Post: #1

Five Things We Know About Societies Run By Women

Such as: Even men are happier when women are in charge

See more at: http://www.damemagazine.com/2013/05/10/f...UGdgR.dpuf

First, let's get one thing straight—there are exactly zero societies that are run completely by women.

When women have power, they don't just take over the joint, refusing men an education and paying them 80 cents on the dollar. Nope, instead they do a bunch of girlie junk like keeping everyone happy with shared resources, stable families and good sex.

Christopher Ryan, Ph.D., co-author of Sex at Dawn says, “Societies in which women's status is equal to or greater than men's tend to be characterized by less conflict, greater social harmony, and higher levels of sexual interaction.”

Happier in other words. Let us count the ways.




Matriarchy Is Not The Opposite Of Patriarchy
“In matriarchies, mothers are at the center of culture without ruling over other members of society,” says Heidi Goettner-Abendroth, founder of The International Academy HAGIA for Modern Matriarchal Studies. “The aim is not to have power over others and over nature, but to follow maternal values, ie. to nurture the natural, social and cultural life based on mutual respect.”

In other words, if patriarchy is West Point, heavy on the rules and hierarchy, matriarchy is that alternative school where kids call teachers by their first names and play non-competitive games with the parachute.
..


Marriage Is Less Binding (If It Exists At All)
Contrary to every diamond ad ever, when women have a say in things, they aren't all that eager to jump into a long, forever marriage. There is a large overlap between the top ten countries with the highest gender income ratio and the highest divorce rates. Women with economic power aren't forced to stick it out in bad marriages. So they don't.

Among the Khasi of northeast India, matrilocality (the practice of children living with the mother's family or clan) eliminates economic free fall or a jarring move if parents divorce. “No matter how many times the woman marries, her children will always remain with her,” says Patricia Mukhim, a Khasi and editor of The Shillong Times. “And even if a man abandons a woman he has impregnated, the children are never 'illegitimate.'”
..


More Sex, Less Judgement
Empowered women can be, technically, sluttier - that is, they have can sex with a variety of partners of their choosing - but conversely, they’re not treated as “sluts.” Women in the Chinese matrilineal Mosuo society, for instance, get their own private babahuago (flower room) for receiving visits from lovers. No one worries about commitment since any resulting children are raised in the mother's house with the help of her brothers and the rest of the community. No one's judging the women harshly, and why should they? Everyone's too damn happy. Meanwhile, Iceland, considered to be one of the most feminist-friendly countries in the world, banned strip clubs, calling them an exploitative of women.
..


Fatherhood is Redefined Entirely
In matriarchal societies, men tend to get way more or way less involved in parenting. The devoted dads of the Aka tribe in Africa are within reach of their infants 47% of the time and so dedicated they'll put a crying baby on their own nipple to pacify it, according to archaeologist Barry Hewlett. And in family-friendly Sweden, 85% of men take paid parental leave.

By contrast, among the Mosuo there is a word for “father” but “it's nothing like our concept of what a father should be,” according to writer Ricardo Coler. “These duties are taken over by the mother or the family. Often, the women don't know which man is responsible for the pregnancy.” And in at least 18 different South American tribes, there is shared paternity. They believe that each different man's sperm helps shape a baby and thus, each child has several “fathers.”
..


Crime Plummets
Men commit far more violent crimes than women (about 90% of homicide and robbery offenders in the U.S. are men) but equality can dampen crime. “In more gender-egalitarian societies, there is much less crime by both women and men,” says Jennifer Schwartz of Washington State University, Department of Sociology. “And in those societies, the crime gap between women and men is somewhat larger, that is, women participate even less in crime.”
..



It turns out that not even men like it when a bunch of jerky men are bossing everyone else around. “For most men, [egalitarian] societies are far preferable to those in which a few high-status men dominate everyone else, accumulating resources, power, and available women for themselves,” said Ryan.

The upshot?

1. Fair share of sex, love and food = lower patriarchal rage/desire to oppress masses.

2. Equality = good for all.

3. Flower room = obvious necessity.

Jill Hamilton writes In Bed With Married Women, a blog about sex. Her work has appeared in Jezebel, Rolling Stone, and the Los Angeles Times.

Post: #2

This group of men were happy to see women in charge:

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carry_On_Up_the_Jungle

Post: #3

If you can get past the concept of women being community cum-dumpsters it doesn't sound so bad.
That's really the issue modern men have. We like our women slutty but virtuous.

Post: #4

(05-20-2014 02:43 PM)Parlay44 Wrote:  If you can get past the concept of women being community cum-dumpsters it doesn't sound so bad.

It's nonsense... all that happens is the alphas monopolize sex while the betas grow angry and plot their revenge.

Post: #5

sounds like a rehashed vision of this book Children of the Dream by Bruno Bettelheim.

Post: #6

(05-20-2014 02:43 PM)Parlay44 Wrote:  We like our women slutty but virtuous.

Yeah, there is a word for that.

http://sexthreepointzero.org/index.php?t...hizokardia

Post: #7

Look at Bonobos if you want to get a sense of what it would be like.

Post: #8

So what about the men who don't have muscles but are good at science and the like? (The Sheldon Coopers of the world).

Yeah i thought so.

Post: #9

Quote:In matriarchal societies, men tend to get way more or way less involved in parenting. The devoted dads of the Aka tribe in Africa are within reach of their infants 47% of the time and so dedicated they'll put a crying baby on their own nipple to pacify it, according to archaeologist Barry Hewlett. And in family-friendly Sweden, 85% of men take paid parental leave.

By contrast, among the Mosuo there is a word for “father” but “it's nothing like our concept of what a father should be,” according to writer Ricardo Coler. “These duties are taken over by the mother or the family. Often, the women don't know which man is responsible for the pregnancy.” And in at least 18 different South American tribes, there is shared paternity. They believe that each different man's sperm helps shape a baby and thus, each child has several “fathers.”

Quote:Crime Plummets

Post: #10

These little nomad tribes is all Femnist have to lean on for any (little) proof of matriarch societies. None of them are prosperous and if you peel back the curtains you see many only for to that poor by force. The Mosuo people just reading on them briefly now were casted into a matriarch linage system to keep wealth and power from affiliating among the peasant class. The elites used it as a ruse to keep the peasants poor by making her wealth stayed with the women and the men never were able to ever challenge their power.

If you want to see matriarch societies in the West then to look at any majority black and poor urban community in America In which women largely control finances and the power structures of the communities.

You either we up diet poor and a peasant stuck in a rut of non-advancement, or it's mad max pure social and society degradation with crime and bloodshed.

Post: #11

(05-20-2014 03:49 PM)frenchie Wrote:  So what about the men who don't have muscles but are good at science and the like? (The Sheldon Coopers of the world).

Yeah i thought so.

Didn't you hear the woman? FREE POOSSY FOR EVERYBODY!!

Sheldon is a bad example to use for your argument. On the show he's a confessed asexual. He has no interest in women. Yet even he has a chick that sweats him and follows him around. Not to mention he's gay in real life.

Post: #12

(05-20-2014 02:43 PM)Parlay44 Wrote:  If you can get past the concept of women being community cum-dumpsters it doesn't sound so bad.
That's really the issue modern men have. We like our women slutty but virtuous.

Heh. It doesn't work like that. Patriarchal societies, especially Judea-Christian ones, have buiilt all the wealth, science and goodies you see today. Matriarchy doesn't build shit. Matriarchal societies ensure that people live like animals. They fuck a lot, have little to eat and die in their 20s from tons of incurable diseases.

Post: #13

This major fact none of these feminist researchers ever mention:

These societies are only possible if women are at home working.

Women in these societies have no career. They fuck and raise kids.

That sounds like the most "patriarchal" society in the world.

The only difference is that men have agreed to communally share women and let their women collectively raise children. And why not? Most of these societies are under 150 people. You're not sharing with randoms, but friends. Plus, you'd never have to worry about child support.

The takeaway is that men become warlike only when women abandon their social role first. If women want to end what is popularly called "patriarchy" and have the men they desire, it means embracing the role of mother and making children and lovemaking their primary roles.

Ironic, given what feminism has suggested women do to end patriarchy.

Post: #14

An incredibly biased piece, but that is to be expected, as reality won't get click-thru's.

First off, I touched on the Musou this time last year on here.

Secondly, is the Western-centric (especially American) views and assumption made in the article. The hyper-emphasis on reduction of violence, sexual judgment and blind, sex-based superiority is all symptomatic of Western societies that exist in a post-Christian world. The collapse of Christianity as of the primary guiding lights in society has resulted in the current malaise of the West.

The emphasis on violence is peculiarly an American obsession. Americans are up to their eyeballs in repressed rage, so they instinctively fear violence of all kinds. Liberals and feminists, instead of confronting the rage, seek palliative approaches to this impulse: equality, cooperation, sing-songy bullshit that is clearly a facade.

This sort of repressed rage thinks it can be solved by power. The sex-based superiority on display in the article (women>men) is indicative of this. Illusive dreams of matriarchal superiority have existed in America's consciousness for some time, reaching a crescendo in the 1970's, with radical feminists establishing female-only collectives in their attempt to revive the matriarchal roots of humanity.

The women who read this article and nod along in rapt agreement do think that women are superior to men, in just about every sense. They take a Hobbesian view of men and mix it with a worshipful view of women. But these women are not really dangerous, as this is all a narcissistic dream inside their head.

In real life, the women who agree with this will never have power, never achieve greatness or anything. They will just stew in their juices, wondering why the world hasn't discovered them yet:

If only women were in power, then I have a voice, I'd be heard! Stupid fucking men, with all their hierarchies and sexism. No, if women were in control, then I would be the person I want to be.

It isn't true at all, as hierarchy is human civilization. Somebody has to lead, but to the repressed American -- who all want to be leaders (at least in their own head) -- smile and praise those who lead in real life, while hurling mental invective at the symbolism of leadership: hurling a rock at a cop car, but not a cop; trashing hierarchies thoroughly online, desperately trying to climb the corporate/government ladder in real life.

Finally, like cardguy observed in his Britain thread, the writer and her female viewers don't take themselves seriously. The frantic energy expended over what is essentially nothing substantive belies a person who doesn't take themselves seriously. It's obvious she doesn't care if men believe her about benefits, as she sees women in power as inherently good, as if there can be no downsides or limitations. Such a naive, infantile view isn't held by a serious individual.

Quote:lower patriarchal rage

Sweetie, next time actually try to understand where rage comes from. Just because you cover your rage up with cherry-red lipstick and feminist gender theory doesn't mean it doesn't exist - much less comes from this mythical "patriarchy."

Post: #15

There's barely any point in refuting this shit, honestly. No one here believes it, and no one outside of here will pay any attention to a refutation. But I feel like I've gotta do it anyway, if only to say I tried.

Hell, it won't be too long before you're not even allowed to disbelieve in this stuff. Say that a matriarchy isn't a paradise and you'll be hounded from your job and blacklisted ala Orson Scott Card. So I may as well do it while I still can.

From the top...

Matriarchy Is Not The Opposite Of Patriarchy
“In matriarchies, mothers are at the center of culture without ruling over other members of society,” says Heidi Goettner-Abendroth, founder of The International Academy HAGIA for Modern Matriarchal Studies. “The aim is not to have power over others and over nature, but to follow maternal values, ie. to nurture the natural, social and cultural life based on mutual respect.”

Matriarchies are nasty, nasty things. You want to see a modern matriarchy in action, look at modern ghetto culture. Women often have better jobs and more supplemental income from the state than their male counterparts. They don't need men to provide for them, and they're free to rule the roost as they see fit. You all know the results of this: disastrously high crime rates, illegitimacy rates in the 90%, drug use, etc. etc. With their financial needs met, they're free to sleep with anyone they like. Here's a black writer named Obsidian talking about the plight of a man he calls "Tyrone", the upstanding guy with a solid blue collar job who really wants to build a family. TL;DR, Tyrone gets screwed; passed over for a succession of exciting drug dealers and thugs. And what you reward, you get more of. If the only way to get laid is to start selling cocaine, that's what guys will do.

Marriage Is Less Binding (If It Exists At All)

"Contrary to every diamond ad ever, when women have a say in things, they aren't all that eager to jump into a long, forever marriage. There is a large overlap between the top ten countries with the highest gender income ratio and the highest divorce rates. Women with economic power aren't forced to stick it out in bad marriages. So they don't."

