men involved with domestic violence

[Schadrach]

snip

One of the rare cases where AVfM actually makes a valid point, it gives a demonstration of how research gets twisted aroun to show what the underlying ideology of the researchers wants it to, without anyone technically lying.

http://www.avoiceformen.com/men/boys/misandry-in-psychology-teen-violence/

Straus (the same Straus who along with Steinmetz and Gelles seriously injured their careers by coming to the conclusion that men are victims of domestic violence, too) actually categorized the most common techniques used into 7 general methods by which male victims and female perpetrators of domestic violence are minimized in research [footnote]http://pubpages.unh.edu/~mas2/V74-gender-symmetry-with-gramham-Kevan-Method%208-.pdf[/footnote], including things like simply not asking questions you might not like the answer to, concluding that evidence supports your belief whether or not there's anything to back it, only citing sources that support a specific ideological goal, and of course

Spoiler: creating evidence by citation

 

[WeepingAngels]

If you understand what patriarchy is, you would understand that is a prime example of the consequences of it.

A catch all word that has no real meaning?

That's more or less my take on the useless theoretical concept. I was once told by a woman in a store who asked for my help that she did so because I looked like I knew what I was doing. Patriarchy. I once assisted a woman install new wiper blades in her car outside a store because she was obviously having trouble figuring it out on her own. Patriarchy. I was told that long hair on a guy was a turn off. Patriarchy. I read a brief article yesterday about how Bike Helmet laws were sexist because they created bad hair days for women. Patriarchy. Me typing this nonsense(although all true) with haughty derision? Patriarchy. My denial of Patriarchy? Patriarchy.

You can't dismantle something that doesn't exist.

Patriarchy is the feminist scapegoat. When men could defend themselves against a violent women, that was patriarchy at work and now that men can't defend themselves without running the risk of being arrested under DV Laws, that's patriarchy too.

 

[generals3]

Because he's not supposed to need to.

The patriarchy wasn't developed by a bunch of guys sitting down to make society better for themselves, it's a set of attitudes and beliefs that came about over centuries, based on the idea of male superiority.

Being (supposedly) inherently inferior, women aren't supposed to be able to threaten men. Men can't defend themselves, because a "real" man has nothing to defend himself against.

That this completely fails to reflect the reality of the situation is one of the problems with the patriarchy.

A patriarchy is a system not a set of beliefs. There is a difference between stereotyping or holding preconceived ideas and there being a "patriarchy". And the fact this word is being so enormously misused is blatantly harmful. It is creating a false image that a patriarchy and certain beliefs/ideas are inseparable.

And ever since ancient history it is well know women can threaten men. Actually i don't think there has ever been a time when people believed they cannot. Although the means tend to be less physical. (like poisoning)

And weren't blacks one time considered inherently inferior? Yet i doubt white people who would have been abused by them would be looked down upon. You're trying to oversimplify these social interactions way too much.

 

[PeterMerkin69]

You want to fix that sentence? I know dozens of women who are just as strong if not stronger than the average male. I also know a bucket load of females who may not be stronger than men - but they are highly trained in martial arts and could kick most guys' ass.

Technically, you can't "know" comic book characters because they aren't real. Highly trained in martial arts... lol.

This primitive belief that if you are stronger than someone then you aren't a victim is fucking deplorable. It's such ridiculous logic that is somehow accepted by people like you. Try to apply your logic to other crimes.

It is true for all crimes wherein the "victims" allow themselves to be victimized. Just because something is arbitrarily defined as illegal doesn't mean the person it happens to didn't have a hand in it or couldn't have reasonably prevented it.

Legally speaking, you're totally fucking wrong. If someone reported that and the police got enough evidence to prove it happened and the victim pressed charges then action would have been taken. Restraining orders, AVOs and even punishments could and would be given out to the abuser.

You do realize that everything you just said could just as easily be applied to women as well, right?

Because grabbing someone, shoving them and yelling at them is totally okay!

It's really not that big of a deal, all things considered.

Maybe he can't get a job and that's why he's reliant on her? Some people can't go home, y'know. Some people were forced to leave in the first place.
Anything she did to him in the video was the exact equivalent of what he did to her. You saw how people reacted to him doing it to her, so why is it any different that she does the same to him?

