O yea my mommy is autistic, smart, gorgeous, commanding, AND tall. I would be completely obsessed with her if she was a foot shorter then me her being tall also just 🥺
My mommy is the best mommy (I’m here to gush about her and find memes to send her duh)
Sure, but that's a choice thing. You like it because you chose it. A lot of women like feeling the same thing for the same reason. But they hate having that choice forced upon them, being made to feel small instead of desiring to feel small, yanno?
I think I know what you meant. I was focused on the fact that I think a lot of abuse stems from this issue, but you were saying that a lot of men need to learn how to grow up, shut the fuck up and listen when a woman in charge is talking.
My father, and my father's father got lost at sea, so that my sons, and my son's sons could die in WW3. You are wise in the ways of malehood, few other women knows these things 😞
There are many examples of matriarchal societies through history, and the idea that violence and avarice disappear or that some form of political utopia results is considered a myth by historians and anthropologists
I know this will be disappointing but things like slavery and war have persisted in humanity throughout a very diverse range of organizational structures, including matriliniel and matriarchal ones
My theory is people hold on to ideas like this because it gives them hope to think that there is some particular wrong that can be righted to fix society, because humans are basically good and it's just that one thing - like patriarchy - that is getting in the way. It's bullshit though. Humans are still the same evil monkeys when women are in charge, or under communism, or in the absence of scarcity
It's a meme, but I appreciate the historical tidbit; how handsome a man looks when he's studying. I promise to give guys like you a place in my dictatorship.
Can I be a warrior? Plsplsplsplspls, I've always wanted to fight and die, silent and unspeaking, shadowing a beautiful queen or princess. Even as a kid, the only game I would ever play is "follow a girl around and pretend to be her silent knight".
I was born to be a silent protector that bleeds out in the snow, it's not fair, modern society took this role away from me and made me pay taxes instead, I'm meant to fight and die in your name and honor, not pay a tuition to sit in classes that bore me. Pls just let me fulfill my destiny and my sword is yours, I need it, this is what I was made for, pls dear god I beg of thee 😭
I want there to be a scene where I physically struggle to keep up with the ability to protect you (because I'm so pregnant), and I lose the fight against some bad guy and I'm all "guuuh, my queen, I have failed you 😞", but then you absolutely blow him the fuck out effortlessly like no big deal, and it turns out you're actually way stronger than I ever was, and you don't even really need a sworn knight, but you just have one anyway, because, y'know, it's simple queen shit; all queens should have a sworn knight; that's just...I don't know, that's just how it is, I didn't make the rules, that's just how it goes...
on the contrary, matriarchical (and gender-egalitarian) societies are consistently less exploitative than their patriarchical counterparts. there are no examples of matriarchical societies that function as reverse-patriarchies in which men are exploited to the same degree as women are in patriarchical societies
it isn't really about humans being "basically good if not for this one thing", and it's not about getting the right sorts of people in power. It's about how material realities, including social structures, shape us. and believe me, when you start to understand the extent of what is wrong with the current order hope is the last thing you'll be feeling.
I disagree with you about the historical context, although you are free of course to present examples
However - I think we mainly disagree about where the pessimism comes from. I personalmy think it's less about a specific structure and more about human nature
Although I agree with you on your historical view, I think It would be a mistake to undermine the structures at play for the ill defined human nature as explanation.
The only way I would know how to define human nature would be deducing it by the actions of people throughout history and cultural differences.
And to me, the corruption of theoretically good system into flawed ones, or simply the differences between people in power and the numerous others... all seems to indicate to me human are very malleable by nature.
So structures would influence both genders.
Of course it's not black and white, there is similarity in structures, like hierarchy or wars, throughout history and cultures. Hence our nature also influence them.
The reason I think it's a lesser influence is I feel like the similarities are more intrinsic to functions of society rather than the individual. Thoses functions being influenced by it in a secondary and more complex way. Some functions might be emergent too. Wich is the limits at wich i'm unsure how do we draw the line of the definition of human nature.
fair enough - I guess I don't think the x-factor needs to be defined all that clearly if we observe that avarice affects nearly all human society, irrespective of its structure
Is it irrespective of its structure or is it that all structure inherently use avarice as one of it's motor in order to exist ?
To me the importance lies on what this entails as our goal as societies. Even to define morality. I'd give you it's more philosophical and not much practical though.
like I said elsewhere on this thread - machiavellianism is like capitalism - it's self administering. that's a huge advantage in terms of prevalence.
as a strategy altruism doesn't really scale in an obvious way, so in a civilized society we tend to impose it on people. but on a certain scale purely self-interested strategies tend to be rewarded disproportionately - so in answer to your question I think the avarice exists first and where it's allowed to it informs what structures develop
I agree, altruism doesn't scale and selfish strategies are rewarded. I was proposing avarice exist because of this assertion wich dictates the structures (opposed to avarice itself informing it)
The point would be to wonder if there is any limits to such assertion. Why is it true and is there any tools to balance it in the best way possible. Because if so avarice would not be so prevalent in my opinion.
It's one though leading my reflections on communism for instance. In which I personally don't believe it can't answer without having to impose itself on people, like you said.
But any kind of systemic tool that would question this assertion reliability (without violence), even partially, would be worth it. As sush can it exist is the legitimate question behind the factors of social structures and human nature.
There is something I've been kind of mulling over recently that I wonder if it could have some influence on humanity as a whole today. So humanity has long had religions that for thousands have years have repressed women. Lots of forced, coerced or arranged marriages. I'm curious if men as a whole would've lost a lot of their aggression if a lot of losers throughout time weren't awarded a wife just by virtue of existing and the women had an actual choice. Would a lot of their aggression toward women and people in general be bred out?
