I've heard this said often.

I've also heard it said that women are unforgiving and uncompromising. Do you think that's true?

Personally, I think the world would be a better place with women in charge. I think women should have taken charge from the get go. I think our strong moral sense (granted not present in all humans or women but I find more present in women than men) and empathy (yes, not always present either, yet more in women it seems) would lead to a strong structure but less laws overall.

Maybe that's just me. I like to put a framework in place with rules that are enforced every time but these rules are just to keep folks from harming others or property. The rest is wide open for individual freedom and creativity.

Views: 507

Replies to This Discussion

That is a sexist sentiment.

 

And it was one used to promote women's suffrage in the United States.  The conventional wisdom was that women emodied greater moral character than men and would vote people with integrity into office.  Turns out that womens' voting habits didn't really differ from the mens'.  But, at least something good came out of it even if it didn't lead to more honest politicians being elected.

I understand that Reggie and yet, I think it might be true, at least until we get to the generation of females that was raised to not be helpers in the community.

Perhaps.  But then it is still a temporary effect that has more to do with social variables than with gender attributes.  I just don't want to cut women short on their ability to be as ruthless and wicked as men. :p

Okay Reggie. That's fine. I've been doing some research.

An interesting article of Mosuo  Society is here:
 
 
I particularly liked these bits:
 
"SPIEGEL ONLINE: Is Mosuo society a paradise for feminists?

Coler: I had expected to find an inverse patriarchy. But the life of the Mosuo has absolutely nothing to do with that. Women have a different way of dominating. When women rule, it's part of their work. They like it when everything functions and the family is doing well. Amassing wealth or earning lots of money doesn't cross their minds. Capital accumulation seems to be a male thing. It's not for nothing that popular wisdom says that the difference between a man and a boy is the price of his toys.

SPIEGEL ONLINE: What is life like for a man in a matriarchy?

Coler: Men live better where women are in charge: you are responsible for almost nothing, you work much less and you spend the whole day with your friends. You're with a different woman every night. And on top of that, you can always live at your mother's house. The woman serves the man and it happens in a society where she leads the way and has control of the money. In a patriarchy, we men work more -- and every now and then we do the dishes. In the Mosuo's pure form of matriarchy, you aren't allowed to do that. Where a woman's dominant position is secure, those kinds of archaic gender roles don't have any meaning.

SPIEGEL ONLINE: What astonished you the most?

Coler: That there is no violence in a matriarchal society. I know that quickly slips into idealization -- every human society has its problems. But it simply doesn't make sense to the Mosuo women to solve conflicts with violence. Because they are in charge, nobody fights. They don't know feelings of guilt or vengeance -- it is simply shameful to fight. They are ashamed if they do and it even can threaten their social standing. "

 
 
And here is an Interesting paper of matriarchal gift societies here:
 
 
I particularly liked this part:
 
"The women, and specifically the oldest women of the clan, the matriarchs, hold the most important goods in their hands, for they are responsible for the sustenance and the protection of all clan members. The women either work the land themselves or organise the work on the land; the fruits of the fields are given to them and the milk of the flocks as well. The big clan houses also belong to them or the tents in case of nomadic tribes.

Matriarchal women are managers and administrators, who organise the economy not according to the profit principle, where an individual or a small group of people benefits; rather, the motivation behind their action is motherliness. The profit principle is an ego-centred principle, where individuals or a small minority take advantage of the majority of people. The principle of motherliness is the opposite, where altruism reigns and the well being of all is at the centre. It is at the same time a spiritual principle, which humans take from nature.

Mother Nature cares for all beings, however different they may be. The same applies for the principle of motherliness: a good mother cares for all her children in spite of their diversity. For example with the Mosuo, the woman who is elected to be the clan mother from among her sisters, is the one who most clearly displays the attitude of care for the other clan members."

I would love to find a better system than the one we have now. Those examples of cultures where women are in charge are subsistence farming cultures, no? I personally think we can do better than this. I don't know if putting women is charge of everything is a good idea. Just like putting men in charge of everything is a terrible idea.

Interesting stuff, but I think it is still a large leap to conclude that everything is better wherever women are in charge.  There are many variables not controlled for.  Basically, taking those gender power dynamics and exporting them into other societies will not necessarily reproduce those results.  In fact, the results could vary greatly, even causing the opposite of the desired outcome.

Frans de Waal has noted in the study of chimpanzees that where a matriarchal society was present due to the circumstance of no males being in the enclosure, the ruling matriarchs were especially harsh and brutal.  Once a sufficient number of males were introduced and wrested control from the females, the brutality eased considerably.  The thought is that males were better at resolving in group conflicts so that they never spiraled out of control.

I think that gender roles in society and toying with those dynamics can be fun things to consider, but to say that flipping the model on its head will always result in a better society is premature and unjustified.  That things might be different, I have no doubt.  That they would always be for the better I have much doubt.

Yes, Daniel in both cases the communities are largely agricultural or livestock based.
 
I agree to that not every man or woman can be trusted to be in charge and be benevolent.
 
Still it clearly shows that what I was thinking could happen in a society run by matriarchs was in fact, something that had happened. The reasons why are the same too. I'm pretty pleased with that.
 
Agreed Reggie, you can't say anything absolutely would work every time for every group of people or even animals.Chimpanzees, I don't know much about. I'd like to study that a bit before offering an opinion on that specific case. Nor do I think it's translates to human society.
I'd be willing to try encouraging a matriarchal society going forward though. I suspect the good would outweigh the bad.

Yeah, I wouldn't draw any conclusions about human behavior from chimpanzee behavior.  It was on the top of my head so I shared it as an interesting tidbit regarding a swapping of gender roles in power within our closest living relatives. 

And while I'm doubtful that a matriarchal society would ideally be better, I'm fairly certain that a society where there genders are equally empowered is better than either of the other two alternatives.

Totally agree with that last bit. The genders should be equally empowered and in a society that actually did that, I think things would be better.

I would agree with you that a matriarchal society would be better than a patriarchal one. But if i had a choice of what society I would like to live in I would not choose either of those as my first choice. 

"Still it clearly shows that what I was thinking could happen in a society run by matriarchs was in fact, something that had happened. The reasons why are the same too. I'm pretty pleased with that."
In those two societies there is a lack of technological development, but there social system is very complex no?
Is finding the balance between the two a better option than having one extreme?

I'm generally in favor of balance Daniel. I just noticed your last post btw. However, I do believe that most if not entirely all of our world's biggest ills, (almost every single religion for instance), were created by men out of fear toward women and general greed. JMO.

Many of the amazing things we have in the world were created by men also.

Men trying to impress or subjugate women has produced both good and bad things.

Men are bad but men can also be good for things also.

RSS

Support T|A

Think Atheist is 100% member supported

All proceeds go to keeping Think Atheist online.

Donate with Dogecoin

Members

Discussion Forum

Do you let your guy cum inside you?

Started by Sophie. Last reply by James Cox Aug 28, 2013. 89 Replies

Videos

  • Add Videos
  • View All

Services we love

We are in love with our Amazon

Book Store!

Gadget Nerd? Check out Giz Gad!

Into life hacks? Check out LabMinions.com

Advertise with ThinkAtheist.com

© 2014   Created by Dan.

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service