Sabre Posted February 19, 2011 Report Share Posted February 19, 2011 A what if topic today. For those unaware, patriarchy means a socity ruled by men. Goverment, Ethics, ect. Men have the power and are the boss basicly. On earth most political and social systems were patriarchy until recently. Matriarchy is the opposate, a socity ruled by women. To date there are no human examples of this, but what if it did? I got thinking about this when I came across some guy on the internet who had a fictisious world with that very setting. Unfortunatly it was mostly to serve his fetish fiction, but the idea was interesting? What, if anything, would be different had matriarchy been the norm? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ballisticwaffles Posted February 19, 2011 Report Share Posted February 19, 2011 Nothing. History would either run exactly like it does now, or it runs almost compleatly with few major changes. Same species, i highly doubt a diffrent gender would change things much else. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert Monroe Posted February 19, 2011 Report Share Posted February 19, 2011 Masculinists instead of feminists. :trollface: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZM Anonymous Posted February 19, 2011 Report Share Posted February 19, 2011 Male or Female; Stupid doesn't discriminate Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DoctorAllosaurus Posted February 19, 2011 Report Share Posted February 19, 2011 All I know is if this did happen, we'd see a real life version of the National Organization of Men Against Amazonian Masterhood. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ballisticwaffles Posted February 20, 2011 Report Share Posted February 20, 2011 took me a little while to see the acronym Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sluggsnipa Posted February 20, 2011 Report Share Posted February 20, 2011 Oh no...we're gonna be the ones discriminated against...MASCULINISTS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sabre Posted February 20, 2011 Author Report Share Posted February 20, 2011 Oh no...we're gonna be the ones discriminated against...MASCULINISTS You assume that's not the case now. :P Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fox1235 Posted February 20, 2011 Report Share Posted February 20, 2011 k Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DZComposer Posted February 20, 2011 Report Share Posted February 20, 2011 Matriarchy is the opposate, a socity ruled by women. To date there are no human examples of this, but what if it did? Wrong. There have been many aboriginal peoples who lived in varying degrees of matriarchal societies. Of particular note was the Iroquois Confederacy. While the chief of an Iroquois tribe was male, the tribe's council of mothers could vote to get rid of him. And the line of succession was usually determined by the chief's sister, not the chief himself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sabre Posted February 20, 2011 Author Report Share Posted February 20, 2011 "consensus among modern anthropologists and sociologists is that a strictly matriarchal society never existed." 'Matriarchy', Encyclopædia Britannica" Plus, just because Britain has a queen, or Egypt had a female ruler as head doesn't mean matriarchy socity. One person isn't socity. I'm talking about complete social structre. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DZComposer Posted February 21, 2011 Report Share Posted February 21, 2011 That's because peoples who are more matriarchal also tend to have high societal equality values. Even though there is a council of women leaders, women aren't superior. This means the societies are less top-down to start with. That doesn't mean the society is patriarchal. You're looking at something as black and white, when in reality you should be looking in full gray-scale. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sabre Posted February 21, 2011 Author Report Share Posted February 21, 2011 That's because peoples who are more matriarchal also tend to have high societal equality values. Is that causation or corrilation? Even though there is a council of women leaders, women aren't superior. This means the societies are less top-down to start with. That doesn't mean the society is patriarchal. You're looking at something as black and white, when in reality you should be looking in full gray-scale. I'm not sure what you are getting at. The idea of most of the power being mostly in the hands of males. Today that's not really the case in the modern west. My point was, what if intimes or places where such equality doesn't exsist what if anything would be different. The premise is basicly a flawed feminist wet dream anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts