Evolution favors the most adaptable, not the strongest or the most willing to take things from others by force.
And no, the history of the world indicates that patriarchy is a brand new social structure that is approximately only about 6-9 thousand years old - a drop in the bucket of human history.
You know who becomes the male Alpha chimp in a troop? It isn't the biggest, the strongest, or the meanest who takes that position by force - it's the one that can form the best coalition and who campaigns the best to get the troop to recognize him as the Alpha. This is done, in part, by breaking up fights, often taking the side of those with low social status, but also by comforting those who are upset.
You have a pop-psychology idea of history, evolution, primatology, etc., that has little bearing on the actual science.
"Despite the classic sociobiological view of an ancient nuclear family, with a father off hunting big game and a mother tending the cave and the kids, current science simply doesn’t support this. Fossil evidence, endocrinology, psychology, history, child development, genetics, comparative primatology, and field research among contemporary hunter-gatherer societies have painted a very different picture — one that only began to change around 6–9 thousand years ago.
It is only with the rise of agriculture, as well as incursions from war-like northern tribes, that we begin to see not only social and sexual control of women but also class stratification and elites for the first time. Agriculture is in many ways a much more difficult life than hunting and gathering, although it also allowed the population to explode. Once the genie was out of the bottle, there was no going back."