We can make all the milquetoast excuses we want for this guy who, by now, has got to be the most ineffectual human being I have ever heard of, but at the end of the day, it's easier for men to get away from their abusers, to support themselves, or, at the very least, to defend themselves. And it's far lower risk that they'll be slain by their partners if they do.

Over half (52%) of female victims aged 16 or over had been killed by their partner...In contrast, only five per cent of male victims aged 16 or over were killed by their partner, ex-partner or lover in 2010/11

It is never the victim's fault.

This simply isn't true. We don't live in the world that should be, we live in the world that is, and when you have the option to extricate yourself from an abusive relationship but elect not to do so for reasons of vanity, or greed, or neurosis, you have no one but yourself to blame.

 

[Thaluikhain]

A patriarchy is a system not a set of beliefs.

One does not occur without the other. Social systems do not just appear out of nowhere, the form they take depends on, amongst other things, the beliefs of that society.

It is creating a false image that a patriarchy and certain beliefs/ideas are inseparable.

They are. You cannot have a male dominated society without viewing males as superior, and vice versa.

And the fact this word is being so enormously misused is blatantly harmful.

Define "misused". Yes, the word is used by feminists to mean something somewhat different than the original meaning of the word, but that is not to say that that is somehow wrong or harmful.

And ever since ancient history it is well know women can threaten men. Actually i don't think there has ever been a time when people believed they cannot. Although the means tend to be less physical. (like poisoning)

Certainly, I am referring to physical violence.

And weren't blacks one time considered inherently inferior? Yet i doubt white people who would have been abused by them would be looked down upon.

Because, as everyone knows, black people were/are considered inferior in a different way than women are. Which leads to various stereotypes about black women, but that's another issue.

 

[thestarlord]

ive just got out of a abusive relationship with my soon to be ex-wife. its not a easy thing to do. making the first step away is always the hardest. but once you make that step in the right direction it starts to get easier.
not straight way of course but over time.
As for the fact that the victim feels like its their fault that's a strange one. In my mind I always knew that It wasn't my fault but there is always a part of you doubting that. Telling you that you did something wrong. Its not rational but its there.
And because its there you will think that.
The charities out there are a big help. But you still need to make the step towards them and give them a call.
Its not a easy situation.
And anyone who thinks that a man being hit by a woman is weak isn't the case.

 

[Something Amyss]

Yes, the "other side." Because we need Fox News, forced "fair and balanced" reporting!

Domestic violence can happen to anyone.

To raise awareness for a particular kind of violence seems silly to me. Like raising money to cure breast cancer. Just raise money to cure cancer.

Of course, different cancers require different research and different treatment, which is actually sort of a perfect analogy as to why saying "violence is violence" is also inane. Women and men tend to become victims for different reasons, and so different issues need to be treated. Saying "violence is bad, mmmkay?" and taking a unilateral approach to it is like saying "cancer is bad, mmmkay?" and taking a unified approach. And when you have to approach, detect, and treat cancers differently, it's really "silly" to treat them all the same--especially when some are less detectable and far more lethal (woman are far more likely to be killed by their domestic partner than men are, to continue the analogy).

Granted, we're comparing one issue that's mostly biological to one that's mostly social in nature, but in both cases, a one size fits all" approach doesn't really work.

A women of around 50kg gets attacked by a much stronger man, lets say around 80kg. He has one hand at her throat and forces one hand down her pants. If she than executes the technique(I will describe it in a bit) fast and with all her might she will most likely do serious damage to his eye before he can stop her.

Remember when you said:

I know this is sort of insensitive and/or ignorant, but its still stuck in my brain.

It still kind of applies. Under optimum conditions, someone giving up 30 kilos to another person (gender really doesn't matter here, I'm just gonna say) can do significant damage. Fights often aren't optimal, especially if you're not expecting them. And let's be frank here, putting your hand around someone's throat is something to be concerned about. again, regardless of sex.

I'm very glad to see this double-standard come to light, as a guy, because abuse victims, of either gender, need a support group to help them recoup.

You mean this false "double standard" that people have been "bringing to light" for decades.

 

[generals3]

One does not occur without the other. Social systems do not just appear out of nowhere, the form they take depends on, amongst other things, the beliefs of that society.

Correct, they don't appear out of nowhere but neither is it as simple as saying "If A exists than B will occur and if B occurs than A must exist". A bomb and an explosion have quite a link but a bomb doesn't always lead to an explosion neither does an explosion mean a bomb must have been involved. And it's exactly the same here.

The current reality proves that beyond a shred of doubt. We do NOT have any semblance of a patriarchy left yet certain attitudes commonly linked with a patriarchal system still persist. We have an explosion which wasn't caused by a bomb.

They are. You cannot have a male dominated society without viewing males as superior, and vice versa.

Wrong. Egyptian society viewed women as equal but role wise it was quite close to a stereotypical patriarchy with men usually holding the power and being the ones doing the physical tasks.

Define "misused". Yes, the word is used by feminists to mean something somewhat different than the original meaning of the word, but that is not to say that that is somehow wrong or harmful.

It is harmful and wrong because it twists reality. And calling for activism against something that is simply not real cannot lead to any good (unless by pure chance, but based on the current state of affairs we don't have this "chance").

Because, as everyone knows, black people were/are considered inferior in a different way than women are. Which leads to various stereotypes about black women, but that's another issue.

You're the one who used the generic "inferior" term. Actually something that also needs to stop. Saying women were seen as "inferior" is not true. Yes they were seen as inferior in certain aspects but so many men scarified their lives to protect them throughout history, they couldn't have been seen as simply "inferior". Humans tend to look down upon inferior beings, and we most definitely don't tend to put our lives on the line for such beings.

 

[Thaluikhain]

The current reality proves that beyond a shred of doubt. We do NOT have any semblance of a patriarchy left yet certain attitudes commonly linked with a patriarchal system still persist. We have an explosion which wasn't caused by a bomb.

Your reality, perhaps, not necessarily everyone else's. The patriarchy is very much a real thing that affects people across the globe. You can choose not to pay attention to it, but you can't expect everyone else to ignore it.

Wrong. Egyptian society viewed women as equal but role wise it was quite close to a stereotypical patriarchy with men usually holding the power and being the ones doing the physical tasks.

In which case it wasn't equal. You can have equality, or you can view one group as superior at doing various things. You simply cannot have both. It might be more equal than other, similar systems, certainly, but you can't have equality unless all groups are viewed as equals.

 

[Chris Tian]

A women of around 50kg gets attacked by a much stronger man, lets say around 80kg. He has one hand at her throat and forces one hand down her pants. If she than executes the technique(I will describe it in a bit) fast and with all her might she will most likely do serious damage to his eye before he can stop her.

Remember when you said:

I know this is sort of insensitive and/or ignorant, but its still stuck in my brain.

It still kind of applies. Under optimum conditions, someone giving up 30 kilos to another person (gender really doesn't matter here, I'm just gonna say) can do significant damage. Fights often aren't optimal, especially if you're not expecting them. And let's be frank here, putting your hand around someone's throat is something to be concerned about. again, regardless of sex.

I'm not entirely sure what you are saying. That I shouldn't have made the gender destinction in my scenario?

The technique described is a situational follow-up thats why I specified that it is the second I teach, but scenarios like the one described, in which the attackers hands are tied with sort of control grabs, are more common for female victims. The frontal choke with one hand is actually very ineffective and not something you have to get rid of immideatly, it leaves you quite alot of time befor it threatens your oxygen level in the brain.

 

[generals3]

Your reality, perhaps, not necessarily everyone else's. The patriarchy is very much a real thing that affects people across the globe. You can choose not to pay attention to it, but you can't expect everyone else to ignore it.

In the world there are places. But I specifically mentioned "in the western world" in the beginning of this discussion. Now granted things do differ among countries a bit so it may still have been quite an overstatement. But generally speaking in the western world you'll either have no patriarchy or sad excuses of patriarchies that aren't even remotely close to actual full fledged patriarchies.

And seeing how we often discuss activism and actions undertaken in said countries i don't see how what happens in let's say Pakistan is of any relevance. I welcome you or anyone else to go fight for women's right there and complain about the patriarchy there. (I myself also find those systems quite appalling)

In which case it wasn't equal. You can have equality, or you can view one group as superior at doing various things. You simply cannot have both. It might be more equal than other, similar systems, certainly, but you can't have equality unless all groups are viewed as equals.

The point was that they were valued equally, they weren't seen as being "inferior". Off course it is possible to be valued equally but considered to be better or worse at certain things.

Because that is absolutely a patriarchal attitude (for reasons that have already been mentioned, regarding men being "tainted" with associations of lesser, womanly behavior), and because domestic violence is only one small aspect of patriarchy that takes place alongside lower economic power, uneven societal pressures regarding sex and modesty, rape culture, and the continuing political influence of (often religious, but not always) organizations that are outright anti-woman.

You need to recognize the source if you want to enact a working solution.

I seem to have overlooked your post. And no it's not a patriarchal behavior at all. A patriarchy is a system in which men dominate over women. People who are underlings are rarely allowed to fight against their "superiors" and consequently this kind of event wouldn't happen. In a patriarchy a man would probably be allowed to use disproportionate violence against his partner to assert his dominance. I have yet to hear about a society were the "superior" class is not even allowed to defend themselves against the lower ones. So saying men not being allowed to defend themselves against women is "patriarchal" is quite absurd, in a patriarchy it would be women who wouldn't be allowed to defend themselves.

And those other things are not necessarily patriarchal either. Take sex for instance, what's patriarchal about that? What's patriarchal about men being shamed for not having enough sex and women for having too much? Trying to frame every single inequality under "patriarchy" is quite questionable. (And I also think that the whole "rape culture" thing is extremely overblown). And there are political influences which try to push for anti women things, but so what? You have anti-semitic political influences, anti-rich political influences, etc. That doesn't mean the system in its entirety is anti anything.

So yeah, we do indeed need to recognize the source to find a solution. Which is why i consider this whole patriarchy debacle to be harmful.

 

[Anti Nudist Cupcake]

Domestic violence can happen to anyone.

To raise awareness for a particular kind of violence seems silly to me. Like raising money to cure breast cancer. Just raise money to cure cancer.

I thought you can't cure all cancers with the same treatment anymore than you can cure all the other diseases out there with one magic potion. Different cancers react to different stimulus. Appropriating funds to cure cancer in general would mean spreading those funds really thin over all the different types of cancer researches. It is more effective to simply focus on one area of research.

 

[BloatedGuppy]

A patriarchy is a system in which men dominate over women.

Eh. That's a robust over-simplification.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patriarchy

There tends to be a propensity in these "gender" discussions to straw man "Patriarchy" as a shadowy cabal of elderly white men, gathered in a musty boardroom, twirling their monocles whilst plotting the downfall of women. It's just a systemic social attitude that celebrates, promotes, and rewards hypothetically "male" or testosterone driven virtues, such as aggression and competition. It's a mode of existence that can be seen as harmful to both genders...by denying women access to areas where power and cultural influence gathers, and by boxing men into a limiting, juvenile and potentially dangerous expression of "masculinity". Why is it okay for women to smack men around? "Patriarchy". Why are male rape victims derided or disbelieved? "Patriarchy". Why is the mother automatically assumed to be the effective child-rearer? "Patriarchy".

Instead of dismissing it as a "feminist buzzword" and thus, for some stupid reason, harmful to men or areas of male interest (presumably because they have tits and are out to get us), we could stop and consider how many of the same social dynamics women complain about are equally damaging to us. It's a HUMAN problem.

 

[DevilWithaHalo]

Trying to frame every single inequality under "patriarchy" is quite questionable.

But that's the beauty of the theory; you can blame anything and everything on it!

