Thursday, June 17, 2010

The Difference Between Matriarchy and Patriarchy

I received a letter from a feminist the other day who tried to convince me that matriarchy was the way to go in her own "natural" way and essentially that males are not needed.

Here are excerpts from her letter with translation into femspeak in parentheses:

"Bonobos are as close to humans as chimps. They are female dominated and peaceful."

Femspeak: (If women had authority over males we would take care of males like you have taken care of us....We promise we will let you stay home and don't have to produce anything while you take care of the children. We promise that you are valued and approachable and worthy of mating with females for the simple fact that you exist as females are to males : ) If females rule over you, territory and resources there will be no war, females will bring everlasting peace to the planet, just give us complete control of all the territory and resources you males compete for and acquire and you will see that matriarchy is bliss for males. Males are not needed by females for anything nor as part of the family and the lives of their children.)

"female bonobos are skilled hunters."

Femspeak: (Female bonobos don't need a man and are strong independent bonobo ladies)

"Ants are a female dominated. The worker and soldier aunts are female. Males are only born at certain times of the year. Their only role is to mate with the queens of other ant colonies. They die shortly after mating."

Femspeak: (Ants are colonies consisting of strong independent ladies who don't need men, in fact all the males are good for is their sperm and then, naturally, they have no place in the family, the lives of their offspring or society and should die.)

"here is a video of a mother grizzly attacking a male bear TWICE who threatened her cubs. She drove him away both times"

Femspeak: (Males are violent and dangerous to women and children and should be driven away or held at bay by force if necessary and or the law)

"you might want to check out the female dominated animals like elephants, whales, wolves and hyenaes."

Femspeak: (It's not just lower life form families and society that males are not needed in but also larger life forms)

Orcas: "Female dominated orcas are skilled hunters"

Femspeak: (female orcas are strong independent ladies that don't need a man)

Wolves: "In one wolf pack, a female wolf led an attack on her FATHER, killed him, and took over the pack."

Femspeak: (This event stuck out in my mind when I watched a show on wolves about a year ago on the Discovery Channel because I have issues with my father and male figures in my life which most likely took place in my early childhood development.
Due to our current pseudo-matriarchal social construct it is likely that I didn't have a father in my life at all and have a resentment toward him because of this... Though as statistics show it is most likely my mother who kicked him out of the home and isolated me from any type of meaningful contact with him. It is also possible that one of the many unrelated males that passed in and out of my mothers home over the years copulated with me but at very least my mother and thus I see males and the role of husband and father as walking disposable sperm donors)

"Hyenaes are female dominated. Male hyenas act submissive. Hyenas are female rule ALWAYS."

Femspeak: (The rightful place of males is to ruled by females and what females say GOES..PERIOD)

So as you can see, what we have here is the classic feminist who is advocating several things,

#1 that females are supposed to rule over the family, which in all cases sited (besides the wolves which she mistakenly believe to be female dominated) does not need to include the male who sired the offspring i.e. husband and father as part of the family, society or the lives of his children.

#2 females don't need males and are independent ladies

So lets dig a little deeper into the ideal world of the feminist. I'd like to make it quite clear that anytime you find female led social structures you will not find male paternal investment in offspring and that this is the one differentiating factor between a matriarchy and a patriarchy.

Lets take a closer look at the animals she mentioned whos social groups were female dominated i.e. the male who sired the offspring is not present in the family.

Upon investigation you will find that males in these matriarchal (female led or dominated social structures) share one or more common characteristics

#1 They may never leave their mothers home or group and have no parental investment in their offspring.

#2 They may venture out to mate and then return to mother or venture out to be solitary creatures while having no membership to any family or group, no parental investment in their offspring.

#3 or they may form all male bachelor groups. Of all three of these scenarios these males give no paternal investment to their offspring.


Elephants live in a structured social order. The social lives of male and female elephants are very different. The females spend their entire lives in tightly knit family groups made up of mothers, daughters, sisters, and aunts. These groups are led by the eldest female, or matriarch. Adult males, on the other hand, live mostly solitary lives.


Killer whale societies are based on matrilines consisting of the matriarch and her descendants who form part of the line, as do their descendants. The average size of a matriline is 5.5 animals. Males venture outside of the pod to mate and then return to the matrifocal group. They have no paternal investment in their offspring.


Spotted Hyenas have a matriarchal social structure the male hyena provides no assistance in rearing the cubs.

