Battle of Chustenahlah

This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Anthropology Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Anthropology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Anthropology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.AnthropologyWikipedia:WikiProject AnthropologyTemplate:WikiProject AnthropologyAnthropology articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale. Sociology Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sociology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of sociology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SociologyWikipedia:WikiProject SociologyTemplate:WikiProject Sociologysociology articles Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Feminism Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Feminism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Feminism on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.FeminismWikipedia:WikiProject FeminismTemplate:WikiProject FeminismFeminism articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Women's History Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women's History, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Women's history and related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Women's HistoryWikipedia:WikiProject Women's HistoryTemplate:WikiProject Women's HistoryWomen's History articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

(The following part of a post is copied from matriarchy Talk: Nick Levinson (talk) 14:51, 14 June 2012 (UTC))[reply]

If someone has a chance to look, there are some papers that discuss Young & Wilmott's Family & Kinship in East London on (white) working-class British families in terms of matrifocality. Itsmejudith (talk) 18:49, 12 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I just looked at the book (not papers about it). I'm not going to follow this up; perhaps someone else will consider it. It has only one index entry for matri-, namely matrilocal residence. I don't feel confident in applying what the book says about matrilocality to this article. I probably won't be able to get this book through interlibrary loan since libraries here have it for in-library use and using it in the libraries creates a time conflict for me. The book I saw was Young, Michael, & Peter Willmott, Family and Kinship in East London (London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, cloth cover, 3d impression 1965, 1st published 1957) (author Young fellow Churchill Coll., Cambridge, & author Willmott degree in sociology, London Univ.). Nick Levinson (talk) 17:19, 14 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks very much for looking it up, but I am not surprised you can get nothing from the book itself. Yes, this is the one, and it is a landmark study in the sociology of Britain, referred to in virtually every undergraduate textbook. You are right, they do not describe the families they find as "matrifocal". They do find matrilocality, since most of the young married couples they met could not afford to live independently, and they usually chose to live with the wife's parents. Y&W go into detail about the support that mothers gave to married daughters, and how frequently mothers and daughters met (daily, even when living separately). It was later writers who noted parallels with matrifocal families. This parallel is important in the present-day sociology of Britain, because it indicates two sources for our high rates of mother-headed households: Caribbean-British matrifocality, and the quite mother-centred white-working class families studied by Y&W. Also notable is the frequency of relationships between white working class and Caribbean people. So, potentially a lot to say, but will take time to find the best sources that discuss Y&W. Itsmejudith (talk) 19:06, 14 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

If you can do that, that would be great. It sounds like it can be done without synthesis. Best wishes. Nick Levinson (talk) 15:04, 16 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

An apparent source on matrifocality, but I don't want to evaluate it for Wikipedia: <ref>Tantiwiramanond, Darunee, & Shashi Pandey, ''The Status and Role of Thai Women in the Pre-Modern Period: A Historical and Cultural Perspective'', in ''Sojourn: Journal of Social Issues in Southeast Asia'', vol. 2, no. 1 (February, 1987), p. 127 and probably ''ff.'' (author Tantiwiramanond fellow, Women's Studies Research Center, Univ. of Wisc., & author Pandey fellow, Land Tenure Ctr., Univ. of Wisc.) (in ''JStor'' (database) (subscription may be required)).</ref> Nick Levinson (talk) 20:44, 29 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The merger of gynarchy into this article has been questioned. See Talk:Gynarchy#IP's proposal to merge with Matriarchy and please discuss there, not here, to centralize discussion. Nick Levinson (talk) 16:31, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion about the merging nearly a year ago of the gynarchy article into this article has been newly begun as part of another discussion at Talk:Matriarchy#main definitions besides feminist. Nick Levinson (talk) 20:59, 10 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

If a patriarchy is the system by which a father leads a household, wouldn't matriarchy be the system by which a mother leads a household? It would then make sense that Matrifocal families are a matriarchal system. A google search for 'matriarch' indicates this use of the term. The first result that isn't a dictionary definition is an article describing the female head of a household. Further searching indicates a consensus: A woman in charge of a family is a matriarch. If this is the case, we should make it clear in the article that a matrifocal family is a matriarchy, or perhaps consider merging this article into the matriarchy article. Flameoguy (talk) 20:50, 4 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please see Talk:Matriarchy/Archive_6#"Matrifocal"_problem, Talk:Matriarchy/Archive 8#matrifocality etc. There have been quite a few past problems with dilution at the "Matriarchy" article, so this is probably not a good idea... AnonMoos (talk) 03:29, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Regardless of what happens with the Matriarchy article, shouldn't we at least try to make the Matrifocal Family article factually correct? Flameoguy (talk) 01:00, 19 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Matrifocal families as discussed by 20th-century anthropologists are not necessarily paradises of female empowerment, but rather societies where the mother-child bond tends to be much stronger than the bond between the parents of a child, or than the father-child bond. It does NOT mean that women have the best-paying jobs or the most-powerful positions in society. In a "primitive" patriarchy (or, theoretically, matriarchy), the family lineage is the main organizing unit within society, so power within the family means power within the society. That's not true for the societies where matrifocal families are found... AnonMoos (talk) 00:27, 7 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

In the very first sentence of this article, it says "A matrifocal family structure is one where mothers head families and fathers play a less important role in the home and in bringing up children.". While Feminism article defines itself as "a range of political movements, ideologies, and social movements that share a common goal: to define, establish, and achieve political, economic, personal, and social equality of sexes." Either this is clearly incorrect or I not understand Feminism correctly because "matrifocal family" is by definition unequally favours women. Can somebody elaborate on this or remove the reference for being part of Feminism! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Raees Iqbal (talk • contribs) 21:34, 21 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It's related to feminism even if family matrifocality is not a specifically feminist phenomenon. Feminism is generally about equality but some feminists seek only to come closer to it and not to achieve it in full and some, a minority, seek for women to gain more power than men have (see feminism and equality (the lead's second paragraph and relevant sections)). Nick Levinson (talk) 23:59, 21 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Raees_Iqbal -- it seems reasonable to include this in "Category:Feminism and the family", but I removed the "feminism sidebar" template... AnonMoos (talk) 15:01, 20 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The definition for matrifocal is wrong and down right inaccurate. 2601:8D:8901:75B0:951D:E55A:7179:7882 (talk) 22:58, 14 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

What is the specific alleged problem? The sentence in the lead section is certainly rather condensed, and could be expanded/explained a little... AnonMoos (talk) 04:13, 15 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]