Whilst traditional gender normes are hurting everyone (“be a man”, “smile more”) I really don’t feel that “patriarchy” and it’s evident undertone of finger pointing are the main cause.
I’d go even further and say that what people call “patriarchy” is really more of an emergent phenomenon coming from those underlying gender normes.
bell hooks explicitly address the violence women inflict on their sons:
patriarchal mothers who have rage at grown men act out with sons. They may either force the son to enter into an inappropriate relationship in which he must provide for her the emotional connection grown men deny her or engage in emotional abuse in which the son is constantly belittled and shamed. These acts of patriarchal violence serve to reinforce in the mind of boy children that their violence toward females is appropriate. It simply feels like justifiable vengeance. Feminist idealization of mother-hood made it extremely difficult to call attention to maternal sadism, to the violence women enact with children, especially with boys. And yet we know that whether it is a consequence of power dynamics in dominator culture or simply a reflection of rage, women are shockingly violent toward children. This fact should lead everyone to question any theory of gender differences that suggests that women are less violent than men.
Hoenstly, The Will to Change addresses every popular argument about masculinity I’ve seen, and defines and explains the role of patriarchy. Fantastic book. 100/100. Read it. I should’ve read it years ago.
I don’t believe the behaviour itself stems from patriarchy, I think it is just human behaviour. That’s the bit that feels kind of convoluted. But I understand that to the true believers, that’s a matter of faith, so I’m not here to change anybodies mind.