Bonobo apes: Males are tolerant of infants and juveniles. A male's status is derived from the status of his mother. The mother-son bond often stays strong and continues throughout life.

Wolves: Normally, the pack consists of a male, a female, and their offspring, essentially making the pack a nuclear family. Wolf males are part of the family, are not a matriarchy or matrifocal and contribute to the wellbeing of such much as a husband or father would in a human family.

So what variables are we able to distinguish when matriarchies or female led social structures are are found. One thing I can assure you of is that lack of male paternal investment in offspring is ubiquitous to all matriarchies.



I can say that humans in my country are moving toward matriarchy at the moment as females have decided to "liberate" themselves and be "independent". By definition this means that males are no longer a part of the family and are not needed to support offspring like you are so adamant about proving to me. We understand that by your representation in government you have created laws which make male necessity to the mated pair bond a choice solely arbitrated by the power of the female. As such males are now an optional accessory to the family.

We know that resource provision to the female and "her" offspring are now mandatory under penalty of prison and with out any breach of contract necessary through female instituted no-fault laws. We understand that once married the male body and the fruits of it's labor are your property and that your body and the fruits of its labor are your property as well. You should know that human males are getting the message quite clear and are withdrawing support and commitment to both females and "her" offspring and increasingly abstaining from marriage all together. This is phenomena I've proven with objective graphs and data throughout my blog.

This is quite natural in a matriarchy so do not fret or call men "dead beats" when you request they support a female that is not a part of his family and offspring he is only allowed to "visit" and furthermore while he has no meaningful role in your family.

In a matriarchy males simply distribute their sperm with no paternal investment. The requirements and prerequisites of matriarchy are as follows...

(a)If females will let this happen in the first place and do not require male paternal investment for themselves or their offspring to survive and thus decide to mate outside of committed mated pair bonds. As such it is important to note that female "Sexual Liberation" took place in the U.S. about 40 years ago during the American Cultural Revolution and females now mate outside of committed mated pair bonds. Females behave this way only when the requisite resource support and protection prospects are available to her without a male mate. As a result 40% of all births in the U.S. are now to single females. So it appears that

(a) is true. "(But what we must examine is where these resources and protection come from and how they are procured by her)

The other factor of matriarchal social structures include

(b)the female and offspring will be fine without male investment.

Now here is the clincher and one of the MAJOR premises behind Men's and Father's Rights:

These factors are supposed to be true in the matriarchy which females have sought to build in this country but unlike all known matriarchies in nature it is only so on the surface but not in practice, not in reality.

In reality male investment is needed or supposedly needed though females are "liberated" and "independent" but this matriarchal family is accomplished in a false fashion in which the male is forced to financially support the female and what she sees as "her" offspring or he will be placed inside of a cage called a jail cage as punishment until he has suffered enough pain and isolation (more than he would in his empty apartment) and decides to take the option of less pain i.e. he again begins to produce and sends money to the female from afar by force of law in order to suit the whims of the pseudo-matriarchal paradigm that the female brain trust called feminism came up with.

So in actuality we don't have a true matriarchal construct but instead live in a pseudo-matriarchy or false matriarchy at the expense and oppression of human males. The human male condition under matriarchy is absolutely deplorable.

Human females changed the laws in the United States in the 1970s to create what females call No-Fault divorce or the ability to leave a male, cast him out of the family and force him to still provide to the female and what is seen as "her" child by force. No breach of the marriage contract by the male is needed in order to make him submit to this humiliating position of "Isolated Resource Producing Male" while having no role in her family.

So yes, Ms. Feminist, you are correct there are matriarchies and matrifocal societies and groups in nature but the defining factor is whether males are needed for paternal investment or not needed.

In human society in the United States females have decided that males are no longer needed, (at least physically) in the home or the family in order that they can have their ideal matriarchal family i.e. accomplish the ideal of having no male present in the family while making him support said family.

You see Ms. Feminist, a major goal of Men's and Father's Rights is either:

#1 claim shared contact or shared custody of our offspring and thus the right to paternal investment without our honorable role of father turned into monetary support and sent to you from a distance.


#2 to be able to withdraw from any contact or forced support to the female and "her" offspring and simply be left the fuck alone.


#3 create some sort of mutual obligation and liability to the female so that marriage is a mutually consummate and obligatory bond which entails mutual liabilities and responsibility.

