All Forms Of Patriarchy Are Unacceptable: The Abolition Of Men As Providers.
In societies where patriarchy is the dominant social structure, men are often cast as the primary financial providers. While this role may seem advantageous, it comes at great emotional and moral cost. The assumption that men can, or should, trade their humanity for money has led to widespread abuse, particularly within families. Men with financial power often use their wealth to control and subjugate women and children. These dynamics not only dehumanise those involved but also reinforce systems of inequality that persist across generations. In contrast, Black women in matriarchal households have long navigated the complex task of balancing financial provision with the nurturing of their families. These women show that the ability to both provide and nurture is not only possible but essential for a healthier, more sustainable way of living. This essay will explore why the role of men as primary providers must be abolished, how matriarchal households offer a viable and humane alternative, and how the exploitation of children within patriarchal systems exacerbates the cycle of abuse. Ultimately, it calls for a world where humanity is never traded for money, and where all individuals, regardless of gender, are valued for their inherent worth.
In an attempt to shame men into deconstructing patriarchy, women have begun criticising them for not engaging sufficiently with it. The common rhetoric is, “Men love patriarchy until it’s time to become providers.” The danger of this argument lies in the fact that provision is often equated solely with financial support, rather than recognising the nurturing aspect of provision – which is presence. Prioritising money as the primary means of provision, over human connection, carries serious ethical implications, such as neglect, emotional harm, and exploitation. A clear example is how men who pay child maintenance (“papgeld”) are often excused from being absent parents, merely because they contribute financially to their children’s lives. These men may see their children only on holidays, in exchange for paying a small amount to the mothers, thereby absolving themselves of the responsibility of being emotionally and physically present in their children’s lives. This same dynamic is evident in men who are physically present in the home but only contribute financially, failing to engage with the emotional and social needs of their families. Two years ago, a viral TikTok trend involved an interviewer asking fathers about their children’s lives. The number of men unable to answer basic questions, such as the names of their children’s teachers or friends, was startling. One comment on that video stood out, where a viewer argued that fathers contribute more significantly by providing a roof over their children’s heads and feeding them. However, surely we recognise that this alone is not enough, particularly in modern homes where mothers also share financial and domestic responsibilities.
As a result, men with financial power are more likely to be abusive within the home. According to Stats SA (2022), economic violence is a significant component of the broader gender-based violence (GBV) epidemic, with many women trapped in abusive situations due to a lack of financial independence. Over 50% of women in abusive relationships report being subjected to some form of financial control or economic violence. Furthermore, we have seen how the commodification of human relationships has taken a psychological toll on men, contributing to the male loneliness epidemic. Treating people as assets to be “fixed” with money has prevented them from benefiting from the same sense of community as those who contribute through human connections. As a result, men are often left to struggle alone, valued only for their financial contributions. Finally, there is broader societal harm caused by men who prioritise financial gain over the well-being of others, as seen in the actions of billionaires who exploit the working class, yet do little to address issues like world hunger and climate change.
South Africa has earned the label of a “fatherless nation,” with statistics revealing that over 60% of children in the country do not live with their biological fathers, and 20% have contact with them only twice a week. Moreover, only 31.7% of Black children reside with their biological fathers. These figures present an alternative view of what provision and protection mean in South Africa. It is evident that, in many households, Black women are both the primary providers and nurturers. Households led by women challenge the patriarchal narrative by demonstrating that women can balance financial responsibility with the emotional and caregiving aspects of family life. This creates a more humane, collective approach to family dynamics. From my own experience of being raised by a single mother, I witnessed a more communal approach to parenting. My mother was the sole financial provider in our home, yet this did not prevent her from being actively involved in family care. Without the presence of a patriarchal figure, our home became adaptable and fostered an environment where humanity, care, and mutual support took precedence over control and restriction. My mother achieved this by allowing us to participate as active members of the household, with the understanding that, as children, our primary contribution was simply to grow and learn. Even the way chores were distributed prioritised hygiene and well-being, ensuring everyone was presentable and cared for, rather than adhering to a rigid hierarchy where certain chores were reserved for those who did not contribute financially.
I grew up watching my mother dedicate her weekends to attending funerals, weddings, and sometimes “uyovela” (a tradition of showing respect during difficult times). At times, my brother and I were brought along, slowly being introduced to a legacy of nurture and presence. Later, when the demands became overwhelming, we would step in for her, contributing to her social obligations in her absence. In turn, we saw how her friends and family helped raise us. Our lives were enriched by community and the healthy relationships we shared with neighbours and extended family. This is why I was shocked to learn of households where certain seats were reserved for adults, specific pieces of chicken were allocated to men, and children were regarded as secondary in the household hierarchy. Conversations with those raised in such households highlighted the crucial role Black women play in nurturing and sustaining community ties. In some families, relationships deteriorate quickly after the death of the matriarch, as the men are unable to uphold the same values. These are the values we risk losing as a community when we place greater importance on money than on human connection. I often imagine how much richer our lives could have been if my mother had a partner who could contribute equally to both nurturing and financially supporting our family. This model would be a more sustainable and effective way of living. Ultimately, there is no world in which you can buy your way out of being part of a community.
Households where money is highly valued often pose greater dangers to children, as they are excluded from power dynamics and have no means to participate in decision-making. The absence of fathers in family care has led to the exploitation of first-born daughters, who, at a young age, are tasked with child-rearing and domestic labour. Similarly, boy children are raised with the belief that they are the heads of households they did not build, forced to compensate for their fathers’ inadequacies. This dynamic fosters resentment and bitterness towards relatives. Such exploitation is common in both households where fathers are physically present but not nurturing, as well as in those where fathers are entirely absent. In these families, children are used as a means to restore balance in the structure created by their parents. The prevailing narrative in these households is that, since children do not contribute financially, they must overcompensate by being useful in other ways. When children are conditioned to equate their survival and sense of worth with money, they become vulnerable to exploitation and abuse. Lacking the ability to generate their own income, they are often treated as commodities within patriarchal systems. This is a dynamic that we, as a community, can no longer endorse or participate in. We cannot accept a world in which children’s worth is determined by anything other than their inherent existence. This is precisely why we must reject all forms of patriarchy, especially those that harm children.
In examining the harm caused by the patriarchal notion of men as primary providers, it becomes clear that this framework perpetuates not only the economic subjugation of women and children but also a dehumanising exchange of money for humanity. This essay has shown how men who prioritise financial provision often use their wealth as leverage to exploit and control, creating toxic power dynamics within families. In contrast, Black women in matriarchal households offer a powerful counter-narrative, where both financial provision and emotional nurturing coexist, fostering healthier, more resilient communities.
The main point of this essay is to urge heterosexual women to reject the dangerous belief that a man’s financial contribution absolves him of other social responsibilities. Men should not be exempt from the duties of caregiving, domestic labour, and emotional support simply because they bring home a wage. In fact, given the gender pay gap and the systemic privileges men are afforded in society, men should be expected to contribute more financially. However, this contribution should not be viewed as a means of diminishing their roles in the home or in the lives of their children. For true equality to flourish, men must step up as nurturers, actively participate in child-rearing, domestic labour, and emotional care, sharing in the full scope of human responsibilities that build just and equitable communities. To create a future free from patriarchy, we must reject the notion that men can be excused from the holistic duties that sustain families and communities. Both men and women must participate equally in all forms of labour – whether financial, emotional, or physical – to create a world where dignity, humanity, and care are valued above all else.