To many women getting custody of their kids? Patriarchy, because Patriarchy supports the sexist notion that women are better care givers then men.
To many men getting custody of their kids? Patriarchy, because Patriarchy wants men to have full dominance over their families.
Men can sit anywhere they like? Patriarchy, because in Patriarchy men dominate every space they exist in.
Men can't sit next to kids on airplanes? Patriarchy, because Patriarchy supports Rape Culture!
Men's problems not being taken seriously? Patriarchy, because in a Patriarchy you have to man up.
Women's problems not being take seriously? Patriarchy, because Patriarchy doesn't care about women.
Fluid dynamics a hard nut to crack? Patriarchy, because Patriarchy frames science in the eyes of men's rigidity.
Rockets look like dicks? Patriarchy, because Patriarchy wants everything to look like a dick.
Gender segregated sports? Patriarchy, because Patriarchy claims men are stronger than women.
Believe in Patriarchy? Patriarchy, because Patriarchy is obvious like that.
Don't believe in Patriarchy? Patriarchy, because Patriarchy is unseen like that.

Now for a real challenge... got a flat tire? Patriarchy... because Patriarchy called it a "jack", which is obviously sexist because it infers "males" in the repair of the problem, which is a hole in the tire and women are synonymous with holes, and women aren't taught how to change tires because Patriarchy doesn't want women to be self sufficient. It's also a trap that predators use to lure women out of their cars which supports Rape culture.

Bam! Nailed it! Come on; give me another!

 

[BloatedGuppy]

But that's the beauty of the theory; you can blame anything and everything on it!

To many women getting custody of their kids? Patriarchy, because Patriarchy supports the sexist notion that women are better care givers then men.
To many men getting custody of their kids? Patriarchy, because Patriarchy wants men to have full dominance over their families.
Men can sit anywhere they like? Patriarchy, because in Patriarchy men dominate every space they exist in.
Men can't sit next to kids on airplanes? Patriarchy, because Patriarchy supports Rape Culture!
Men's problems not being taken seriously? Patriarchy, because in a Patriarchy you have to man up.
Women's problems not being take seriously? Patriarchy, because Patriarchy doesn't care about women.
Fluid dynamics a hard nut to crack? Patriarchy, because Patriarchy frames science in the eyes of men's rigidity.
Rockets look like dicks? Patriarchy, because Patriarchy wants everything to look like a dick.
Gender segregated sports? Patriarchy, because Patriarchy claims men are stronger than women.
Believe in Patriarchy? Patriarchy, because Patriarchy is obvious like that.
Don't believe in Patriarchy? Patriarchy, because Patriarchy is unseen like that.

Now for a real challenge... got a flat tire? Patriarchy... because Patriarchy called it a "jack", which is obviously sexist because it infers "males" in the repair of the problem, which is a hole in the tire and women are synonymous with holes, and women aren't taught how to change tires because Patriarchy doesn't want women to be self sufficient. It's also a trap that predators use to lure women out of their cars which supports Rape culture.

Bam! Nailed it! Come on; give me another!

It's almost like culturally pervasive attitudes are culturally pervasive, and influence a lot of different areas.

It's cool though. You seem to have it figured out.

 

[Aaron Sylvester]

Trying to frame every single inequality under "patriarchy" is quite questionable.

But that's the beauty of the theory; you can blame anything and everything on it!

To many women getting custody of their kids? Patriarchy, because Patriarchy supports the sexist notion that women are better care givers then men.
To many men getting custody of their kids? Patriarchy, because Patriarchy wants men to have full dominance over their families.
Men can sit anywhere they like? Patriarchy, because in Patriarchy men dominate every space they exist in.
Men can't sit next to kids on airplanes? Patriarchy, because Patriarchy supports Rape Culture!
Men's problems not being taken seriously? Patriarchy, because in a Patriarchy you have to man up.
Women's problems not being take seriously? Patriarchy, because Patriarchy doesn't care about women.
Fluid dynamics a hard nut to crack? Patriarchy, because Patriarchy frames science in the eyes of men's rigidity.
Rockets look like dicks? Patriarchy, because Patriarchy wants everything to look like a dick.
Gender segregated sports? Patriarchy, because Patriarchy claims men are stronger than women.
Believe in Patriarchy? Patriarchy, because Patriarchy is obvious like that.
Don't believe in Patriarchy? Patriarchy, because Patriarchy is unseen like that.

Now for a real challenge... got a flat tire? Patriarchy... because Patriarchy called it a "jack", which is obviously sexist because it infers "males" in the repair of the problem, which is a hole in the tire and women are synonymous with holes, and women aren't taught how to change tires because Patriarchy doesn't want women to be self sufficient. It's also a trap that predators use to lure women out of their cars which supports Rape culture.

