Patriarchy: who does it serve?

Patriarchy Inc by Cordelia Fine review: Inside the rigged game of modern work

Who does the patriarchy really serve? A new book by an outstanding Melbourne academic examines the evidence.

Have you ever played the card game “I win”with a toddler? It normally works like this: you pull a grand hand by poker standards – say, a full house or a royal flush. Then your infant opponent produces a four of clubs, a seven of hearts, a slice of plastic cheese and a Lego dinosaur and yet they win decisively because that’s the game. They win, no matter what they are holding.

This might also be an apt analogy for the patriarchy – some people (particularly women) are always going to lose, because the game is rigged against them. But weren’t we supposed to be fixing all that?

PATRIARCHY INC. By Cordelia Fine (Allen & Unwin)

Patriarchy Inc., from Cordelia Fine, seeks to cut through the noise and explore the working world as it is today, not the egalitarian fantasy corporate boards would like you to think we’re striving towards.

If you’ve read to this paragraph you may be cringing by now: patriarchy, egalitarian, privilege... ye-gads, the woke words are rising. However, the book is an equal-opportunity critic: it has plenty of criticisms about DEI initiatives, too. That’s Diversity, Equity and Inclusion, the same bugbear the Trump administration is having a conniption trying to stamp out. Patriarchy Inc. fearlessly cuts through the misconceptions and assumptions about workplace inequality by exploring a multitude of studies and business cases. It’s not a left versus right political battle; it’s a study of how divisions of labour are shaped, and

how that affects every working-class family.

Fine narrows her focus to two central questions: who does what in the workplace and then who gets what in return – that is, who gets the perks, status and money?

Spoiler alert: it’s mostly rich blokes getting richer. Why is a nurse paid dramatically less than an investment banker? Should a firefighter get bugger-all compared to the chief executive of a casino? Who works harder, and which is more valuable to society?

Patriarchy Inc. challenges the notion that there are fair, market-based or biological reasons for entrenched inequality, especially for women. In reality, it’s in the best interest of an elite few to maintain the status quo. One misconception the book tackles: women are natural carers, they have biological differences which make them ideally suited to unpaid work. It’s a pervasive logic which sounds science-y, doesn’t it? Something, something hunter-gatherers. Though Fine’s work highlights that this fuzzy feeling is in no small part a consequence of the introduction of the wage; it’s a post industrial concept.

Industries could have introduced mechanisms so that carers were paid, reducing the financial burden for the whole of a family. Instead, wages became a dividing force. Women remain systematically disadvantaged when it comes to pay, while they find it harder to get many types of jobs (read: high-paying, influential ones) and it’s harder for women to move up the ranks. They occupy less space in management, on boards and in governments.

One could only hope the Liberal National Party, on the back of its electoral bloodbath, grabs a copy of this book as it deals with its “women problem”. Though Patriarchy Inc. has plenty to say about the treatment of men in the workplace, too. Many men today are expected to break their backs working overtime, hardly seeing their families. Women soft, men tough; another

fuzzy feeling with an air of truth about it. However, as Fine points out, studies show a majority of men expressed a preference for more involvement in childcare-giving. Yet even when they’re presented the opportunity for paternal leave, many men feel afraid to take it, for fear of being seen as slacking off or losing status in the workplace. At the same time, one Australian survey of 10-13-year-olds found that over half of them thought their dads worked too much.

So, who does this system really advantage, if not families? For one, it allows huge executive bonuses to go unnoticed, because those, too, have come to seem “natural”. Such a system encourages Machiavellian behaviour and

risk-taking, to try to get to the top and, in turn, maintain the status quo.

Then, when banks and companies go belly-up, bailouts can ride in to the rescue, not just reinforcing risk-taking behaviour but at the same time, socialising it. Those at the top always win, even with plastic cheese, while the working class pays for them to re-enter the game.

Let me state the obvious: this book is dry. Fine throws in the odd joke, but you should read it with a glass of water nearby to moisturise your eyeballs. There’s a certain reassurance in that, though. Patriarchy Inc. is not an opinion piece, it’s a rigorous study. She’s done the work; there are almost 100 pages of notes and references, more than a quarter of the book. Spare a thought for the publisher, Atlantic Books, given recent price hikes in the cost of paper.

It has a steep learning curve; Fine’s introduction hits you like a textbook. However, it builds on itself nicely, reiterating over the central questions of who does what and who gets what, layering information with a sense of purpose and direction. Of particular fascination are its criticisms of DEI; initiatives that are supposed to be helping women have instead become products unto themselves, sold to customers and shareholders. Many of these programs could in fact be fuelling the inequality bonfire, disenfranchising the same people they purport to help.

Both women and men alike will get something out of this book. Rich blokes will probably stew about it, but they can always buy a Lamborghini and a Lego dinosaur to cheer themselves up. Patriarchy Inc. is for anyone who has ever felt an itch, an itch that something just isn’t right in their workplace. It’s not an easy read but it is an important one; a dose of sanity for the modern working world.

PATRIARCHY INC.

By Cordelia Fine

Allen & Unwin, Social Science

252pp, $32.99

Correction: an earlier version of this story had quotation marks around a sentence that was not in fact a quote from the book. This has now been fixed.

Cadance Bell’s most recent book is Letters to Our Robot Son