And to add, their only understanding of justice is reciprocal "eye for an eye" justice. They think the only way the patriarchy can be replaced or adjusted would be for them to face punitive, corporal punishment justice for all the sins of the patriarchy. It is why they are so obsessed with the concept that they, themselves as individuals, did not enslave black people, genocide Native Americans, or exploit women for generations.
The whole point of ending the patriarchy is to end the cycle of abuse and oppression, not trade hands of the abusers and oppressors.
I don't think this is quite it. It's not that they think the destruction of the patriarchy would require them recieve punishment, it's that the destruction of the patriarchy would erode the privileges they enjoy, and from their perspective women being "brought up" to their level feels like they're being brought down.
AKA to a privileged person, equality feels like oppression.
I think the second part is why I like matriarchies, I'm mentally behind and don't know what to do as a human... plus being raised by my mom and aunts has made me incapable of putting up with women who can't be independent
There’s something deeply wrong with you, and I have a feeling you aren’t just going to hurt or harm women but anyone regardless of gender around you is not safe. Seek help
I'm completely harmless, I used to be violent and it terrified me so bad that I abhor violence outside of self defense... I'm just autistic so my development is a little behind
so they feel like what they are? the parliament in my home country feels like a boys club with the shit they say and they're so immature and smug about it, i thought we got this out of our system in high school but i guess not
I saw and experienced misogyny and harassment from both men and women. I don't know who is in charge; all of them will get corrupted at some point, and I don't like that part.
yep. mean people come in all shapes and forms.
there are amazing people out there, but they never ever want to be in those positions.
the lust for power so often attracts the least able and the more self-absorbed isn't it.
Gurlll them men all thinking saying one non-toxic thing somehow entitles them to praise from women here. WE DON'T CARE. Stay in your space. Wanna be an ally here? Stay quiet. Damn
1000% I'm fine with men being in this space and commenting, but what really gives me the ick is when they have to say something along the lines of, "As a man-" or "Man here-"
I dont want to get too conspiratorial, but i have had these guys reply to my comments, I get a notification on my phone so I generally see them right as they're posted. Somehow they always have e like 5 upvotes immediately, and then same for my reply but in the negatives.
In this sub it will correct itself over time, but given what we've seen in the past on reddit (like researchers using AI on r/changemyview) i dont think it's insane to think there are people betting upvotes to manufacture consent or change the general opinion of a sub.
Thanks for telling me about this possibility, I was about this 🤏 close to leaving over the sudden loss of spine of this subreddit. Bleak as it is, I hope you're right.
Then rename the sub to "let people have fun" or something.
Seriously though, it's not misandry? There are men out there that I appreciate and care about, but they're not the kind of tool that goes into woman-centered spaces to insert their opinion. This argument has been had before here so I won't elaborate but yeah.
Also this meme isn't anti-prude, it's feminist and it's attracting losers that feel like they need to come here to correct women in their thoughts and views.
Regardless, this pushback is all I needed to peace out. Not that anyone should care since I'm usually not very active here at all (there are moids here more active than me lmao) but it does say something about the direction the community is going, for better or for worse.
The thing that I'm always baffled about is that people can't take a step back and remember that this is all internet joking for the funny. There are no consequences in real life for someone posting a meme about how much they love making men cry. You can still feel a little bit upset about it if you want, sure, but it's NOT misandry.
It's super easy to tell the difference between someone who's actually being hateful and spiteful and someone who just wants to contribute to the community. If a moid sees a meme like this and it seriously upsets them, then that's on THEM, not the poster.
they won’t. they’ve said several times that they’re welcome here, best thing to do is to report the comments and hope they get taken down but they’ll keep lurking and complaining about every post that isn’t straight up glazing them
edit: LMFAO immediate downvote means i’m literally right
Of course all the moids are going to have loud opinions again. Of fucking course. This sub has gone to, well, the moids. It's so tiring. I come here for unhinged girly opinions and memes and here there be moiding like the rest of reddit. Women can't have shit.
I fear matriarchy because I see how bad patriarchy has been for everyone, including men. Basing a system of governance on what's between your legs is ridiculous.
Also, to be fair, half these posts use threats of violence against men as jokes. They are funny, but still!
I think that with women having power, they wouldn't objectify or harass men. They would continue to ignore and avoid creepy men as they do and should now, but with much less pressure or remorse to do otherwise. That is what those men really should fear in this hypothetical: irrelevance
In my opinion, men and women are emotionally the same (from birth). The only thing that changes things is environment, or upbringing, social pressures, etc. So I think men would fill the role of women in patriarchy in a matriarchy. Men would get whatever advantages or disadvantages in this scenario.
For me personally I’d be fine with it, but then again, I’ve never been a women, so I don’t know what misogyny is like
But patriarchy or matriarchy is not about an entire sex of people being in charge of things.
It's about 0,01% of patriarchy (or matriarchy) on the top.
Being in charge, sure. It’s only a fraction of that sex, but it is always true that only a fraction of any population is “in charge”.
It’s about one group having a default advantage in all situations. Who gets the job, the pay, that apartment, etc. when it is down to a member of the in-group vs a member of the out-group.
It’s about that deference feeling like something you are owed so strongly that you don’t even think about it.
Matriarchy is amazing. Grew up in a matriarchal family and loved it. Who wouldn't want to have multiple mothers?
My favorite is that men freak out about the ultrafeminist idea of altering birth rates until women outnumber men two or three to one. I'm like "dude, do you know what that means? It means two or three of them for every one of us. Let them win this one."
