Matriarchy VS “Patriarchy”

PlzSendDunes · 2023-06-22T02:14:31+00:00

The thing is, that what is called patriarchy now, is not that much of Patriarchy. Most countries are democratic. People vote in candidates in to power. Therefore you have leaders that have public support, not that they have certain organs between their legs.

Another thing is that women are more active voters in democracies. So even women vote in more men, than other women.

Also I remember one election in Lithuania when there was a woman and a man competing for presidential. Although feminist groups were spouting about women are great leaders, women in the streets were against a woman in power mainly because she didn't have family and didn't have children, so ordinary women didn't think she would stand for families in policies, as opposed to a man who had a family and had children.

There were very few experiments were similar conditions were made, where one group are led by women and another by men. One of which is survival Island by Bear Grylls. That experiment best shown that men were far more willing to take risks, build up community and work together, rather than women getting in constant infightings.

In other words, it's not much Patriarchy Vs Matriarchy as much what works and what doesn't. What has public support and what doesn't. Who are better overall at their job and overall more competent is what makes them to climb hierarchies and gain support of others.

Although it would be cool to have a social experiment and have multiple communities(as villages which can trade), where in one you can have only women as leaders, in another men as leaders and another electable position and check what results are achieved, whether communities are self sufficient, can produce enough food and can self-sustain and whether people would prefer to stay in those communities or leave them.

Traditional_life98 · 2023-06-22T02:11:07+00:00

I don’t want a matriarchy.. especially in the US. Not with how the mindset of todays women are. No thank you.

Big_Chocolate_420 · 2023-06-22T03:41:05+00:00

i mean, based on how you view the origins of modern civilization, the sexual division of labor, and the origins of gender you'll get different perspectives on how a matriarchy would operate. If you want to see some societies close to matriarchal system (which I would classify them as matriarchys) then u should look at these groups to get a general sense for female empasizing cultures. (at the far bottom is my theory for what an extreme authoritarian matriarchy would look like)

Tuareg: all women there are encouraged to read while men are sometimes illterate, and the men wear hijab to preserve their beauty for their wife [they also look sick as fuck in the hijabs], women are freely allowed to divorce and are the default property owner leaving the guy with a sack over his shoulder as he wallows back to his mom's place, women are also allowed to be promiscuous and will have multiple suitors til she finds the right guy she wants to marry, after marriage she must respect her husband's want for monogamy and her husband must respect hers. They also had a female warlord/general who they honor.

Mosuo: idk too much here, but the women there are promiscuous and will have many partners in their life time in some cases, pregmamcy outside of marriage is seen as okay as the family unit is built on uncle-father instead of biological fathers, the biological father still knows his child and his child still knows him but the relationship is not prioritized.

Iroquois: one of my favorites and the feminist's favorites, which I have been trying to learn men's role in that society but havent gotten to it. The women there, last I remember, were effectively very dominant having domination of social organization. In politics, they had n always male warchief who was elected via democratic vote, but there was an elder council run by majority or entirely grandmothers and elderly women iirc, so women here had de facto domination politically. As i said, ive been meaning to learn more about them, cause there so much more to them, but Id argue they were a legit matriarchy, through and through, funny enough feminist refuse to call them a matriarchy.

Serer: i need to refesh myself on these guys, which i cant atm, but I remember them having high regard for women. They also have a very interesting pratices regarding monogany in which iirc, if a guy was engaged in adultery hed have his underwear put on display, while the paramour wife would have her hair cut. These were so shameful the two would often resukt to suicide.(warning: i could be misremembering these guys)

So, obviously im just a guy who browses wiki and taps his keyboard into the google search engine, so take what I have said with a heart heathy dose of salt.

Now as for are matriarchies worse? In theory, a matriarchy is a system that would normalize and endorse male chattle slavery since the more husbands a woman has, the more economic output her household would have access too. (this is counter to a patriarchy as the patriarch is the economic output of the household himself). Therefore, at the extreme, men would be highly illiterate and highly uneducated and will be banned from education to maintain the male slavery, and the fruits of his labor will be siphoned into his wife's bank account and he'll only gain access through her goodwill, and finally there would be no monogamy, husband sharing / husband sex trading would be apart of the culture, and group raping husbands would not be uncommon.