Bam! Nailed it! Come on; give me another!

Hahaha this is awesome. It's almost like Creationism

 

[generals3]

A patriarchy is a system in which men dominate over women.

Eh. That's a robust over-simplification.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patriarchy

There tends to be a propensity in these "gender" discussions to straw man "Patriarchy" as a shadowy cabal of elderly white men, gathered in a musty boardroom, twirling their monocles whilst plotting the downfall of women.

No. The only strawman of the patriarchy is the one that defines it in an absurdly vague manner which renders the term a rather pointless one which is just used to blame everything. A real patriarchy is a system in which men are in power. A lion pack is a patriarchy for instance. Just like a wolf pack is a matriarchy. But having certain stereotypes regarding genders is not, per se, a patriarchy.

It's just a systemic social attitude that celebrates, promotes, and rewards hypothetically "male" or testosterone driven virtues, such as aggression and competition.

That's one of the butchered definitions. And even that one is quite dubious. By that definition the Free Market ideology is patriarchal (considering it promotes competition). And aggression is hardly promoted nowadays.

It's a mode of existence that can be seen as harmful to both genders...by denying women access to areas where power and cultural influence gathers, and by boxing men into a limiting, juvenile and potentially dangerous expression of "masculinity". Why is it okay for women to smack men around? "Patriarchy". Why are male rape victims derided or disbelieved? "Patriarchy". Why is the mother automatically assumed to be the effective child-rearer? "Patriarchy".

Why is it okay for women to smack men around? Quite simply: because we're expected to suck it up. That has nothing to do with the patriarchy. And also because women are expected to be physically weaker, which is more linked to biology and how the human brain works than any sociological concept. Why are male rape victims derided? Because men are expected to be sex-driven. Which has no relation whatsoever to a patriarchy being in place or not. The last one is actually more complex. But a reason could be that women are the only ones being capable to breast feed children. So from a biological POV women clearly were meant to stay with the child early on, so this habit which persisted through millennia could very well be a remnant of an important biological fact. But I guess mother nature is patriarchal.

Instead of dismissing it as a "feminist buzzword" and thus, for some stupid reason, harmful to men or areas of male interest (presumably because they have tits and are out to get us), we could stop and consider how many of the same social dynamics women complain about are equally damaging to us. It's a HUMAN problem.

It's a human problem being addressed in a totally wrong manner which won't solve the issue at all. You can't cure a disease by using medication against the wrong illness. (unless by sheer luck)

 

[DevilWithaHalo]

It's almost like culturally pervasive attitudes are culturally pervasive, and influence a lot of different areas.

It's cool though. You seem to have it figured out.

I know right? It's like I could walk into different cultures and potentially different time periods and have different cultural attitudes and standards which apply in varying levels of adherence with the local populace on an individual level. It's like the world is this vast organism with many intricate and complex parts interacting with each other on billions of individual contexts on an hourly basis.

It's how these next sentences can be seen as grossly offensive, cheerfully endearing, or downright confusing depending on the culture you exist in...

I wonder whether or not that **** loves her pussy.
Would you mind sticking this fag in your fanny?

 

[BloatedGuppy]

I know right? It's like I could walk into different cultures and potentially different time periods and have different cultural attitudes and standards which apply in varying levels of adherence with the local populace on an individual level. It's like the world is this vast organism with many intricate and complex parts interacting with each other on billions of individual contexts on an hourly basis.

It's how these next sentences can be seen as grossly offensive, cheerfully endearing, or downright confusing depending on the culture you exist in...

I wonder whether or not that **** loves her pussy.
Would you mind sticking this fag in your fanny?

I'm curious about the nature of your behavior in this thread. Identifying that "Patriarchy" is nebulous language or that social sciences are soft sciences is not a shocking revelation to anyone, so I don't get where this "drop the mic" attitude comes from. Should we just not discuss diverse social and cultural phenomena unless they present in a measurable fashion?

It's a human problem being addressed in a most despicable way which ends up harming men. Why would i support this? Why would i team up with activism which is carried out in a way which considers men acceptable collateral damage? Either these activists don't give a shit about men or are ludicrously incompetent. In either case if I want to help men they would be the last one to team up with.