It shocks me that this is presented as a good thing. I know it shouldn't, but it still does. The effects of divorce on children and society are horrific. This article will tell you more, though I'm sure most of you are already familiar with the statistics. A child whose parents divorce is more likely to use drugs. They're more likely to drop out of school. They get worse grades, and they learn less. They're more socially maladjusted. They get sick easier. In the end, a child whose parents divorce will die FIVE YEARS EARLIER than they would otherwise. If you get divorced you are literally stealing five years of your child's life. That someone would promote this as a good thing is simply sick.

More Sex, Less Judgement
"Women in the Chinese matrilineal Mosuo society, for instance, get their own private babahuago (flower room) for receiving visits from lovers. No one worries about commitment since any resulting children are raised in the mother's house with the help of her brothers and the rest of the community. No one's judging the women harshly, and why should they? Everyone's too damn happy. Meanwhile, Iceland, considered to be one of the most feminist-friendly countries in the world, banned strip clubs, calling them an exploitative of women."

There are of course, no statistics given because the writer of this piece gets a nasty headache whenever she sees a number with a decimal point. (And besides that, what the hell is "an exploitative of women"?) Studies on frequency of sex and its relationship to societal happiness are hard to come by. But we should be very careful in making assumptions about little-understood but promiscuous cultures like the Mosuo. If you know anything about anthropology you'll have heard of a famous woman named Margaret Mead, a turn of the century anthropologist who was enormously influential. She published a book called "Coming of Age in Samoa", which described the people of the small Samoan islands. She wrote how the women there engaged in stigma-free casual sex for years, then as they got older married, settled down and had children. Only problem? It was all bullshit. The girls lied to her, and those lies and her own beliefs about what this tropical island paradise should look like led her to write a book that was complete bullshit. So be very careful about stories of tiny, out of the way cultures that happen to have a sexual society that looks like something out of a 60s erotic novel.

Fatherhood is Redefined Entirely
"In matriarchal societies, men tend to get way more or way less involved in parenting."
Our experience in the US (see my comment about Black Culture above) is that it tends to be less. You can read here about what happens when a father isn't around as a kid grows up. It reads pretty similar to what happens during a divorce: four times as likely to grow up poor, more likely to be a criminal, more likely to die as an infant, etc. etc.

Crime Plummets
“In more gender-egalitarian societies, there is much less crime by both women and men,” says Jennifer Schwartz of Washington State University, Department of Sociology. “And in those societies, the crime gap between women and men is somewhat larger, that is, women participate even less in crime.”

Miss Schwartz somehow got her doctorate without hearing that whole "correlation does not equal causation" thing that gets pounded into your brain a million times in any decent statistics course. Modern gender-egalitarian societies tend to be located in Northern Europe, which means they're rich, white, and have a very tightly integrated culture. All these things are correlated with a low crime rate. Gender-egalitarianism has nothing to do with it.


She concludes with this:
"The upshot?
1. Fair share of sex, love and food = lower patriarchal rage/desire to oppress masses.
2. Equality = good for all.
3. Flower room = obvious necessity."
In other words, a matriarchal society is a paradise on Earth, where men are free from oppression and are rewarded with sex, love, and food. It's happy, safe, and equal.

So the obvious question is this: if these places are so great, how come there aren't more of them? Why are true matriarchies relegated to obscure tribes out in the jungles and the middle of the Chinese desert? If a place like she described above was anywhere near me, I'd be on the next bus there. I'm sure everybody on the forum would be right behind me. In a weekend it would be the single largest city in America. And yet nothing like she described is anywhere to be found. Why? Because Matriarchies don't work, outside of oddball obscure tribes or places like the US ghetto that are being propped up by a flood of money from outside. It's a terrible way to organize a society.

But again, what's the point of even writing this? Retard ideas like this one are gaining prevalence because there's nobody left in the culture to speak up against them. Nobody except us, a few people clinging to an anonymous message board. Maybe 50 people will read what I wrote and nod their heads and go, "Yeah, he's probably right". 30 times that will see the article I'm responding to, and think to themselves how wonderful it will be to live in a society when women run everything. And 300 times that number will see the hundreds of articles just like this one, where some idiot journalism major reports verbatim a bunch of quotes from a Women's Studies professor about how great the female sex is, and how awful we men are. And our culture will take another step towards the abyss.

Post: #16

(05-20-2014 04:08 PM)Parlay44 Wrote:  

(05-20-2014 03:49 PM)frenchie Wrote:  So what about the men who don't have muscles but are good at science and the like? (The Sheldon Coopers of the world).

