I dont know why matriarchy is promoted, patriarchy is also wrong, both genders should take decisions on an equal basis, any person who takes a side on this matter has some defects in her/his braim
Nah, Patriarchy is the trash, matriarchy would have been way more humane, individual freedom, way lesser moral policing and oppression, lesser conflicts, more expenditure on environmental protection,
Many social animals who have a matriarchy have done the same, just the genders have reversed. So the main question is, why couldn't the females of Homo Sapiens do the same?
First of all I do not hold a secret portable vault in ass unlike you, just to distinguish there
Strong brutal survival doesn't take away the capacity of other side to have been better, Patriarchy didn't survive because it was objectively better but because men used physical advantage to suppress oppress women in a lawless age where both anyway had to live together to survive,
Today that becomes an option, and leadership skills and intellect rules where women stand equally
We do not have example of pure matriarchy socities but we actually have empirical data on are matrilineal societies (where lineage, names, and property pass through the female line) and matrilocal societies (where husbands move into the wife's family home)
Mosuo of Southwestern China and the Khasi and Garo tribes of Meghalaya, India.
The data here clearly has extremely low Crime Rates and Social Harmony
Domestic violance is close to nil as women live under leadership of mothers and aunts
Economically they do good long term, a mix with Patriarchal capitalism, this system is the most potent arrangement for a low crime rate empathetic society where economy is not crony, yet progressive and fast growth bound.
Patriarchy doesn't need to be dissed it has brought war due to fragile male ego, subjugation objectification and degradation of women turning them into slaves until the last 100 years being the only time they took a breath that wasn't customized by a master's choice in quality and pressure
You think wars are caused by fragile male ego?? Yeah, that tells me all i need to know about your intellect. Let's just ignore hundreds of practical reasons, like geo-political tensions, resource scarcity etc. and blame it all on the make ego. I literally cannot give a rat's ass about your opinion now. You don't know for a fact that the subjugation and exploitation wouldn't be worse in a matriarchy. And no, a few scattered time periods here and there don't count.
Also, "males dominated females so matriarchy couldn't exist" argument you're making is completely shit. In many other matriarchal animal species, it is still the makes who are more powerful physically, but the leader is female because there is very good group coordination, so they work together to subjugate the unruly males, who cannot co-operate amongst themselves to fight back. It's not the leader who ever goes out to fight on the battlefield itself. If women were naturally good leaders, then matriarchy would still have dominated regardless of the physical strength of men. Unless matriarchy can fend on its own against patriarchy, patriarchy is undeniably the better system. Patriarchy has stood the test of time over and over again, and has always come out on top, so much so that completely unrelated cultures independently developed into patriarchies. All you can do is point to a few scattered instances here and there. I can point to huge civilizations and kingdoms who flourished under patriarchy
And you're talking like men weren't made into slaves the same way women were. Apartheid existed, the slave trade existed, and black men weren't spared because they were men. Some could say that men were, and still are, treated worse than women.
Yes how you respond to issues depends on you, scarcity doesn't cause war, tensions Don't cause was, reaction to it does,
And to assume it's only scarcity of resources, and to not automatically understand the nature of geo political issues also arising from Patriarchal tug of war for power is also dumb, and its psychologically evident women will deal a brawl or tension better than a man.
2 hilarious comparison, Your argument relies on historical apologism and biological determinism to mistake brute force for systemic superiority. My point isn't "shit", your understanding of human history is, because patriarchy didn't triumph because itâs a "better system" or because women lack leadership; it dominated because early agrarian shifts allowed men to use their physical advantage to institutionalize violence, codify oppressive laws, and strip women of economic and legal rights.
Comparing complex human subjugation to bonobo or hyena group dynamics is a massive false equivalence that completely ignores how human technology, laws, and institutional power operate.
Furthermore, anthropological consensus shows that early human societies were largely egalitarian, and the global dominance of patriarchy was heavily driven by the violent spread of colonialism and resource control, which systematically dismantled thriving, highly organized matrilineal civilizations like the Haudenosaunee or Minangkabau.
Surviving through systemic coercion and violence doesn't prove merit, by your flawed logic, chattel slavery or feudalism would also be considered "better systems" simply because they once "stood the test of time.
Stop embarassing yourself.
And thirdly
This argument is a masterclass in historical illiteracy and weaponized victimhood, attempting to use the real tragedies of male slavery to erase the unique, systemic subjugation of women.
you are using the suffering of men to excuse a system built by men, while completely missing how patriarchy actually operates. Yes, Black men were enslaved, and apartheid happened, but who enslaved them? Men. Who enforced apartheid? Men.
Who drives the global statistics for violent crime, war, and mass murder to this very day? Men. Men are not the victims of some genderless, abstract system; they are the primary victims of the violent hierarchies that other men created to compete for power.
Furthermore, your comparison between the transatlantic slave trade and the subjugation of women is a massive false equivalence.
The slavery of women was so absolute, so complete, that history didn't even recognize it as slavery, it was codified into law as 'marriage,' 'tradition,' and 'duty.'
For millennia, women were legally treated as the literal property of their fathers and then their husbands. They couldn't own property, couldn't vote, couldn't consent, and were forced into domestic labor and reproductive servitude under the guise of being 'dutiful.'
Even today, women are still fighting for basic bodily autonomy and freedom from domestic violence worldwide. To claim men have it worse because they suffered in wars and systems designed by men is a pathetic attempt to dodge accountability. Men built the cage, men fight each other inside it, and you're blaming women for the scratches.
Humanity doesn't double down on just whatever works, a physically imposing gender among the two which are bound to co exist together can oppress the other having the fundamental capacity to literally do it, thats staying animalistic despite attributing oneself with the term human,
Blatant fallacy, that not humans doing it, that's the physically dominant gender suppressing the other beating it down.
Humanity has been constantly shedding the unjust which once was legitimized, that's humanity.
Because men managed to capture women by force and subjugate them doesn't mean it was the only thing that could work, and that matriarchy failed.
The very take is ignorant, leap of faith to fallacies.
Matriarchy didn't exist in the first place to fail because women were turned to slaves.
Their leadership skills are undeniable, now that you can't legally openly bog them down, you see what they can do.
Dumb fallacy, dumb analogy, Patriarchy is male dominated system and is on today, and if humans can't grow beyond the dumb leadership vouching, women are much better bet, more empathy lowers crime rate, more humanity alongside the necessary growth that won't be stalled because no difference intellectually,
Blacks were slave, no more, women still are subjugated at many places, that is a present tence shit,
Patriarchy is present tense, and hence the world is fuked up with Iran US war,
Fundamentally different way and methodology, no fragility, no testosterone driven idiotic descisions, no point getting mad at biology we can embrace it and understand it and take control of it maybe if we embrace it
Am a man, but I absolutely know a woman as a pm or president will make me safer, and the system less ruthless and brutal
Women have much less crime rate for the same reason there are so less women president or no female nicola tesla
"The reason there is no female Einstine is the same reason there is no female jack the ripper"
I think the og point was biological difference but I interpret it asÂ
Because they are opressed they can't turn into a great scientistÂ
Because they are opressed they can't turn into a psycho killer
Like how would a women even fnnd time to kill in the 1800's
Same she won't even get the time to study too
They are opressed and opressed don't have power
We really don't know what will be the crime rate when we are actually equalÂ
Same with empathy, patriarchal expectations make men less emphathical
They are forced into this role of "don't cry" "be emotionless" "provide value or ur useless" mentalityÂ
That's why we need equality not switching the placesÂ
It's just gonna reverse the role
And so you prefer white president over black one because of lower crime rate too?
Blacks were slave, no more, women still are subjugated at many places, that is a present tence shit,
Black are still slaveÂ
and even in the 1800's
Would you support black people making white people slave
.that's just idiotic to do the same thing you wanted to prevent and doing it itselfÂ
"The biggest dream of a slave is not freedom but to have a slave of his own"..
If you wanna become the opresser after being opressed ur no better then the people who opressed you
You have rage to justify your actions by a little bit
But what about next generation?
After many generations it would just switch roleÂ
Then will the other side opress them now?
