Very true, and I use the term all the time myself. But what it doesn't do is emphasise all the other ways in which the 'norm' is problematic. For example, as a white, heterosexual, English speaking, cisgendered, male in a relatively-high-status occupation, I am the oppressor, societally speaking, in a lot of ways.

On the other hand, as someone with little or no social skills (quite probably due to Asperger's Syndrome, but I personally have an intense dislike of medicalising personality differences), and someone who is overweight and physically unattractive, I am also the oppressed in many, *many* social circumstances. I can be perfectly comfortable in, say, Forbidden Planet Manchester (which my wife refuses to enter because of the general leering sleaziness of the place), but I've had a panic attack before now in a mobile 'phone shop full of pictures of footballers...

While I'm very aware of the problems with equating my 'oppression' with that of other, more marginalised groups, and don't want to be committing me-tooism or whataboutery here, I do think a term like kyriarchy allows us to see that, with the possible exception of quadroplegic black lesbian Muslims with Down's Syndrome, we're all oppressors sometimes just as we're all oppressed sometimes, and that *all* power relationships are intrinsically a Bad Thing, even though some of them are clearly worse than others in their effects...