Basically to explain my position on pron and teh prostitutes I have to color my waffles in a garish shade of Nieve Set Theory, please excuse me a second.
Theory goes like so:
If we accept that there lies set P, where set P encompasses Patriarchal thingiemajigs in all shapes and sizes, and hence an apposite set N, where set N encompasses things which are Not-patriarchal, from there it is not hard to accept that there is likely at least two major subsets of set P, subset np and subset Pp, where np represents a shared subset of both sets P and N.
Now the thing about subset np is that thingiemajigs within np, while by definition patriarchal, are also by definition only patriarchal as a side effect of being a subset of set P, and hence the existance of things within subset np is reliant on the existence of subset Pp. But, importantly, things within subset Pp are not reliant on the existence of subset np, because if we got rid of the things which comprise set N then all that would happen is that we'd no longer be able to define objects within set P into two subsets, beause there'd be nothing to enable you to make a distinction between np and Pp things, becayuse both groups of things would be belong wholly to set P
Okay, now the point:
Because of the fact that if you get rid of set N, subset np disappears as a subset - so things that were in subset np become things entirely in set P - the reverse should logically be true, and if you get rid of set P then things within subset np cease to be Patriarchal, and become wholly Not patriarchal as a result!
To put it in plain speak then:
Somethings exist because of a patriarchy, and is therefore patriarchal. Meanwhile, some things would exist without a patriarchy, but in the context of a patriarchal society become patriarchal.