The idea of broad-based consensus as a decision model is central to some versions of feminism. And I think we're seeing the limitations of that model.
I think Wiscon tries to work with the ideal of democratic anarchy, with large, broad-based communities working together to hash out actions without a centralized authority to impose ideas by force. Centralized forceful authority that can hammer down Rules From On-High is, as I understand it, the defining characteristic of patriarchy. Whether or not that authority has a penis or not. This particular meaning of "patriarchy" is a concept of how to do things, not something that is around people who identify as "male".
One form of feminism is defined in part by "democratic egalitarian consensus-based anarchy as opposed to centralized authoritarian ruling power."
And what we're finding is that democratic egalitarian consensus-based anarchy is helpless to deal with an active ongoing threat in its midst. In order to deal with threats, cons are having to institute pockets of patriarchy. A Safety Committee may be run by consensus within itself, and its formation may be set up by democratic consensus. But there has to be a decision that "this group has authority to make and enforce exclusionary decisions." That's pretty much what patriarchy is, in at least one definition.
Edited to Add: Comments locked, because the fight in the comments started to get more embarrassing than funny.