As is current males are forced into an existence under a pseudo or false matriarchy and are fighting to get out of this deplorable, unnatural and unjust condition that females have subjected us to so that they may have their "choices" or "a womans choice" of having a male in the family or not having a male present with absolutely no consequence or responsibility on her part to accomplish these ends.

If your goal is matriarchy this is fine. Men are more than happy to let you be "independent" and "liberated" from needing us but please stop abusing men, our bodies and the fruits of our labor to do it. So for god sake already...... support yourselves like all the known matriarchies and matrifocal animal societies in nature of which you so exalted to me in your letter.

Now, Let's get it OVER WITH ALREADY. It's getting ridiculous. When are you going to be independent and liberated like you promised??? When can we get this whole matriarchy of which you so delightedly wrote to me about accomplished..when? When will you leave men that are not apart of your family ALONE and solitary like the matriarchal males or take care of and live with your sons for life like the matriarchal mothers do? When will you insist that men have the same freedoms and choices that you do? When will you realize that your independence and liberation are currently financed at the males expense and that we resent you and do not respect you for this..when?


Bwec said...

Update: Just some more conversation with my feminist friend...ENJOY !


Really? How is it that you expect men to own you something and force this upon us by law? How about I take your bodily property for my own? How do you expect men to respect the body of women if women don't respect the body of men and the fruits of its labor?

YOU SAY: "That said, women have come a long way, but we still have a lot of hurdles to jump before the playing field is level between men and women."

ooooooh this is getting good, what hurdles do you have to jump before the playing field is level?

YOU SAY: "the patriarchy created this mess that women are now trying to get ourselves out of.'

what mess are you trying to get out of? How do you plan to get out? Help me out here, what's the game plan to get you independent and self supporting?

YOU SAY: "We need all the resources and benefits we can get to make that happen."

So men, society and government are supposed to be your beasts of burden in order to construct this matriarchy of which you speak?

LOL ohhhh I'm sorry but it's pertinent to let you know that I'm laughing right now. How about you obtain your own resources and earn your own benefits. How about you stop expecting to have more rights and privileges than men do. Your entitlement complex astounds me.

YOU SAY: "Since the patriarchy created this whole mess, the patriarchy should be obligated to pay to right the wrongs forced on women."

OK OK OK this is getting good so how should men and society be "obligated to pay to right the wrongs forced on women"?

YOU SAY: "I don't give a rat's ass if that's in the form of child support, spousal support, funds for domestic violence shelters, special government offices for women's health, welfare to keep women out of poverty, or whatever."

Is there anything else we can do to for you as "pay back" to you because of the perceived injustices to your gender in the past??? At least your coming out and just saying it...WOW. "pay back" time aye.. How long until these wrongs of which you speak become righted?

What more can we do for you?

YOU SAY: "Anything women can get to better the lives of women and girls is money that the patriarchy is OBLIGATED TO PAY."

LOL yes men always pay for the lady huh? ohhhhhh ohhhh I'm laughing and my tummy has this tickling feeling. You are really funny. Wow this is gold. The patriarchal government husband owes you special privileges and protection and provision so you can feel independent and self supporting aye.

Why can't women just come out and say this stuff more often. THIS IS WHAT I'VE BEEN TRYING TO GET YOU TO ADMIT ALL ALONG... "PAY BACK TIME" It really is sad! You don't feel any sense of shame either..WOW!

You really do feel entitled to be protected and provided for by men and government husband with no sort of obligations or responsibilities to men or society like we've done for you since the beginning of time. Except now you want to stick it to us really good!

"You guys have absolutely nothing to whine about AT ALL."

Ohhhhh ohhhhh shit. LOL. WE have nothing to whine about. You are so ironic ano funny!

When can we get this matriarchal family going so you won't need men or special care and privileges? Your dependency on men and government is really getting taxing...literally..

Leos Tomicek said...

She compares our species with ants, I'm surprised she didn't throw in the Praying Mantis as an example. The latter I have already encountered debating feminists.

Comparing our, highly evolved mammal breed with some insects or even other lesser mammals is wrong from the start.

Bwec said...

Proper inferences can be made and learned from the animal kingdom. They suffice to elucidate basic processes.

Some of these processes carry correlation or direct connection to the same laws that we as humans are subject to. However, the base template in question always connects back to the understanding of basic elemental facts which allow for evolution, gene selectivity, sexual selection and natural selection.