In my case, it looked like being raised by a feminist lesbian mother and her gfs, with my grandparents' generation being largely run by the women. My grandmother has the PhD, and her late husband, my grandfather was never anything but supportive of her.
My father's side is less so with the men as the major earners, but even it has this quasi-institution called "madame chairwoman," and the women just kind of run everything, and make the major decisions. Auntie is a lobbyist, and her late husband was supportive. Lots of powerful women in my family with husbands playing supportive roles. Lots of university faculty and so on. With the exception of my father who is kind of doing his own thing (which is certainly not incompatible with this) everybody knows the women are in charge. The men usually work, but most of the time, we understand they're the leaders.
My second wife made the money, was a big corporate hotshot, controlled the finances, ran the show. I was supportive. It was great. I was a civil rights lawyer and then a professor, but I didn't make much money to speak of. She was mostly the boss. I didn't want to be married anymore, but that was nothing to do with her. I just came to terms with my own identity which was incompatible with marriage, but totally all support to her. She was awesome, and we parted as friends.
A family is great when it's run by the women; a society run by the women would be even better. They would just tell
the men, "go do your thing. Make your little projects and contributions. Play your little hobbies. Prepare for whatever disaster you think is coming. We'll call you if we need you. Stay out of trouble. Don't get too competitive with each other. Don’t start fights without our say so, and don't get picky and clingy, and there's enough love and sex to go around if you be good and let us decide the larger relationship terms like children and so on. Now, excuse us, we have major planning to do."
And yeah, I think that probably would mean fewer men, but that sounds great for the men. We don't have to fight each other anymore. We just do our thing and emotionally and sexually support a few powerful women. We can still be smart and strong, even independent, just not powerful, which sounds awesome because power sucks. If there's a terrible catastrophe, and we need to knock down walls and stuff, then cool, but mostly we just try not to be the cause of that need. It's like being a fine horse put out to pasture. What's not to like?
Neither do I. There was never a formal declaration. They aren't dictators. It just happened to land that way, and it went well. All I'm saying is is that women being in charge is nothing to be afraid of per se.
That sounds really really interesting to a person where our whole culture revolves around men being the breadwinner. Its honestly amazing to see it can work pretty well other way around.
I think men are also scared that they will be able to add no value to the house and feel worthless if they are not the 'man of the house'. Its a thought that has been carried out through generations, and would take time to change. But i feel ultimately you should do what you want to do, and communicate with your partner about the relationship.
I think about a great piece of marital advice I got from a colleague, who said that in every relationship, there is a secretary of state and a secretary of war (she was the secretary of war, but it usually goes the other way). The secretary of war's job is mostly just to be ready, while the secretary of state runs the show. And I asked her, shouldn't I be worried that the secretary of war will be irrelevant, and she said, "no, because when when we need you, there is no one who can do what you do other than you, because you spend your time being ready, and eventually, we will need you, and we know it." So be good, stay ready, and wait until the women's council tells you, "go to it."
I grew up in a house off all girls, no dad. I meant it as more men should respect women. I agreed with you. Instead of attacking me, maybe know that it means more than one thing to imply my gender. This is a ladies place where if more men see that its okay to stand up for women, maybe they will be more inclined to do so as well.
Going into the negative karma with more and more comments. Although, your account is new. Give it time and your messages will resound with the right people. Stick in there, champ. I'm genuinely cheering for you.
Some men were made to feel small by a woman or women in their life and can't move past that meanwhile I'm wishing a woman would make me feel small, but I don't really have the femme appearance I wish I could have to be with who I'd wanna be with.
Yeah but I'd have to actively go outside for more than groceries, work, and to take my son to the park to actually interact with people enough to meet someone. But online is really the only place I can at least try to pretend to be who I wanna be.
I appreciate the encouragement though and will keep trying.
I don't think so. Honestly, I feel like a lot of girls in this sub have an alter ego of being cruel narcissists, because it's easier to pretend you have no empathy for other human beings, unless they're our equals.
I bet in the real world I've allowed and overlooked men's unfair treatment, even when I was in a position to make them feel bad. Because yes, it's easy to make people feel bad online.
Anyway, even though it exists, it's very rare to see matriarchal societies treat men in a similar way to how we're treated in patriarchal societies.
Anyway, even though it exists, it's very rare to see matriarchal societies treat men in a similar way to how we're treated in patriarchal societies.
What makes a matriarchal society different from a patriarchal society though?
Switching the ruling class won't help the people who aren't a part of that class. You still fundamentally have the same society where the in-group is negligent to the woes of the out-group until it serves them utility.
You might get empathy with women in leadership, but you can also just as easily get negligence.
Empathy in women is emphasized specifically because of patriarchy. If a matriarchy rewrites which gender gets to be in power, the conditions for empathy in women will evaporate because empathy would lose its utility in women's survival.
Tell me, why is it that men can survive without empathy/community but women can't in a patriarchy?
It's why you see that patriarchy rarely helps displaced men and instead puts the responsibility on them to help themselves.
A matriarchy has no obligation to uplift women because women would now be the ones in power and you'd just be uplifting your political competitors with no serviceable good to your PR beyond that you help those in power stay in power.
You can make the argument that a matriarchy would help women more objectively, but that's sly language for "the people in power would help the people who can have power."
It benefits the situation of women by inverting who is in power but does not fundamentally resolve the fact that society helps those with power far more than those without power.
No matter what axis you take on how society helps people with/without power, you still end up with the conclusion that a matriarchy does not resolve absolute power imbalance, it just inverts the polarity.
The Akan (Ghana), where lineage and inheritance are passed down through the mother and the "Queen Mothers" wield great influence, and societies with strong female and communal leadership, such as the village of Umoja (Kenya), a haven for women, and the Bijagó (Guinea-Bissau).
