How about a Me-archy were I, Roflmasterbigpimp, decide everything?
You can absolutely trust me with this much power.
Sounds good to me
Im ok with this.
But how do we know that you’re as big a pimp as you say you are?
Look at the size of the cane!
I’m on board
works with me
Yes sir.
🫡 I serve the Roflmasterbigpimp Union.
i will absolutely take that over what we have now
👍
Genuine question, why peope don’t want a patriarchal society but wish for a matriarchal one? Isn’t it better to just have equality between all genders?
Don’t get me wrong, I also don’t want a patriarchal society and I understand what are the problems with it, but I never understood the desire to have a “main” gender
Form time to time, i encounter these dominant toxic woman. It’s very rare compared to dominant toxic men, but just as annoying.
It’s the toxic domination that we needs to be rid of.
Yeah. This post should be only taken as a joke.
Too late. Already finished my dissertation on it.
Exactly, and leadership positions currently heavily select for that, regardless of gender
Honestly, this is just a joke of a post. You’re right in that ideally there would be no gendered hierarchy at all. It just tends to be male gendered people that punch down.
I haven’t encountered people really advocating for a matriarchy (except the Barbie movie for some reason) so I don’t really think it’s a popular belief
Wasn’t the matriarchy in the barby movie done specifically to parody the patriarchy in real life?
They aren’t so much advocating for it as using it as an obvious 1 to 1 allegory.
Yeah but at the end of the movie they reinstate matriarchy and give kens a bit more power, and I found that to be such a 180
Yea, that movie didn’t really explore the problems well, more of just made fun of the whole situation. I liked it about 1/5th as much as most, apparently.
I want all the privileges of women. Let women have the ones of men and have them find out it sucks. (Half sarcastically)
Both men and women have struggles. I wouldn’t argue one has it worse than the other, just that both have problems and all those problems are awful. We should all be working to eliminate all of them.
People who honestly think this don’t know history.
Throughout history, society has, when having an excess of young men gone to war to control their numbers. Yes there have been other reasons but having an excess of young, low education men is extremely destabilizing.
Having a matriarchal society doesn’t necessarily mean that the male part of the population is suppressed or oppressed, but the few people that I have met that honestly think that replacing the current patriarchal system with a similar matriarchal society, also what men to “pay” for the historical treatment of women.
Having a large group of men that are low education, is such a bad idea, they are easily radicalized to do terrible things. Men will continue to be physically stronger than women, this fact along with radicalization would lead to massive societal problems.
What we need is too move further towards equality and equity, unfortunately boys are not doing well in schools girls are out performing them all over the board.
As an aside, years ago (on reddit) in a movie discussion someone asked why we don’t see any “crazy ex-boyfriend” movies? When we see movies poking fun at “crazy” ex-girlfriends.
One insightful commenter replied: it is because ex-girlfriends are generally not a physical threat; there isn’t really anything a girl can do to a boy, whereas “crazy” ex-boyfriends are a massive physical threat and therefore not funny, in the real world many murders are motivated by emotional issues and these are overwhelmingly committed by males against females.
Feminists see that the world is dominated almost entirely by a small handful of men who control all the news we consume, all the policy decisions that get made, and see all the massive inequality all throughout our society, and decide that the only problem with this is that the person that this power imbalance benefits isn’t a woman.
Power corrupts, idiot. Dismantle the system. Don’t paint it pink.
I, for one, will not rest until we have a woman committing genocides and atrocities. It’s only right.
if you genuinely think that feminism is “painting it pink” and not changing the system to be more equitable then youve been in the wrong circles, this meme is making fun of people like you who hold the belief that feminism is a matriarchal ideology rather than an egalitarian one
You would be correct IF the post wasn’t literally and directly asking for women to behave the same as all the problems in patriarchy…
Learn to fucking read before you put others down. The post is a joke but you unironically defending matriarchy based on a joke that is asking for toxic matriarchy is not a joke. Do better.
Because subtext doesn’t exist.
It varies a lot between different groups of feminists. There are plenty that unironically want a system where some rich women are in charge instead of just rich men. In fact I would say this is the majority of feminists as communists and anarchists aren’t that common plus lots of communists are against identity politics to begin with.
Ah yes, the famous strategy of making fun of an ideology that some (few) actually believe by saying outright that you believe it and giving no hint that you are joking
the OP explicitly stated that they dont support the idea of an actual matriarchy and that this is just a shitpost in another comment, feel free to scroll down
this is being posted in a shitposting community
I feel tis extremely clear given the context of where this is posted that OP just wants to get stepped on lol. It’s hilarious that people are having actual discourse about a meme with a picture of a woman stepping on a man.
No gods, no mistresses (unless…?)
Step on me mommy
Yes mommy😩
(I am so glad that my online persona isn’t really connected to my real persona. My digital footprint is diabolical)
Same. 👀
You guys distinguish personas?
To be honest, when I found out the patriarchy wasn’t about horses, I lost interest anyway.
I for one welcome our hot mommy overlords
It’s the logical extension of JDVance’s illogical proposition: Only people who are physically invested in the future by bearing children within their bodies deserve to rule. Those matriarchs can then decide to include people who would be capable of birthing children if they chose to do so. The mere sperm donors can shut up and do what they’re told, as they frequently waste their potential contribution to the future on the couch or in a sock or the shower.
We are all people = we are all idiots
This is not what a matriarchy would look like at all, since men are physically stronger overall. A matriarchal society would have to be based on respect or some other acknowledgement by men that women should lead, since a domineering, physical, might-makes-right society would not end up this way. Not sure why or how (some) women feel the need to physically subjugate men and rule on men’s terms, to use the rules of patriarchy to form a matriarchal society. It simply can’t work.
As I have stated previously; this is a joke of post. No-one should expect this as a reality, nor ethically desire it.
honestly I think historically it would have made way more sense for inheritance to go through tha matrilineal line. I mean even if everything remains the same it makes more sense for a guy to be king because his mother is part of the family line. I am in no way endorsing monarchy in modern times I am just talking about the past. It seems obvious to me that family lines are more definitive by who actually bore you as opposed to who possibly inseminated.
Counterpoint: Women were often seen as invaders to the family lineage because of heavily misogynistic ideas like the idea of all women being evil.
Yeah it doesn’t make sense, but misogyny typically doesn’t.
I totally get why it might not be so historically. I mean im talking to some degree about the definition of the bloodline so if it was a thing they could not be seen as invaders. Just seems like it makes so much more sense. Like you think about the crazy royal stuff about witnesses to consumation and it like just have witnesses the kid came out of the right womb.
It might have more to do with men being able to safely father so many more children. 50ish seems the record for mothers, but fathers could have hundreds of kids. On top of that, maternal mortality rates were high, so a matriarch has a chance of dying with every kid.
well you could still have kings its just the bloodline would run through the female side and you can still go back like when a king dies. Also contrast that with no combat deaths.
Why would there be no combat deaths? It’s not like the more matriarchal societies throughout history didn’t go to war.
I mean if we are talking all the other stuff the same with medieval europe basically. Doesn’t have to be but it went with the still king thing and matrilineal just being the inheritance line.
@HubertManne @jawa21 matrilineal inheritance (including crowns) existed among booking and Asian cultures.
There’s historical precedent for how it workedwhats booking?
@HubertManne @jawa21 Viking.
I didn’t notice Google replacing the word.ok that would make more sense. thanks.
The US is already a matriarchy and I love it!