Secondarily, a matriarchy would endorse sex trade of boys and the selling of boys in a market as boys would be valuable for their labor potential and for their fertility status to maximize the genes of the buyer's offspring in order to produce better workers to allow the woman to climb the economic ladder. Child marriage and pedophilia are destined to be rampant. Women will have sex with sexually ideal men 16+, but they wil seek reproductively ideal 12 year old boys; older men age 20+ would be worked to death and if he doesnt have a wife who prefers him or if he is a low status male (unattractive, low muscle power, etc.) he will receive little to no consentual sex except by low status women. Refusing sexual request from women would be punishable, but male homosexuality would not be stigmatized nor illegal but anal penetration would be mocked much like how u see the left makes fun of bottoms. (theoretically homosexuality amongst men 20+ would be far more prevelant [much like it is in prison]). He may get access to vaginal sex through rape, or being raped, kidnapping a sex slave, or obtaining a sex slave from war. Or the man may have a juliette & romeo moment in his elder years with an older women.

As for status, it would be based on attractiveness thus how many husbands she has and additionally how many men she can attract, contrary to a patriarchy where a man's status is based on wealth and how many women he can attract with that wealth. A mans status in a matriarchy would be dertermined by his desire to serve and protect women, and by his masculinity at mid puberty when he develops masculine characteristics. Additionally, men would view being raped as a positive, not a negative, despite it being detrimental to their sense of self.

Think anti-christ hypergamy on crack.

Lastly the more men a woman has the less time she'd need to rear children as she could have a husband (child-husband) specialized in rearing her young, therefore the most affluent and dominate high status aristocrat women would have no labor at all, beyond taking a shit every morning and giving birth every other year. Also men still go to war, and fight all battles, while women won't unless she is low status, and even then, she'd be a medic as she'd be given higher education in contrast to the deprived of education men.

This would be men's saudi arabia.

ggleblanc2 · 2023-06-22T05:36:05+00:00

Ask the young boys growing up in the United States' inner cities with single mothers and female teachers about the problems they have with crime and drugs, as well as their mothers treating them like husband-sons.

Current_Finding_4066 · 2023-06-22T02:27:18+00:00

I doubt any sensible person wants any gender to rule over the other. I have seen no evidence of women being better leaders. Most of my experience shows me that women can be as terrible as men. I also have not seen any empirical evidence that women are actually better.

I have seen articles claiming women are better due to some imaginary traits, but from writing you could see it was feminist propaganda providing no empirical evidence whatsoever.

Vegetable_Ad1732 · 2023-06-22T03:29:54+00:00

I have a question. How are not already a matriarchy? I mean women can beat up men, rape men, mock men with virtual impunity. They get less jail time for the same crime. So what else is needed to make this a matriarchy?

vegansoymilk · 2023-06-22T02:17:56+00:00

Wow...this concept would make a really good novel or movie. Not sure what genre it would fall into... dystopia, science fiction, horror, fantasy. Wonder if it has already been done. Think I'll get my typewriter out.

mrkpxx · 2023-06-22T04:14:18+00:00

Violence of Female Rulers

Study shows queens were much more likely to be violent than males

https://www.dvaa.com.au/study-reveals-queens-were-much-more-willing-to-pursue-violence-than-kings/

Women are wonderful effect

The women-are-wonderful effect is a phenomenon found in psychological research that suggests that people associate more positive traits with women than with men.

This bias reflects an emotional bias towards women in general. The term was coined by Alice Eagly and Antonio Mladinic in 1994 after they found that both male and female participants tended to attribute positive traits to women, with female participants showing far more pronounced bias.

Ingroup preference among women is more than four times higher than among men.