Ho ho holy cow. Okay, I uh...misjudged your stance on this issue. We don't...really...have any common grounds for discussion. We should probably just wave from a distance and carry on our separate ways. My apologies.

 

[Lil devils x_v1legacy]

Trying to frame every single inequality under "patriarchy" is quite questionable.

But that's the beauty of the theory; you can blame anything and everything on it!

To many women getting custody of their kids? Patriarchy, because Patriarchy supports the sexist notion that women are better care givers then men.
To many men getting custody of their kids? Patriarchy, because Patriarchy wants men to have full dominance over their families.
Men can sit anywhere they like? Patriarchy, because in Patriarchy men dominate every space they exist in.
Men can't sit next to kids on airplanes? Patriarchy, because Patriarchy supports Rape Culture!
Men's problems not being taken seriously? Patriarchy, because in a Patriarchy you have to man up.
Women's problems not being take seriously? Patriarchy, because Patriarchy doesn't care about women.
Fluid dynamics a hard nut to crack? Patriarchy, because Patriarchy frames science in the eyes of men's rigidity.
Rockets look like dicks? Patriarchy, because Patriarchy wants everything to look like a dick.
Gender segregated sports? Patriarchy, because Patriarchy claims men are stronger than women.
Believe in Patriarchy? Patriarchy, because Patriarchy is obvious like that.
Don't believe in Patriarchy? Patriarchy, because Patriarchy is unseen like that.

Now for a real challenge... got a flat tire? Patriarchy... because Patriarchy called it a "jack", which is obviously sexist because it infers "males" in the repair of the problem, which is a hole in the tire and women are synonymous with holes, and women aren't taught how to change tires because Patriarchy doesn't want women to be self sufficient. It's also a trap that predators use to lure women out of their cars which supports Rape culture.

Bam! Nailed it! Come on; give me another!

I do not think you realize how much Patriarchy has actually shaped your culture and society. I come from a Matriarchy (where men take the woman's name, are the primary property holders and women are primarily the ones in charge of business and the economy), and I had quite a rude awakening when it came to understanding western society due to this. Although you are intentionally being facetious, differences in Patriarchy vs Matriarchy are intertwined into every aspect of society and relationships.

In western patriarchy, for example, the women are expected to stay home with the children and the men to work and provide for their families. In my matriarchal culture however, child care was a part of work and women primarily took care of young children AND were the primary ones responsible for trade and the economy. However, when the children grew past nursing stage, although western society seems to find this strange, Two spirit transgendered male to females are who takes care of the children while the mothers worked. Two spirits were considered to be exceptional teachers and caregivers and are who traditionally educated and raised the tribes children often considered to be superior care givers than either just males or females. Two spirits were never shamed or abused in our culture, instead they were considered "gifted" and treated as celebrities.

Men could sit wherever they like, so could women there was never "men go here women go here" nonsense at all in our matriarchy, that is just seems as really weird. Who came up with the idea that people should and should not " sit" somewhere?! It seems so absurd. Sports were not segregated, everyone competes against everyone and no one was excluded. In my tribes culture, there were no " women sports" or "men sports" there were activities and anyone male or female that wishes to do so participates. That separation is indeed a patriarchal idea. Of course there were things that women primarily do and men primarily do, but no one ever would tell a man or woman they could not do something, instead it was always encouraged for you to follow your dreams regardless of your sex. The views of sex are also quite strange in Patriarchy where sex is something that is " hidden" where in Our tribe sometimes it was performed on stage in front of the entire tribe in ceremony and considered a natural and beautiful part of life rather than hiding and shaming people for it.

Despite the idea that people think matriarchy is nonexistent, that is not the case at all for those who are unaware:
"The Hopis are organized into groups consisting of related clans. The society is matriarchal, with women owning the property and heading the families."
http://history.howstuffworks.com/native-american-history/hopi-indians.htm

EDIT: People in western society are the only ones who told me I could not do something because "I was a girl", that does not exist in Matriarchy at all. No one is told they cannot do something " because they are a girl" or " because they are a boy" except maybe a boy being told he cannot give birth because it is physically impossible for him to do so.