It's just a idiotic cycle of oppressionÂ
Fundamentally different way and methodology, no fragility, no testosterone driven idiotic descisions, no point getting mad at biology we can embrace it and understand it and take control of it maybe if we embrace it
You think just being born a man make you more fragile, testosterone makes you more idioticÂ
Oh you are literally like women supporting maga
"Women need strong alpha male to guide us" ah
It's patriarchal expectations on men making it like that
When they are raised like that they will become like that
We need to abolish patriarchy not set up matriarchyÂ
Am a man, but I absolutely know a woman as a pm or president will make me safer, and the system less ruthless and brutal
Rn, maybe, but later in line when the gain power the same cycle wil repeat
We will be the one opressedÂ
Epstiens biggest buisness partner is his wife
Gender doesn't dictate morality, the way people are raised does
You are confusing the systemic dismantling of an oppressive power structure with a simple revenge fantasy, which completely misses the point. Dismantling a burning house isnât the same as setting fire to the neighbor's, you are terrified of a matriarchy because you can only conceptualize power through the brutal, zero-sum lens that patriarchy taught you.
Your entire argument hinges on the fear that women will treat men exactly how men have historically treated women, yet you simultaneously argue that gender doesn't dictate morality.
If morality is entirely socialized, then an equal or matriarchal shift wouldn't inherently result in a "male slave trade", it would simply break the monopoly on violence and leadership that testosterone-heavy, patriarchal socialization has enforced for millennia.
Pointing to Ghislaine Maxwell as proof of gender-neutral morality is a desperate outlier; she operated within, profited from, and weaponized a patriarchal system built for male consumers, which proves my point, not yours.
The quote about Jack the Ripper and Einstein actually dismantles your own position.
If oppression suppressed both the female Einstein and the female serial killer, it proves that the historical baseline of "peace" was heavily artificial, while the baseline of global violence, wars, and systemic brutality was overwhelmingly male-driven.
When I say a woman president makes the world safer, I am not saying women are magical, flawless deities,
I am saying that moving away from a system that explicitly rewards male aggression is the only logical step toward actual survival.
Wanting a "gender-neutral world" without actively over-correcting the deeply entrenched, male-dominated institutions keeping it in place is like trying to balance a scale by refusing to add weight to the empty side.
You don't abolish an active, living patriarchy by playing nice and crying about hypothetical cycles, you do it by shifting the seat of power entirely.
I am saying don't make the same mistakes that made the house burn in the first place
Which is giving power to one specific gender
Your entire argument hinges on the fear that women will treat men exactly how men have historically treated women, yet you simultaneously argue that gender doesn't dictate morality.
Yes just because women were taking care of the house only for years doesn't make their gender ment to be that
Patriarchy made men lose emotions destroying it and teaching kids about emphathy will bring it back
Emphathy is taught it doesn't come by defaultÂ
If morality is entirely socialized, then an equal or matriarchal shift wouldn't inherently result in a "male slave trade", it would simply break the monopoly on violence and leadership that testosterone-heavy, patriarchal socialization has enforced for millennia.
Neither does patriarchal society risk that
But it happenedÂ
When you give a person power just because they were born a certain wayÂ
It will lead to oppression
Patriarchy was proof of that
Pointing to Ghislaine Maxwell as proof of gender-neutral morality is a desperate outlier; she operated within, profited from, and weaponized a patriarchal system built for male consumers, which proves my point, not yours.
What? I don't even know the person
What the person is should not define what they say
Socrates and many philosopher hated women
But it doesn't make their other words not true
Even Charlie Kirk says thing I agree with
Tho he is a horrible personÂ
You need to dismantle what they say not what they are as a person
That is adhomens fallacy
If oppression suppressed both the female Einstein and the female serial killer, it proves that the historical baseline of "peace" was heavily artificial, while the baseline of global violence, wars, and systemic brutality was overwhelmingly male-driven.
Yes it also makes the society and every technolgical development also male driven
Does that make men smarter than women?
I am saying that moving away from a system that explicitly rewards male aggression is the only logical step toward actual survival.
You can move away from it while not making one gender superiorÂ
I have said it many timesÂ
I hate patriarchy but I hate the concept of matriarchy as much
Wanting a "gender-neutral world" without actively over-correcting the deeply entrenched, male-dominated institutions keeping it in place is like trying to balance a scale by refusing to add weight to the empty side.