Get wars from women 39% more often

Throughout history there are countless stories of powerful male kings declaring and fighting great wars. For a long time it was assumed that women were less aggressive and more likely to keep the peace than go to war. However, this study now shows that over the centuries, queens have been at war a staggering 39% more often than kings.

Authored by political scientists Oeindrila Dube of the University of Chicago and SP Harish of McGill University, the paper analyzed a sample of mainly European kings and queens who reigned between AD 1480 and 1913, and included 193 rulers in 18 countries.

violence in recent times

Many feminists have argued that the dismantling of patriarchy and the rise of higher-sex feminist leaders would obviously lead to less violent conflict.

The authors of the book Why Leaders Fight analyzed each world leader from 1875 to 2004 and statistically examined gender differences in military aggression. They found that 36% of female executives started at least one militarized argument, while only 30% of male executives did the same.

DutchOnionKnight · 2023-06-22T05:36:20+00:00

As Peterson said. Women tend to be more agreeable than men. And I don't think that would bring us anywhere.

Also, we don't live in a patriarchy.

2023-06-22T03:17:29+00:00

We are not living in a "Patriarchy" and even if all the political and corporate leaders of the world were women, it wouldn't be a Matriarchy.

Things will not be any different, because it takes a particular type of person (gender is irrelevelant) to reach and attain a leadership role.

There'd be the same amount of political conflict, wars, genocide, the environment nor economy would be any better. This is because decisions that impact these factors aren't taken by one person on a whim, rather based on long term strategic objectives.

Lolocraft1 · 2023-06-22T04:40:37+00:00

A matriarchy would be as bad as a patriarchy for society. Both think there is a specific natural role for each gender, one getting dominated and the other one entitled as the bread winner, and that if you dare try to be something outside of those social borders, you aren’t considered as a real woman or a real man

I do not wish for none of both

EricAllonde · 2023-06-22T07:26:28+00:00

There is no “patriarchy”, it’s just a feminist lie, one of many.

ayroxus94 · 2023-06-22T10:02:14+00:00

I would say both are as bad as each other. However, if a patriarchy existed in the olden days, the men still strived to protect women. Having a wife and kids was like the default family setting. If a matriarchy existed today, it would be about female empowerment. “We don’t need men” “men are useless” etc. They would not be concerned about protecting men unless it benefited them.

2023-06-22T08:57:32+00:00

Have you read about the early matriarch communities? They answer by themselves without any ground for questioning - especially because they all died and no one was left to defend any good they may have promoted.

Low_Significance_312 · 2023-06-22T08:21:05+00:00

I was so waiting for someone to mention our crazy days in a month. Obviously women will never make good rulers. Our bodies and minds are not built like that. There are days I have a brain the size of an ant when I have my monthly days because the pain is so unbearable. We already have a lot on our plate whereas men who are naturally more calm and contained and have a better control of self, appear to be much better choices. And you can control the world only when you can control yourself, which let’s agree men are much better at than women

2023-06-22T09:10:56+00:00

I don't want matriarchy. We live in a matriarchy now and look at how things are going for 95% of men. Very very badly.

bobby1225 · 2023-06-22T03:55:23+00:00

All is good, except those 5-9 days a month that results in irrational behavior in many females. After menopause, there are and should be women who attain stratospheric heights in all levels of politics, business, and home life.

Comfortable_Nail1553 · 2025-03-29T21:59:53+00:00

Not offensive. Im a female. A lesbian , no less. Im not transgender, but I don't see the difference between genders. Both men and women have abused assumed dominance over other individuals. If it bears any benefit to human society, good, and advocates for change, great. If it's just wasted energy towards the ursurption of power , it's not worth addressing.

Reasonable-Recipe352 · 2025-04-16T04:07:50+00:00

I'm gay and prefer a non-homophobic patriarchy

offtable · 2023-06-22T07:18:03+00:00

You need to define both, first and examine which world we live in now.