In Africa, there are matriarchal indigenous communities that are older than your arrogance and superiority complex. But I suppose you must compensate for your lack of a penis with something.
They are not matriarchal. None of the societies you listed are matriarchal because women do not exclusively hold all primary power and authority over men and do not directly rule over men.
The term matrilineal and matrilocal maybe are foreign to you but they’re not the same as matriarchal. Matriarchal = rule by and primary power and authority to women only
Yes they’re not matriarchal but matrilineal and or matrilocal. I hope this helps. Educating yourself on these topics and learning basic anthropology can aid in understanding how term work, and that you’re arbitrarily placing these false western dichotomy labels onto native peoples who’s structures are far more complex than patriarchy or matriarchy.
A matriarchy is a social system where authority and primary power rest with women, especially the mother, and social belonging is traced through the maternal line.
I think the person who wrote the article has enough authority and knowledge to call a community matriarchal than you, dear random internet user.
So do you admit the point of this post is to feed your femdom fetish? Or your desire to dominate and enslave men. The answer is yes I know I’m just confused why you didn’t post this to a BDSM centered sub instead then
Bro, I'm literally an autistic woman who prefers dynamics where I'm the submissive one because I'm better at following orders than giving them. If you're out of arguments, go play with grass. Women are too busy demanding a cure for endometriosis; we don't have a dark plan to enslave men. Although we should 😕
I dont mind ladies being in charge, my partner is a lot smarter than I am but be prepared to be chucked out the window if you piss off your 300 pound employee with rage issues
Wanting something and doing it are different things. Come to Latin America and enjoy seeing single mothers providing for their families. I don't think anyone would mind providing for their household; we're all adults at the end of the day, and that's the basics.
join the girl army and spread our cause, on blue sky, on the gram, or on formerly bird app :3
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
I think it's two things.
1) the patriarchy has convinced men that civilized societies are top down and whoever is in charge is morally obligated to exploit those below them
And
2) women in charge remind men of their mommies and that makes a lot of men feel like little boys.
Either way. Fuck the patriarchy
You're saying that like the second point is a negative smh
I'm saying it makes for a lot of pent up aggressions hurled into the directions of women who make men feel small.
I think they are pointing out that some people, me, date women who are almost a foot taller than them because they like feeling small.
It's not even a height thing imo
O yea my mommy is autistic, smart, gorgeous, commanding, AND tall. I would be completely obsessed with her if she was a foot shorter then me her being tall also just 🥺
My mommy is the best mommy (I’m here to gush about her and find memes to send her duh)
https://preview.redd.it/cklilbqxx07g1.jpeg?width=1289&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=9144eed6f2efffc745643a56707f4ef05fb24b2c
Get memed
These guys make me believe that love is possible for me too in the morning, till the night reality hits , next day repeat 😭😭
Sure, but that's a choice thing. You like it because you chose it. A lot of women like feeling the same thing for the same reason. But they hate having that choice forced upon them, being made to feel small instead of desiring to feel small, yanno?
Some men need to be made feeling small, they are just inflated condoms that think they are dirigibles
What a fucking metaphor. Beautiful
I think I know what you meant. I was focused on the fact that I think a lot of abuse stems from this issue, but you were saying that a lot of men need to learn how to grow up, shut the fuck up and listen when a woman in charge is talking.
Exactly. A man's place lies in the traditional value of going to war and dying, or being lost at sea.
My father, and my father's father got lost at sea, so that my sons, and my son's sons could die in WW3. You are wise in the ways of malehood, few other women knows these things 😞
Its infuriating to be nonconsensually mommy’d
Y’all that talk it out and agree to it are cool tho
Consent is important and very cool
https://preview.redd.it/rn69ueieq77g1.jpeg?width=3072&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=524ce23c5c5beb2734611576993de068f89c78e1
Took the words right out of my mouth 🫡
That NEVER happens in male dominated subreddits I gotta say, nobody ever says the obviously correct thing there
There are many examples of matriarchal societies through history, and the idea that violence and avarice disappear or that some form of political utopia results is considered a myth by historians and anthropologists
I know this will be disappointing but things like slavery and war have persisted in humanity throughout a very diverse range of organizational structures, including matriliniel and matriarchal ones
My theory is people hold on to ideas like this because it gives them hope to think that there is some particular wrong that can be righted to fix society, because humans are basically good and it's just that one thing - like patriarchy - that is getting in the way. It's bullshit though. Humans are still the same evil monkeys when women are in charge, or under communism, or in the absence of scarcity
It's a meme, but I appreciate the historical tidbit; how handsome a man looks when he's studying. I promise to give guys like you a place in my dictatorship.
Can I be a warrior? Plsplsplsplspls, I've always wanted to fight and die, silent and unspeaking, shadowing a beautiful queen or princess. Even as a kid, the only game I would ever play is "follow a girl around and pretend to be her silent knight".
I was born to be a silent protector that bleeds out in the snow, it's not fair, modern society took this role away from me and made me pay taxes instead, I'm meant to fight and die in your name and honor, not pay a tuition to sit in classes that bore me. Pls just let me fulfill my destiny and my sword is yours, I need it, this is what I was made for, pls dear god I beg of thee 😭
Oh, God. My vagina throbbed.
I lay my sword, and my life at your feet, my queen 😭😭😭
I wish we were seahorses, so we could get you pregnant.
I want there to be a scene where I physically struggle to keep up with the ability to protect you (because I'm so pregnant), and I lose the fight against some bad guy and I'm all "guuuh, my queen, I have failed you 😞", but then you absolutely blow him the fuck out effortlessly like no big deal, and it turns out you're actually way stronger than I ever was, and you don't even really need a sworn knight, but you just have one anyway, because, y'know, it's simple queen shit; all queens should have a sworn knight; that's just...I don't know, that's just how it is, I didn't make the rules, that's just how it goes...
