我一直不理解女权主义所反对的"父权制"这一概念中的一点：为什么在历史上众多父权制文化和文明中，男性会系统性地压迫与他们相对应的群体，即他们的妻子、姐妹和母亲？

One of the things I never understood about the idea of patriarchy that feminism opposes is this: Why would men throughout history across numerous patriarchal cultures and civilizations systematically oppress their counterparts, i.e., their wives, their sisters, their mothers?

To oppress someone means to prevent that person from what she needs, what is her due, and to otherwise cause harm. And I can understand how that happens in isolated situations, e.g., domestic abuse where a husband abuses his wife, etc. But I don't understand how this can happen globally or across an entire society. Why? Because men are smarter than that and so are women. What I mean is, it would be completely irrational for men to inflict this kind of program within their own households. How do men benefit by crippling their female companions and continually frustrating their needs? That is simply not functional. Have you ever known a family where the husband/father (or the wife/mother) is a tyrant, wields all the control, rules with an iron fist? Those situations are never sustainable and everyone involved is miserable and looking for an exit. Are we supposed to believe that it was only modern people that realized, "Wow, constant dhulm (injustice) in the household is neither optimal nor sustainable?" Also, the idea that women have been the perpetual victims of this scheme by men to oppress them over thousands of years is really insulting to the intelligence and capabilities of women. Again, are modern women the only ones enlightened enough to understand that they are being oppressed by patriarchy and to fight back, whereas past women were too stupid to notice or successfully effect change? That makes no sense.

To oppress someone means to prevent that person from what she needs, what is her due, and to otherwise cause harm. And I can understand how that happens in isolated situations, e.g., domestic abuse where a husband abuses his wife, etc. But I don’t understand how this can happen globally or across an entire society. Why? Because men are smarter than that and so are women. What I mean is, it would be completely irrational for men to inflict this kind of program within their own households. How do men benefit by crippling their female companions and continually frustrating their needs? That is simply not functional. Have you ever known a family where the husband/father (or the wife/mother) is a tyrant, wields all the control, rules with an iron fist? Those situations are never sustainable and everyone involved is miserable and looking for an exit. Are we supposed to believe that it was only modern people that realized, “Wow, constant dhulm (injustice) in the household is neither optimal nor sustainable?” Also, the idea that women have been the perpetual victims of this scheme by men to oppress them over thousands of years is really insulting to the intelligence and capabilities of women. Again, are modern women the only ones enlightened enough to understand that they are being oppressed by patriarchy and to fight back, whereas past women were too stupid to notice or successfully effect change? That makes no sense.

如果从实际角度看，要有效压迫一个群体，并非易事。看看当今的阿拉伯世界吧。独裁者为了维持某种程度的（非法）权力与对民众的控制，不得不动用各种资源：军队与警察力量，各种监控计划，以及宣传与恐吓机构。他们这样做已有六七十年了，然而看看他们遭遇了多少抵抗，又造成了多少动荡。纵观整个世界历史，情况也是如此。压迫本质上是不稳定的，要长期维持，需要耗费大量资源与精力，因为受压迫者必然会进行抵抗。

If you look at what is required to effectively oppress a group of people, it is not a trivial task. Look at it from a practical perspective. Look at the current state of the Arab world. Dictators have had to marshal all kinds of resources, military and police force, all kinds of programs of monitoring and institutions of propaganda and intimidation to maintain some semblance of (illegitimate) power and control over their populations. They’ve been doing this for 60 or 70 years, and look at how much resistance they’ve been getting and how much turmoil has resulted. The same is the case throughout world history. Oppression is inherently unstable and requires a lot of resources and energy to maintain for any extended period of time because the victims of oppression inevitably resist.

这一点从两方面对“压迫性父权制”的观点提出了质疑。首先，认为男性千百年来一直成功地压制女性，这种想法是荒谬的。如果真是这样的安排，男人为什么要让自己陷入无休止的纷扰之中，不断应对来自自己家人的“反抗”，而这些人恰恰是每晚与他同床共枕的人呢？其次，如果真有这样的安排，那么实施这一安排的资源又从何而来？在家庭层面，从历史上看，丈夫所掌握的钱财和资源很难被他刻意地不让妻子接触。这种情况并非不可能，也确实发生过，但那只是个别案例，而不是系统性的现象，也不可能广泛存在。

This casts doubt on the notion of oppressive patriarchy on two counts. First, the idea that men have been successfully keeping women down for millennia is absurd in the sense that, if that were the program, why would men put themselves through that incessant turmoil, constantly battling “uprising” from their own family members, presumably the same people they are sleeping next to in their beds every night? Second, if that were indeed the program, where would the resources for such a program come from? On the family level, historically it would have been difficult to keep money and means that are available to a husband away from a wife. It is possible and did happen, again in isolated cases, but not on a systematic level or something that could be widespread.

历史事实是，男性与女性在维持家庭方面承担着不同的角色。然而，正是现代女权主义将这些角色划分出高低等级，并主张女性的传统角色使她们相对于男性处于不利地位。但正如我在别处所论证的，这些判断并无依据。例如，抚育和教育子女这一传统的女性角色，并不明显地比商业贸易等角色本质上更缺乏影响力，这一点并不清楚。

Now it is a historical fact that women and men played different roles in maintaining their households. But it is only modern feminism that imposes a hierarchy on these roles and claims that the traditional roles of women have put them at a disadvantage vis-a-vis men. But as I have argued elsewhere, there is no basis for these determinations. For example, it is not clear how a traditional female role like raising and educating children is inherently less powerful than roles involving commercial trade, etc.

女权主义希望我们相信，男人会选择与其他男人勾结，建立权力体系，而不是优先考虑自己的家人，自己的妻子、女儿和母亲。这违背人类经验和基本的自身利益。如果你是女性，请问问自己：你的父亲、丈夫或兄弟会仅仅因为"男人互相包庇、对抗女性"，就把陌生男人的利益置于你的利益之上吗？如果会，那只能说明你的父亲、丈夫和兄弟心理失常，甚至精神不正常，而不是什么压迫一个性别的全球阴谋的代表。如果你是男性，请问问自己：你会照顾陌生男人，把他们的利益置于妻子、女儿和母亲的利益之上吗？如果会，你很可能精神不稳定，而不是一个阻碍女性、属于全球男性兄弟会的家长。

Let me make the point like this: Feminism wants us to believe that a man would choose other men to collude with and establish systems of power with over his own family, over his own wife and daughters and mother. This goes against human experience and basic self interest. If you are a woman, ask yourself: Is your father or your husband or your brother going to privilege the interests of a strange man over your interests, solely on the basis that “men stick together against women”? If so, that just means your father, husband, and brother are psychologically disturbed and possibly insane, not representatives of this global conspiracy to oppress one gender. And if you are a man, ask yourself: Are you going to look out for strange men and prioritize their interests over the interests of your wife, daughters, and mother? If so, you are very likely mentally unstable, not a patriarch who is part of this global brotherhood holding back women.