You cant just assert we live in one or another.

nezar19 · 2023-06-22T11:02:28+00:00

Meritrocracy. Nothing else matters.

jack_avram · 2023-06-22T19:33:31+00:00

Sad many fail to realize it's simply a hypothetical question.

scoff scoff scoff "what are you trying to infer!!?"

"nothing but sheer curiosity of both sides"

scoff scoff scoff

"???"

mytsicfforest · 2023-06-22T10:25:27+00:00

Women led counties did have better outcomes when handling the coronavirus pandemic. I do think there should be more women in senior leadership positions as they are very well equipped in decision making and crisis situations. However I don't believe that one gender is naturally better at leading than the other. I believe a progressive society with diversity will deliver the best outcomes for society.

LordOafsAlot · 2023-06-22T04:00:47+00:00

Do you really believe magical thinking and ritualistic behaviour are a basis for long-term social change? Sit back, relax, and try some popcorn.

griii2 · 2023-06-22T08:37:10+00:00

This is meaningless question. What matters is the degree to which one gender rules the society.

There is a difference between a patriarchy of the kind that we say "hi guys" and mean both men and women and a patriarchy of the kind that only men can own wealth and women can't walk on a street.

TossAwayFamilyRant · 2023-06-22T07:21:24+00:00

I don’t want men or women to rule. Too much power in the hands of one gender, over time, results in abuse of power. You know, like men have done for the last several hundred years. Ideal situation would to value skills in the context of others contributions - NOT setting the default value system by what men excel at (which is the current system).

GT121950 · 2023-06-22T08:30:33+00:00

Question how is this about men’s right also how sexist do you think the comments were in this

Revolutionary_Law793 · 2023-06-22T06:36:11+00:00

Both systems are wrong and unfair Matriarchy would probably cause less wars, but slower development

Annual_Anxiety_4457 · 2023-06-24T09:59:17+00:00

My own lived experience has been that until I got my first corporate job I lived in a matriarchy (Sweden). School, home, nursing, media narratives (80s, 90s, 00s) was woman dominated. Same with university and unemployment office and psychologist I met. All authority figures were women (well apart from a couple of lecturers in university). Everything was on womens terms.

Once I got a full time job around 30 it all flipped on it’s head. Suddenly I got a male manager who wanted me to accumulate wealth and hit on female colleagues (he knew I struggled with dating bc I’m shy and feel inferior).

I think we now live in a world where the public sector, education, media and parts of politics (Sweden) are mostly a matriarchy while corporate world is a patriarchy.

diacylglycerol83 · 2023-07-13T01:55:14+00:00

We have some ideas of what feminists are planning already. see quote below... This isn't even a matriarchy. This is worse than Hitler. Mossad's logo is "never again", meaning the intelligence agents in Israel would never let another Hitler rise up ever again. I hope they mean it. The second wave of feminism hurt us too much already. "Never again" needs to be every man's logo, Jewish or not.

QUOTE

In my silly utopia-dream, all men are castrated at birth! If they would like to have their testicles back, they have to have a minimum of a college degree, a six-figure job, no criminal background, a driver's license, a perfect grade on a year-long parenting course, and the consent of a psychotherapist who has seen them for at least two years, the consent of their mother, and the consent of a female partner who the man has been with consistently for at least four years. Paradise!

END QUOTE

SOURCE

u/diacylglycerol83 presented this on another thread a few days ago. He in turn found it on Ovarit, which is feminazi HQ. It carries the toxic feminists now that after they decided to go private, because being public on Reddit exposed their own shit the world. Anonymous cowards always hide. When Die Feminazi Uber Furher, whoever it is, rallies the rats out of the sewers, we need to be prepared to stop it. Crush it before young boys are taken hostage and murdered. Stop it before its too late.

Title	Matriarchy VS “Patriarchy”
Author	-Blueberry-1
Upvotes	120
Comments	132
Date	June 22, 2023 1:50 AM UTC (3 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/MensRights
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/14fq2ue/matriarchy_vs_patriarchy/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/MensRights/matriarchy-vs-patriarchy.1223199 https://theredarchive.com/post/1223199

Comments