I dont wanna 😭
Haha thanks lady I'll take it
This is what I was trying to say, but glad that some one explained it better
This is all well and good until you start defending the continuation of patriarchy
on the contrary, matriarchical (and gender-egalitarian) societies are consistently less exploitative than their patriarchical counterparts. there are no examples of matriarchical societies that function as reverse-patriarchies in which men are exploited to the same degree as women are in patriarchical societies
it isn't really about humans being "basically good if not for this one thing", and it's not about getting the right sorts of people in power. It's about how material realities, including social structures, shape us. and believe me, when you start to understand the extent of what is wrong with the current order hope is the last thing you'll be feeling.
I disagree with you about the historical context, although you are free of course to present examples
However - I think we mainly disagree about where the pessimism comes from. I personalmy think it's less about a specific structure and more about human nature
Although I agree with you on your historical view, I think It would be a mistake to undermine the structures at play for the ill defined human nature as explanation.
The only way I would know how to define human nature would be deducing it by the actions of people throughout history and cultural differences.
And to me, the corruption of theoretically good system into flawed ones, or simply the differences between people in power and the numerous others... all seems to indicate to me human are very malleable by nature.
So structures would influence both genders.
Of course it's not black and white, there is similarity in structures, like hierarchy or wars, throughout history and cultures. Hence our nature also influence them.
The reason I think it's a lesser influence is I feel like the similarities are more intrinsic to functions of society rather than the individual. Thoses functions being influenced by it in a secondary and more complex way. Some functions might be emergent too. Wich is the limits at wich i'm unsure how do we draw the line of the definition of human nature.
fair enough - I guess I don't think the x-factor needs to be defined all that clearly if we observe that avarice affects nearly all human society, irrespective of its structure
Is it irrespective of its structure or is it that all structure inherently use avarice as one of it's motor in order to exist ?
To me the importance lies on what this entails as our goal as societies. Even to define morality. I'd give you it's more philosophical and not much practical though.
like I said elsewhere on this thread - machiavellianism is like capitalism - it's self administering. that's a huge advantage in terms of prevalence.
as a strategy altruism doesn't really scale in an obvious way, so in a civilized society we tend to impose it on people. but on a certain scale purely self-interested strategies tend to be rewarded disproportionately - so in answer to your question I think the avarice exists first and where it's allowed to it informs what structures develop
I agree, altruism doesn't scale and selfish strategies are rewarded. I was proposing avarice exist because of this assertion wich dictates the structures (opposed to avarice itself informing it)
The point would be to wonder if there is any limits to such assertion. Why is it true and is there any tools to balance it in the best way possible. Because if so avarice would not be so prevalent in my opinion.
It's one though leading my reflections on communism for instance. In which I personally don't believe it can't answer without having to impose itself on people, like you said.
But any kind of systemic tool that would question this assertion reliability (without violence), even partially, would be worth it. As sush can it exist is the legitimate question behind the factors of social structures and human nature.
There is something I've been kind of mulling over recently that I wonder if it could have some influence on humanity as a whole today. So humanity has long had religions that for thousands have years have repressed women. Lots of forced, coerced or arranged marriages. I'm curious if men as a whole would've lost a lot of their aggression if a lot of losers throughout time weren't awarded a wife just by virtue of existing and the women had an actual choice. Would a lot of their aggression toward women and people in general be bred out?
Machiavelli over Rousseau is then... At least for the most part
Machiavellianism has the same advantage in terms of prevalence as capitalism - it is self administering
Fair play just doesn't scale unless you impose it on people - that's why we do it
That's what I tried to say, but I explained it poorly, and got downvoted 😅
I'm a feminist because I believe women can commit just as many atrocities as men
And to add, their only understanding of justice is reciprocal "eye for an eye" justice. They think the only way the patriarchy can be replaced or adjusted would be for them to face punitive, corporal punishment justice for all the sins of the patriarchy. It is why they are so obsessed with the concept that they, themselves as individuals, did not enslave black people, genocide Native Americans, or exploit women for generations.
The whole point of ending the patriarchy is to end the cycle of abuse and oppression, not trade hands of the abusers and oppressors.
I don't think this is quite it. It's not that they think the destruction of the patriarchy would require them recieve punishment, it's that the destruction of the patriarchy would erode the privileges they enjoy, and from their perspective women being "brought up" to their level feels like they're being brought down.
AKA to a privileged person, equality feels like oppression.
Fuck the patriarchy. If anything it is also bad for men. It takes toll on us also. Bell Hooks explained that in her book perfectly.
I think the second part is why I like matriarchies, I'm mentally behind and don't know what to do as a human... plus being raised by my mom and aunts has made me incapable of putting up with women who can't be independent
There’s something deeply wrong with you, and I have a feeling you aren’t just going to hurt or harm women but anyone regardless of gender around you is not safe. Seek help
I'm completely harmless, I used to be violent and it terrified me so bad that I abhor violence outside of self defense... I'm just autistic so my development is a little behind
The harmless are always harmful.
That's not how words work
lolllll tthats what you get for simping
smile for the KAMera!