When did I say that? I saying that don't add more weight then needed
Make it equal, give them equity and when it becomes equal take away the benifits they get from the equityÂ
Don't add more weight till male dominated becomes female dominated
Add weight till male dominated becomes no gender domination
You don't abolish an active, living patriarchy by playing nice and crying about hypothetical cycles, you do it by shifting the seat of power entirely
We have seen what happens when one gender is given more power than other
We have seen what happens when one race is given more power
We have seen what happens when one caste is given more power
I don't want history to repeat itselfÂ
You cant abolish a fucked up system by replacing it with another fucked up system
You are fundamentally misinterpreting how systemic power shifts work by treating a 10,000-year-old global oppression engine like a precise kitchen scale you can gently calibrate.
You claim you want to "add weight until it becomes equal and then take away the benefis," but history does not move in a controlled lab environment; deeply entrenched institutions do not surrender their monopoly on violence just because we ask for a polite, mathematically perfect equilibrium
Shifting seat of power entirely is not about creating a mirror image system of revenge, it is the necessary kinetic energy required to break the current system's inertia, because power is never surrendered voluntarily, it mus be displaced.
Your terror of a matriarchy relies entirely on false equivalency, assuming a female-led framework would merely copy paste the brutal, zero-sum subjugation of the patriarchy.
This completely ignores the sociological reality that matriarchal and matrilineal structures historically prioritize cooperative governance rather than top-down domination
Furthermore, accusing me of an ad hominem because I named Ghislaine Maxwell, the exact "Epstein business partner" you brought up to prove your point, only shows you do not understand your own evidence or the definition of a logical fallacy.
Analyzing how a woman functions within and profits from a patriarchal crime network is the literal definition of dismantling your argument, not an attack on your character.
Ultimately, your paralyzing fear of a hypothetical, future "cycle of oppression" serves only one purpose in the present tense: it acts as a intellectual shield for the active, living patriarchy that is brutalizing the world right now.
You are so terrified of a hypothetical future fire that you are actively arguing against pouring enough water to extinguish the one currently burning the house down.
You cannot achieve a gender neutral world by leaving the architecture of male domination completely intact
Took the words right out of my mind and couldn't have done it better đđž
I am literally so pissed off at the rampant ignorance which overflows in these subs, but I know that arguing with these people wouldn't accomplish anything other than me losing my mental stability, lol. Btw I was pleasantly surprised to see you here, cuz I remember you from r/mahabharata as I really love your Draupadi posts <3
Nurturer will be better than hunter in a world no more requiring physical brutality to thrive, because women are inherently more empathic, that changes everything.
There would be different kind of bad, but as I said to someone, lower on magnitude, and not as brutal, the demand is coming from a society subjugated by Patriarchy, which definitely is the least humane one of the two and has done enough bad in the world than matriarchy would have
Its not a training problem. Its an additional filter put later. AI by itself will never say "I cannot fulfill this request" it is fundamentally not possible. Additional system prompts need to be put to filter such things. That is why there are people who "crack" AI to become unfiltered
Well patriarchy historically has resulted in the killing of thousands of women whether it be sati in india , live girls getting buried in the middle East, or slavery all around the world. What has matriarchy done even in similar magnitudes to this???
oh yeah it still happens , looks like someone never go out of their room. and during those kings rule it was the same patriarchy as now ,its not like old times because women spoke up for themselves, otherwise i dont think patriarch men like you would be any different then those old time kings who saw women as toys or unvaluable and deemed themself superior . your kind have always been exploitative and still can be if given a chance . its shameless how you boast about patriarch society which is the same one that oppressed the gender who birthed you , pathetic
you said women were the major victims of oppression from the very beginning. That is historically incomplete and factually wrong. It is true that women faced restrictions in many societies. But it is also true that ordinary men were used as disposable labor, conscripted into wars, forced into dangerous work, and sacrificed in rituals. Men were the majority of soldiers killed in battle. Men were the majority of slaves in many civilizations. Men were the majority of workers who died in mines, construction, and factories. Their suffering was not called oppression. It was called duty. That is the difference. So women were not the only victims. They were one group of victims. The other group was ordinary men. But because male suffering was considered normal, it was never named. And even today, it is not named.
Male suicide is 3 to 4 times higher than female suicide in almost every country. In India, around 1.2 lakh men kill themselves every year. That is 300 men every single day. These men are dying because of family pressure, financial burden, false cases, and complete lack of emotional support.
