Not your mother's patriarchy? Reflections on the rise,fall,and unexpected return of a feminist keyword

Abstract

The 2016 election of Donald Trump to the US presidency breathed new life into a rhetorical relic of the feminist past: the term ‘patriarchy.’ Still, as relevant as the concept of patriarchy remains, the revival of this onetime radical feminist rallying cry hardly was foretold. Radical feminism has not fared well in the popular imagination, indelibly linked (among conservatives) to man-hating, and (among progressives) to transexclusionary politics. And while developments like the repeal of the settled right to abortion indicate that an unrelenting anti-feminist backlash has accomplished the seemingly impossible in turning back time, it hardly follows that feminists, too, should reach into the past in response. Accounting for the use of the term ‘patriarchy’ in the present requires understanding why it lost currency among feminists in the first place. This article argues that the term did not survive the intersectional turn in feminist studies—and for good reason. Reviving the term today risks repeating errors of the past, or worse, satisfying a nostalgic yearning for a time before the intersectional imperative. Abandoning the term carries its own dangers in enabling postfeminist denial of structural sexism. The article concludes with the hope that renewed interest in the term ‘patriarchy’ will provide a model of sorely needed intergenerational solidarity.