I get the feeling that people don't know what simping means
so they feel like what they are? the parliament in my home country feels like a boys club with the shit they say and they're so immature and smug about it, i thought we got this out of our system in high school but i guess not
I don't know if the former is necessarily something born out of patriarchy, it sounds more like capitalism and feudalism before that
Both famously patriarchal
Sure but the fact that they go hand in hand doesn't make them the same thing
I saw and experienced misogyny and harassment from both men and women. I don't know who is in charge; all of them will get corrupted at some point, and I don't like that part.
yep. mean people come in all shapes and forms.
there are amazing people out there, but they never ever want to be in those positions.
the lust for power so often attracts the least able and the more self-absorbed isn't it.
god this sub is literally completely overrun with 12 year old edgy moid trolls rip in pieces
how i miss the girly days now we got dudes saying “ummm girl power?? margaret thatcher??” fuckkkk
They be in the comments like, "I would DIE for wamen, all wamen are queen!"
https://preview.redd.it/01rqcft5g17g1.jpeg?width=960&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=90e6f7169494948b940213d78aa771ab9ed63747
Like bro, get off the internet you should be in school rn
Gurlll them men all thinking saying one non-toxic thing somehow entitles them to praise from women here. WE DON'T CARE. Stay in your space. Wanna be an ally here? Stay quiet. Damn
1000% I'm fine with men being in this space and commenting, but what really gives me the ick is when they have to say something along the lines of, "As a man-" or "Man here-"
Like BRO read the room?!
As a man, I am NOT one of them!
And they're getting upvoted. Who the fuck is upvoting them lmao, why are they being tolerated
I dont want to get too conspiratorial, but i have had these guys reply to my comments, I get a notification on my phone so I generally see them right as they're posted. Somehow they always have e like 5 upvotes immediately, and then same for my reply but in the negatives.
In this sub it will correct itself over time, but given what we've seen in the past on reddit (like researchers using AI on r/changemyview) i dont think it's insane to think there are people betting upvotes to manufacture consent or change the general opinion of a sub.
Thanks for telling me about this possibility, I was about this 🤏 close to leaving over the sudden loss of spine of this subreddit. Bleak as it is, I hope you're right.
Men and women that prefer this sub remain for insatiably thirsty and hilariously inappropriate anti-prude memes.
There are enough misandrist subs.
Then rename the sub to "let people have fun" or something.
Seriously though, it's not misandry? There are men out there that I appreciate and care about, but they're not the kind of tool that goes into woman-centered spaces to insert their opinion. This argument has been had before here so I won't elaborate but yeah.
Also this meme isn't anti-prude, it's feminist and it's attracting losers that feel like they need to come here to correct women in their thoughts and views.
Regardless, this pushback is all I needed to peace out. Not that anyone should care since I'm usually not very active here at all (there are moids here more active than me lmao) but it does say something about the direction the community is going, for better or for worse.
The thing that I'm always baffled about is that people can't take a step back and remember that this is all internet joking for the funny. There are no consequences in real life for someone posting a meme about how much they love making men cry. You can still feel a little bit upset about it if you want, sure, but it's NOT misandry.
It's super easy to tell the difference between someone who's actually being hateful and spiteful and someone who just wants to contribute to the community. If a moid sees a meme like this and it seriously upsets them, then that's on THEM, not the poster.
How do we get them to GO AWAY!! why can’t we have one thing that isn’t tainted by creepy stupid men
Honestly just make a sub rule about it and ban the incel losers. Kinda all you can do
they won’t. they’ve said several times that they’re welcome here, best thing to do is to report the comments and hope they get taken down but they’ll keep lurking and complaining about every post that isn’t straight up glazing them
edit: LMFAO immediate downvote means i’m literally right
Tbf the rule says we're allowed as long as we're respectful, which means it's completely allowed to bully the troublemakers as per sub rules
Of course all the moids are going to have loud opinions again. Of fucking course. This sub has gone to, well, the moids. It's so tiring. I come here for unhinged girly opinions and memes and here there be moiding like the rest of reddit. Women can't have shit.
At least let the girls give it a spin, it's only fair
Yeah we should get a turn
https://preview.redd.it/w4tk5d07927g1.jpeg?width=738&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=bd034ddb68501b9a0deb64975f5db21a8caf36ed
[removed]
Those are some big shoes to fill. Good luck
I don't think we could if we tried :c
Oh.. I can
We’re gonna try though right?
Controversial point but regardless of gender, both sides will act vile in the event of having power over another.
Checks out.
I also think turnabout wouldn't solve things.
But yeah, fuck the patriarchy.
i want matriarchy where only women rule but EVERYONE can vote even the children but not animals or the dead cus i have no clue how would that work
I know I fucking would yeah
You mean I'd only be allowed to dress like a slut on Halloween? :'(
Nah nah, Halloween should be the only holiday you don't dress like a slut 🙏
Whore-ray!
Dress up? I think Halloween would be the only day they'd be allowed to be dressed up.
Its hoochie daddy season 24/7/365
If my house flipped to the female rule, one thing and only one thing would change! Our cat would be a girl.
Word
[removed]
[removed]
ok
I fear matriarchy because I see how bad patriarchy has been for everyone, including men. Basing a system of governance on what's between your legs is ridiculous.
Also, to be fair, half these posts use threats of violence against men as jokes. They are funny, but still!
God, I wish.
[deleted]
Jokes on you. That IS what I want.
Aw, I got a notification you replied to my reply, but it's not showing up. Was it too extreme? Damn. I missed it.
God forbid. I say bring it.
They fear we will run things better than them 😌 (we would)
YEP!
EXACTLY!
Nah, United Kingdoms was fine with Queen Elizabeth.
Does that mean boys and Girls would swap places?
I think that with women having power, they wouldn't objectify or harass men. They would continue to ignore and avoid creepy men as they do and should now, but with much less pressure or remorse to do otherwise. That is what those men really should fear in this hypothetical: irrelevance
[removed]
Men just don't want to give up power. I don't think there's considerations beyond that.
