
Psychological Bulletin 2002, Vol. 128, No. 5, 699–727