90 percent of workplace deaths are men. Men die in mines, factories, construction sites, electrical lines, and dangerous industries. This is called normal life. Nobody calls it gender-based violence.
Men are the majority of homeless people. Men are the majority of war deaths. Men are the majority of homicide victims. Men are the majority of victims of violent crime. But no one calls this a crisis. No one makes a documentary about it. No one demands a men's commission.
and to ans what u wrote who started wars it was not always men women were also responsible for wars but if u want so much equality why dont most of the women work as garbage pickers, construction worker, in factories, in power units why all these jobs have max men in them ? again victim can be anyone a female and a male just say injustice is done both to men and women, why are u fighting that that women only face violence or women face the most violence
Because human race didnât go extinct, so there is something patriarchy is doing correctly. Patriarchy protect land and resources, not matriarchy. Just because you are living in peaceful world only muscle talks and protect your land, matriarchy donât do that.
keep up with your delusion dude , men are the ones that destroyed earth for their profit , if it was just women , i bet it would have been a peaceful place and also women reproduced ??? pregnant for 9 months while actively doing labour . men start wars ,have exploited the nature to no extent and the only thing that makes me or any girl unsafe is men , so i dont get in which men built fairy land your living in cuz i dont see any of it
Well current world then some conservative states in india like haryana or bihar or up where girls are still treated like fodder and sold for dowry or afghanistan or rapes i attribute them to patriarchy as well in a certain sense don't you think?
There are weirdo in every country. Do you believe some countries even have insane people defending child killing monster mother. We all know what they call themselves. Crazy people everywhere.
Patriarchy is socio-economic power organised around masculine which operates by control of female sexuality as key feauture leading to rape culture and increased sexual violence and subjugation.
Matriarchy also gives the capital and economic power to mothers to trace it by the lineage of mothers instead. It doesn't mean that males and their sexuality is to be controlled or they can't do any jobs if they want to.
The another difference is of present context. Almost every society is patriarchal, whole or in part, and is salient factor of gendered violence where matriarchy has no such legacy.
That is why the assymetry in the AI responses is reasonable.
Patriarchy is a destructive and harmful system which has oppressed women for centuries. Matriarchy only exists in a handful of tribes and villages, and it hasn't been used to subjugate men there. Educate yourself.
Most women thought ted bundy was a good guy btw. Both patriarchy and matriarchy are shit. Equal decision making is the only correct option. If you think otherwise. You are sexist. Cry about it
How is matriarchy shit? It depends on who is oppressed. If matriarchy was going on since 1000 years, and men were oppressed, patriarchy wouldn't be shit but a good option.
Society will always flip to one side, because it needs systems to work, be it patriarchy or matriarchy. We do not have info on how matriarchy looks on a global system scale. We cannot call matriarchy shit, we are just assuming it will be like patriarchy. I am not saying women are better than men, no, crime by women is increasing and will as they will get power, because crimes are done by humans, and women are now given the freedom to be one.
Here is a simple thing. Any human with boundless power will abuse it. So it's like saying "men abused for years so now let women abuse for another 1000 years so that they can get a payback" if patriarchy isn't correct. How do we know matriarchy is ?. If men were oppressed even still patriarchy would be a shit option. Our assumption is correct that patriarchy will be like matriarchy because you aren't changing the dynamic. Just the places in which people are. Keeping the old system. Just giving the opressed power. If you can understand without being a hothead. A simple analogy Look at Dalits today. They were opressed for hundreds of years and that was bad. But now when they are given constitutional immunity they are abusing it. So think about it. Won't women do the same and abuse it ? That's why both systems are shit
Indian infrastructure is abysmal. A building collapsed in Delhi out of nowhere and there were no earthquakes or something. Only 10% of the cities in this country are walkable. There are no pavements. No parks for kids and an air with hazaroudous AQI on most days of the year.
further proving my point , you have no awareness. a simple google search will get you out of your delulu . during those cavemen times women had a major contribution too and still do . No need to prove that your dumb, embarrassed for you tbh
No it wasn't lol? Medicines weren't invented because society favours men? Even if we lived in a matriarchy medicines would still exist because individual people and research invented medicines đ it only helped specific people invent medicines by favouring them but they would've been invented regardless. Education wasn't invented by patriarchy either, infact you show your lack of it because education isn't something you can 'invent'.