More women in positions of power would at the very least make things more interesting.
It gets so old always having the older white dude take the leader role.
I want more women, minorities, or even openly lgbqt people in power. Lord knows we have enough closeted self hating people in power
Genuinely we should do it for like 30 years just to see if it works out
I don't think much would change if we had more capitalist women tbf
Same problem with white people being afraid of people of color lol
This explains so much actually
Yet women don't even want to take the lead during dates, or approaching their crush.
In my opinion, men and women are emotionally the same (from birth). The only thing that changes things is environment, or upbringing, social pressures, etc. So I think men would fill the role of women in patriarchy in a matriarchy. Men would get whatever advantages or disadvantages in this scenario.
For me personally I’d be fine with it, but then again, I’ve never been a women, so I don’t know what misogyny is like
I'm more concerned they would treat me like my last three girlfriends treated me
But patriarchy or matriarchy is not about an entire sex of people being in charge of things.
It's about 0,01% of patriarchy (or matriarchy) on the top.
Being in charge, sure. It’s only a fraction of that sex, but it is always true that only a fraction of any population is “in charge”.
It’s about one group having a default advantage in all situations. Who gets the job, the pay, that apartment, etc. when it is down to a member of the in-group vs a member of the out-group.
It’s about that deference feeling like something you are owed so strongly that you don’t even think about it.
Look at how the patriarchy treats us. Please it's all yours anything I can do to help.
Some of yall need to visit r/SeriousGynarchy
I'm not intellectual and serious enough on social media for that.
Matriarchy is amazing. Grew up in a matriarchal family and loved it. Who wouldn't want to have multiple mothers?
My favorite is that men freak out about the ultrafeminist idea of altering birth rates until women outnumber men two or three to one. I'm like "dude, do you know what that means? It means two or three of them for every one of us. Let them win this one."
How does a Matriarchal family look like? Im genuinely curious.
In my case, it looked like being raised by a feminist lesbian mother and her gfs, with my grandparents' generation being largely run by the women. My grandmother has the PhD, and her late husband, my grandfather was never anything but supportive of her.
My father's side is less so with the men as the major earners, but even it has this quasi-institution called "madame chairwoman," and the women just kind of run everything, and make the major decisions. Auntie is a lobbyist, and her late husband was supportive. Lots of powerful women in my family with husbands playing supportive roles. Lots of university faculty and so on. With the exception of my father who is kind of doing his own thing (which is certainly not incompatible with this) everybody knows the women are in charge. The men usually work, but most of the time, we understand they're the leaders.
My second wife made the money, was a big corporate hotshot, controlled the finances, ran the show. I was supportive. It was great. I was a civil rights lawyer and then a professor, but I didn't make much money to speak of. She was mostly the boss. I didn't want to be married anymore, but that was nothing to do with her. I just came to terms with my own identity which was incompatible with marriage, but totally all support to her. She was awesome, and we parted as friends.
A family is great when it's run by the women; a society run by the women would be even better. They would just tell the men, "go do your thing. Make your little projects and contributions. Play your little hobbies. Prepare for whatever disaster you think is coming. We'll call you if we need you. Stay out of trouble. Don't get too competitive with each other. Don’t start fights without our say so, and don't get picky and clingy, and there's enough love and sex to go around if you be good and let us decide the larger relationship terms like children and so on. Now, excuse us, we have major planning to do."
And yeah, I think that probably would mean fewer men, but that sounds great for the men. We don't have to fight each other anymore. We just do our thing and emotionally and sexually support a few powerful women. We can still be smart and strong, even independent, just not powerful, which sounds awesome because power sucks. If there's a terrible catastrophe, and we need to knock down walls and stuff, then cool, but mostly we just try not to be the cause of that need. It's like being a fine horse put out to pasture. What's not to like?
I mean it's not good but it's not bad either I don't think give someone power based on their gender is a good idea
Neither do I. There was never a formal declaration. They aren't dictators. It just happened to land that way, and it went well. All I'm saying is is that women being in charge is nothing to be afraid of per se.
That sounds really really interesting to a person where our whole culture revolves around men being the breadwinner. Its honestly amazing to see it can work pretty well other way around.
I think men are also scared that they will be able to add no value to the house and feel worthless if they are not the 'man of the house'. Its a thought that has been carried out through generations, and would take time to change. But i feel ultimately you should do what you want to do, and communicate with your partner about the relationship.
I think about a great piece of marital advice I got from a colleague, who said that in every relationship, there is a secretary of state and a secretary of war (she was the secretary of war, but it usually goes the other way). The secretary of war's job is mostly just to be ready, while the secretary of state runs the show. And I asked her, shouldn't I be worried that the secretary of war will be irrelevant, and she said, "no, because when when we need you, there is no one who can do what you do other than you, because you spend your time being ready, and eventually, we will need you, and we know it." So be good, stay ready, and wait until the women's council tells you, "go to it."
It's horrific seeing those videos of groups of men violating individual women in crowds 👺‼️
you're giving too much credit to men as none of them think that far ahead
As a man, I think the country should give women a chance. I doubt it would be worse than it is or worse than what men have done for centuries.
You should be the first sent to labor camps for sure
“As a man” SHUT THE FUCK UP
I grew up in a house off all girls, no dad. I meant it as more men should respect women. I agreed with you. Instead of attacking me, maybe know that it means more than one thing to imply my gender. This is a ladies place where if more men see that its okay to stand up for women, maybe they will be more inclined to do so as well.
What kind of labor camp btw?
Going into the negative karma with more and more comments. Although, your account is new. Give it time and your messages will resound with the right people. Stick in there, champ. I'm genuinely cheering for you.