When trying to understand the connection from ants to humans in terms of the above and in reference to gender and the social order it is imperative to apply the base template of known facts from the above, find common elements that definitively match and extend the correlative from this.

The mismatch of her reasoning is quite simply the fact that ants hold very little relation to the gene selective processes that humans are subject to. Ants have changed little throughout time. Male ants are haploid or single chromosome and do not carry the variable of Y as the Male XY chromosome set does.

Male purpose of variation in the selectivity process is the sole reason males exist. We are the sole selective variable for many traits. If you go a short order below ants there are no genders at all.

Her case for the institution of matriarchy in human society has no base template of facts to work from, it is a non-sequitur argument. No known functional facts are used to extend her reasoning to a probable or definitive conclusion. Wishful thinking by feminists though.

I've actually made reference to the animal kingdom in my blog. The difference being that the connection I make or recall making in another post has functional basis rooted in fact in terms of genetic fitness which extended to my understanding and relation of such to resources and thus the connection to gynocentric consummation of resources to fulfill this imperative.

The post I am referring is in relation to the personification of the male within government and as such it's connection to basic female biological imperatives, resource consummation and the relationship this dichotomy has to relations between the sexes. Essentially the relation females have to their government is something males are unable to compete with.

In fact males are forced to abide by the mandates of the government husband and this includes the contract which males sign with the government when they enter the legal institution of marriage. All things brought about by female gynocentric representation in government.

Anonymous said...

Hey! Since your going to twist what I said about the animal kingdom into some kind of society where fathers aren't needed, I'll go with that. Personally, I think we should have a family structure like this:

Joab said...

Further undermining her point: this is all crap about bobonos, based on observations in zoos, not the wild. Back to square one, bitch! Your argument is nullified (and all your base blong to us!)

Bwec said...

Yes my feminist friend, I saw your link. Yes, this is very doable but I can promise you that you will be living in conditions much like the tribe in your link and like the matriarchal groups in Africa as well.

The reason the men only take active interest in the offspring of immediate female relatives is because they are unable to tell for sure whom their own offspring. However, they are able to know for sure they are related to the offspring of the immediate female members of their family.

Again, I have no problem with your arrangement besides the fact that you expect to be dependent upon men who are not related to you for your survival and that of your offspring. This is unacceptable. As you may have noticed it is also unacceptable to the men in these societies as well.

Also to continue on my prior point, what is ubiquitous to all matriarchies is the lack of male incentive to produce anything.

In fact there are very few of these types of tribal groups as it is the case that patriarchal groups have for the most part overrun or outright conquered these peoples. Patriarchal societies are more successful in many ways, both technologically, resourceful and population wise as well. The standard of living is orders beyond what matriarchies have managed to accomplish. In fact matriarchal societies have changed little

In fact patriarchal civilizations are often tasked with sending aid to these peoples in order to help support them, feed them and render them medical aid.

Again, I have no problem with your idea of a matriarchal social order but don't expect men that are not direct relatives to care for you or your kids...rather simply leave men alone, become independent and self supporting like women promised the were capable of doing on their own.

Anonymous said...

"what is ubiquitous to all matriarchies is the lack of male incentive to produce anything."
This is profundly true. But things are far worts than that! In the kind of feministed matriarcat, in this gynarcat, male are forced by the law and the state to provide most of their earning to their mistress. If they dont for any reason, unimployment included, they go to JAIL. Males are the moneyslaves of the sisterhood. In ALL others matriarcal society, males are not forced to provide for Women and HER childs.

Anonymous said...

You're wrong about something. Women didn't create the anti-male laws. Caucasian men created them.

So, in a way I think caucasian men do not to be brought down. Its the caucasian that creates and enforces matriarchy FOR WOMEN. Get him out of the way and the matriarchal agenda goes away.

Anonymous said...

Instead of acusing women for hating men,why don´t you make a self critic? why don´t you stop and pounder on how men treat women in your society and in the rest of the world? do you think we like to be exploited in prostitution and porno,to be raped,to be beaten?

To be honest,i am tired of this shit,of thie "male victimhood" denying all he cruel opression we face all over the world!

Anonymous said...

do you think we like to be exploited in prostitution and porno,to be raped,to be beaten?

Well guess what, Those women (not rape victims) usually enjoy an get paid very well in those professions.
If you are so jealous of people having penises as Clinical Psychology interprets feminism go get a sex change and STFU!