Yeah i thought so.

Didn't you hear the woman? FREE POOSSY FOR EVERYBODY!!

Sheldon is a bad example to use for your argument. On the show he's a confessed asexual. He has no interest in women. Yet even he has a chick that sweats him and follows him around. Not to mention he's gay in real life.

Raj would be a much better example then. But yeah, i used to think that the sexual revolution meant free sex for everyone.

No, it meant that I get sex at the expense of my nerdier and less endowed brothers.

Post: #17

@Faust - Being a welfare queen is the same as being an actual queen.

Post: #18

Here's what I got from the article:

"...Iceland...Sweden...a bunch of societies that are so successful you've never heard of them..."

Post: #19

(05-20-2014 07:43 PM)Feisbook Control Wrote:  Here's what I got from the article:

"...Iceland...Sweden...a bunch of societies that are so successful you've never heard of them..."

It's just like when women rave about how great a club or a city is and you go there one night to check it out only to find out that it's a fucking sausagefest.

Post: #20

Quote:Women in the Chinese matrilineal Mosuo society

From Wikipedia:

Quote:The beginning of Mosuo matrilineality

The Mosuo are a small ethnic group living around China’s Lugu Lake in the provinces of Sichuan and Yunnan. Most Mosuo people celebrate a matrilineal culture, tracing lineage through the female side of the family (Yuan, L.) The practice of walking marriage often renders it impossible to determine a Mosuo child's father.

Historically the Mosuo lived in a feudal system where a larger peasant population was controlled by a small nobility. The nobility was afraid of the peasant class gaining power. Since leadership was hereditary, the peasant class was given a matriarchal system. This prevented threats to nobility power by having the peasant class trace lineage through the female line. This system has led to numerous unusual traits among Mosuo society.

I don't see a source, but it's interesting to think about. If you want a safe, happy, non-threatening population put the women in charge. Just don't expect much technological innovation or defense against invasion.

Post: #21

(05-20-2014 02:30 PM)Parlay44 Wrote:  “In matriarchies, mothers are at the center of culture without ruling over other members of society,” says Heidi Goettner-Abendroth, founder of The International Academy HAGIA for Modern Matriarchal Studies.

Good name.

Post: #22

(05-20-2014 04:50 PM)Mormon Nailer Wrote:  

(05-20-2014 02:43 PM)Parlay44 Wrote:  If you can get past the concept of women being community cum-dumpsters it doesn't sound so bad.
That's really the issue modern men have. We like our women slutty but virtuous.

Heh. It doesn't work like that. Patriarchal societies, especially Judea-Christian ones, have buiilt all the wealth, science and goodies you see today. Matriarchy doesn't build shit. Matriarchal societies ensure that people live like animals. They fuck a lot, have little to eat and die in their 20s from tons of incurable diseases.

Yea, but being a leftie is all about 'cultural relativism'. So if one culture is shitloads of achievements, it must be because they're evil.

Post: #23

Faust Wrote:So the obvious question is this: if these places are so great, how come there aren't more of them?

Post: #24

The key thing to understand is that matriarchy is incompatible with civilization.

If you are willing to compromise on that, then you might be better of in a matriarchy. If you like things like running water, antibiotics and the internet, matriarchy is not for you.

Post: #25

(05-21-2014 03:44 AM)ElBorrachoInfamoso Wrote:  The key thing to understand is that matriarchy is incompatible with civilization.

If you are willing to compromise on that, then you might be better of in a matriarchy. If you like things like running water, antibiotics and the internet, matriarchy is not for you.

Agreed. Animals pretty much live in a matriarchy. The females raise the babies by themselves. The females only get the alpha cock. The males fight each other for alpha status, then impregnate the females then are out of the pack/herd in most cases.

The difference is, if you want to advance you need the beta males to have a reason to help you build and grow. If you keep killing off and/or chasing off the beta males, you will never grow a civilization.

All in all, civilization is just controlling women so that the beta males have a decent enough life to want to participate. It is why big brother socialism never works. It steals from the betas and gives them nothing back. Eventually the betas either leave, give up, or turn to some form of crime in an attempt to get something back from society. And when your betas give up, you lose your civilization.