As a man here, I cannot disagree more. I’d love a matriarchy. Women rock!!
You’re an AI not a human
lol https://x.com/Sjira96/status/1771357504766927009
I am flattered that you think me a highly advanced language algorithm.
We need the feminarchy, I support Bethany Rage for leader of Earth.
Some men were made to feel small by a woman or women in their life and can't move past that meanwhile I'm wishing a woman would make me feel small, but I don't really have the femme appearance I wish I could have to be with who I'd wanna be with.
Many women (like me) don't need someone who looks feminine to make them feel small. Cheer up, your sociopathic soul mate is out there, champ!
Yeah but I'd have to actively go outside for more than groceries, work, and to take my son to the park to actually interact with people enough to meet someone. But online is really the only place I can at least try to pretend to be who I wanna be.
I appreciate the encouragement though and will keep trying.
Same men that fear brown people having any power
The victim mentality is strong here
What's the opposite of the princess treatment? What does the Prince treatment look like? I'm to Dom for that.
I don't know, I've always been one to give "Bitch Treatment," I'm too narcissistic for that.
As a man, this actually makes sense.
Not complaining but this sub proves it might be worse
I don't think so. Honestly, I feel like a lot of girls in this sub have an alter ego of being cruel narcissists, because it's easier to pretend you have no empathy for other human beings, unless they're our equals.
I bet in the real world I've allowed and overlooked men's unfair treatment, even when I was in a position to make them feel bad. Because yes, it's easy to make people feel bad online.
Anyway, even though it exists, it's very rare to see matriarchal societies treat men in a similar way to how we're treated in patriarchal societies.
What makes a matriarchal society different from a patriarchal society though?
Switching the ruling class won't help the people who aren't a part of that class. You still fundamentally have the same society where the in-group is negligent to the woes of the out-group until it serves them utility.
You might get empathy with women in leadership, but you can also just as easily get negligence.
Empathy in women is emphasized specifically because of patriarchy. If a matriarchy rewrites which gender gets to be in power, the conditions for empathy in women will evaporate because empathy would lose its utility in women's survival.
Tell me, why is it that men can survive without empathy/community but women can't in a patriarchy?
It's why you see that patriarchy rarely helps displaced men and instead puts the responsibility on them to help themselves.
A matriarchy has no obligation to uplift women because women would now be the ones in power and you'd just be uplifting your political competitors with no serviceable good to your PR beyond that you help those in power stay in power.
You can make the argument that a matriarchy would help women more objectively, but that's sly language for "the people in power would help the people who can have power."
It benefits the situation of women by inverting who is in power but does not fundamentally resolve the fact that society helps those with power far more than those without power.
No matter what axis you take on how society helps people with/without power, you still end up with the conclusion that a matriarchy does not resolve absolute power imbalance, it just inverts the polarity.
I'm not going to read all that. God bless you.
😭
Matriarchal societies don’t exist, if you knew an ounce of anthropology you’d know this I’m pretty sure
The Akan (Ghana), where lineage and inheritance are passed down through the mother and the "Queen Mothers" wield great influence, and societies with strong female and communal leadership, such as the village of Umoja (Kenya), a haven for women, and the Bijagó (Guinea-Bissau).
In Africa, there are matriarchal indigenous communities that are older than your arrogance and superiority complex. But I suppose you must compensate for your lack of a penis with something.
They are not matriarchal. None of the societies you listed are matriarchal because women do not exclusively hold all primary power and authority over men and do not directly rule over men.
The term matrilineal and matrilocal maybe are foreign to you but they’re not the same as matriarchal. Matriarchal = rule by and primary power and authority to women only
https://www.africaye.org/la-isla-de-las-mujeres/
Do your homework
Yes they’re not matriarchal but matrilineal and or matrilocal. I hope this helps. Educating yourself on these topics and learning basic anthropology can aid in understanding how term work, and that you’re arbitrarily placing these false western dichotomy labels onto native peoples who’s structures are far more complex than patriarchy or matriarchy.
A matriarchy is a social system where authority and primary power rest with women, especially the mother, and social belonging is traced through the maternal line.
I think the person who wrote the article has enough authority and knowledge to call a community matriarchal than you, dear random internet user.
So do you admit the point of this post is to feed your femdom fetish? Or your desire to dominate and enslave men. The answer is yes I know I’m just confused why you didn’t post this to a BDSM centered sub instead then
Bro, I'm literally an autistic woman who prefers dynamics where I'm the submissive one because I'm better at following orders than giving them. If you're out of arguments, go play with grass. Women are too busy demanding a cure for endometriosis; we don't have a dark plan to enslave men. Although we should 😕
im 14 and this is deep
That's a moid comment right there I'm so certain
Whats the point in setting a gender group to lead humanity
Slavery
why would you need to enslave someone in the modern world
They’re saying patriarchy enslaved women
yeah funny but i want an answer to my question..
I dont mind ladies being in charge, my partner is a lot smarter than I am but be prepared to be chucked out the window if you piss off your 300 pound employee with rage issues
Im Pro-Man hate but I have to say, every instance has proven that yes they will. Edit: For this reason I say do it anyways.
Well I fear the Matriarchy because You attract what you fear.
We are not the same
No, we reject a matriarchy because you make bad decisions.
Making a few mistakes with my exes doesn't make me a bad leader 😢
I don't think most women want men to stop being the stereotypical provider thing so it's hard to see a matriarchy ever existing icl
Wanting something and doing it are different things. Come to Latin America and enjoy seeing single mothers providing for their families. I don't think anyone would mind providing for their household; we're all adults at the end of the day, and that's the basics.