Allyson's view is indeed well-worded (and based on the attempts of many others, in both long form and short form) to define the term.  Many anthropologists believe there's no way to strictly operationalize the term, but that it points to a collection of social facts that need to be pointed to, including female infanticide, female mutilation, female slavery, women bought and sold, unconsenting marriages, etc., etc.  The problem is - does the article want to stick to this more theoretical level (who defined the word) in the lead or close to the top, or does it also want to talk about what patriarchy is (and that it may have pre-existed any terms applied to it).  Difficult subject.  I too applaud the earlier editors for giving it a go, it needs to be in Wikipedia, it's just very hard to edit.