Breaking down the question

The question is built in two movements. First it asks you to define patriarchy — a demand for a precise, theoretically anchored definition rather than a loose synonym for male dominance. Second, it poses a testable proposition — does patriarchy have bearings on women's entitlement within the Indian family system? The word entitlement is doing real work here. It is not merely about attitudes or status; it points to the concrete claims a person can make on resources — property, food, health, education, decision-making and bodily autonomy.

The verb explain signals that a descriptive listing will not suffice. You must show the mechanisms by which patriarchal structures translate into unequal entitlements. The phrase Indian family system narrows the canvas to the household, kinship and inheritance, so the answer should stay grounded in family and kinship rather than drifting into the economy or polity at large.

A strong script therefore does three things — it defines patriarchy rigorously, it establishes the analytical link between patriarchy and entitlement, and it demonstrates that link through the specifically Indian institutions of patrilineal descent, patrilocal residence and controlled female sexuality.

For conceptual grounding, see the note on patriarchy, entitlements and the sexual division of labour.

How to approach it

Begin with a definition that names the structures through which patriarchy operates, then move systematically through the arenas of entitlement within the family, and close with a measured judgement.

  • Define patriarchy, following Sylvia Walby, as a system of interrelated social structures through which men dominate, oppress and exploit women.
  • Locate its Indian form in patrilineal descent, patrilocal residence and the sexual division of labour.
  • Trace its bearing on distinct entitlements — property and inheritance, food and health, education, and reproductive autonomy.
  • Use Amartya Sen's language of entitlement and capability to sharpen the argument, and Uma Chakravarti and Leela Dube for the Indian mechanisms.
  • Acknowledge counter-currents — legal reform and regional variation — before concluding.

Model answer

Patriarchy may be defined, following Sylvia Walby, as a system of social structures and practices in which men dominate, oppress and exploit women. Walby identifies several interlocking sites — the household and its division of labour, paid work, the state, male violence, sexuality and cultural institutions. Applied to the family, patriarchy denotes an arrangement in which authority, descent, residence and inheritance are organised around men, and women are positioned as dependents whose worth is defined by their reproductive and domestic roles. It is not a set of individual prejudices but a durable structure that reproduces itself across generations.

That patriarchy bears heavily on women's entitlement in the Indian family becomes clear once entitlement is understood, in Amartya Sen's sense, as the set of legitimate claims a person can exercise over resources. The Indian family system is predominantly patrilineal in descent and patrilocal in residence, so a daughter is raised as paraya dhan — someone who will belong to another household. This single premise shapes almost every entitlement she can command.

Consider property and inheritance. Although the Hindu Succession (Amendment) Act, 2005 granted daughters equal coparcenary rights, patrilineal norms mean many women still relinquish claims in favour of brothers, or are compensated through dowry rather than a share in ancestral land. Property remains, in practice, transmitted through the male line, so women's economic entitlement stays fragile and mediated by male kin.

Consider food, health and survival. Leela Dube's work on kinship shows how everyday socialisation, feeding practices and seed-and-earth metaphors inscribe female subordination into the intimate rhythms of household life. The consequence is what Amartya Sen famously called the problem of missing women — the deficit of females in the population produced by unequal nutrition, neglect in health care, and son preference expressed in sex-selective abortion. Here patriarchy is written on the body itself, and the entitlement at stake is survival.

Consider education and autonomy. Where sons are viewed as permanent members and future providers, and daughters as transient, families ration investment in girls' schooling and hasten their marriage. Decision-making within the household — over mobility, work, fertility and expenditure — typically rests with senior men and mothers-in-law acting on patriarchal norms, leaving women with attenuated agency.

The distinctively Indian dimension is the fusion of patriarchy with caste. Uma Chakravarti's concept of brahmanical patriarchy shows that the control of women's sexuality is the mechanism that preserves caste purity and endogamy. Guarding female reproductive capacity keeps caste boundaries intact, which is why women's autonomy over marriage and sexuality is so tightly policed. The entitlement to choose a partner, and to bodily self-determination, is curtailed in the name of family honour.

A balanced answer must register counter-currents. Legal reform, women's education, the growth of nuclear households, the assertion of conjugal bonds, and women's movements have expanded entitlements in significant measure. Matrilineal pockets such as the Nairs and Khasis, and the relatively greater autonomy of women in parts of the south and north-east, show that patriarchy's grip varies by region and community. These qualifications matter, but they modify rather than overturn the central pattern.

On balance, patriarchy has a deep and pervasive bearing on women's entitlement in the Indian family system. It operates not through open coercion alone but through descent, residence, inheritance and the control of sexuality, converting a structural principle of male dominance into concrete inequalities of property, survival, education and autonomy. Recognising this is the first step towards the constitutional promise of substantive equality within the home.

Examiner's perspective

Examiners look first for a crisp, theoretically grounded definition. A candidate who opens with Walby's structural account — rather than a vague equation of patriarchy with sexism — immediately signals command. The second, decisive move is to treat entitlement as an analytical category, ideally through Sen, so that the answer explains mechanisms rather than merely listing women's disadvantages.

The strongest scripts anchor the argument in Indian kinship — patrilineal descent, patrilocal residence, paraya dhan, dowry, son preference — and elevate it by linking patriarchy to caste through Chakravarti's brahmanical patriarchy. Citing Leela Dube for socialisation and the missing women thesis for survival adds both Indian and empirical weight.

Finally, top-band answers are dialectical. They concede legal reform, regional variation and matrilineal exceptions without diluting the core judgement. British spelling, em dashes used sparingly, and a clear four-part structure across the twenty-mark canvas will lift a competent answer into the highest band.