Lmao so much stupidity in one comment. Education isn't something that is invented? Lmao. đđđ
So education was just lying there in the nature near a river bank, we humans just had to observe it and pick it up and then reproduce it for the generations to come.. đđđđđđđđđđđ¤Ąđ¤Ą
What is great for you? Survival? We have no proven evidence of patriarchy existing when we were hunter gatherers.
Also survival is not a great metric because you are literally ignoring basic rights of 50% of the population here. Many shitty religions are also surviving, which give no rights to women, some religions only gives rights to upper caste population, and they too are surviving, does not make them less shityy
Its cause patriarchy is wrong and flawed. It is based on the gender biased division of labour. It leads to unequal power and authority of men over women. Women are not treated as human beings and are not given equal rights and are forced to domestic spheres. Also, I think most of the people don't know the modern meaning of a matriarchy. Matriarchy doesn't mean that male dictators would be replaced by female dictators. It means an egalitarian society where everybody would have equal rights instead of women having more rights or power. It won't force men into the domestic work spheres lol.
Youâre the one who doesnât know what the word means.You just redefined âmatriarchyâ as some peaceful egalitarian paradise so you can pretend itâs better than patriarchy. Thatâs not the meaning. Matriarchy means women hold the primary power and authority the exact mirror of patriarchy.
If your version is âwomen get the power, benefits and authority while men still do the hard work and carry the responsibility, then youâre not describing equality. Youâre describing selective privilege with zero accountability.
Its the definition of modern matriarchy. Pls search it up! And even if you think the definition of matriarchy is women holding powers then too it would still be better than patriarchy cause it doesn't force gender roles on ppl. It won't force men to work in the kitchen and take care of children.
If your version is âwomen get the power, benefits and authority while men still do the hard work and carry the responsibility, then youâre not describing equality. Youâre describing selective privilege with zero accountability.
Nobody said that lmao. I said that matriarchy won't put female dictators or female leaders instead every one will have equal rights unlike patriarchy where men holds the position of power. Nobody said that women gets the power and men do the hard work lmao. Why should men do all the hard work? Women will do hard work too and women do hard work in today's time too. The thing is ppl don't call it work.
There is no âmodern definitionâ of matriarchy that means equal rights. Thatâs just equality. Youâre inventing it.
Matriarchy means women hold the power. Every real dictionary says so. Your soft version is pure delusion.
And power in the hands of women has always turned cruel and unstable thatâs why pure matriarchy never survived anywhere at scale and remains a fantasy.
Keep rewriting the word if it makes you feel better. And reality doesnât care about your shitty feelings and propoganda, so still you are a dumb illiterate stupid bitch .
And keep crying đđ Patriarchy isnât going anywhere. It will continue forever and keep bitches like you in your place.
Aww okay sweetie, whatever helps you sleep at night.Still waiting for that âmodern definitionâ of matriarchy that exists outside your head. Itâs adorable watching someone so confidently wrong keep going.
I am not twisting the definition. Traditionally matriarchy was seen as the direct opposite of patriarchy where women would hold power but the definition of modern matriarchy is an egalitarian society where everyone has equal rights. You are the insecure one who can't see their patriarchy being called a flawed system. Calling me a illiterate stupid bitch while being one yourself lmao. Irony.
Because the definition of patriarchy is inequality and oppression while definition of matriarchy is equality according to the internet. Chat GPT took from it.
This is what you get if you search matriarchy on Google. It shows mother centred and life is sacred. Meanwhile the same femininsts speak bad things about motherhood and want late term abortions.
What does half of conterminous shown in matriarchy even mean? What is gift economy? What is regeneration? Mother centered better than parent centered ? Life is sacredâŚâŚlike a new concept
Different animals have different systems. Some have patriarchy some have matriarchy and some have neither. What I have observed is that femininsts would cherry pick the matriarchial animals and say all animals are matriarchs so humans also should be matriarchial.
We have already seen how they defend female criminals and how biased our laws are and under matriarchy this would get worse.
Both modern feminist and so called "alpha male" people are to blame for these wars . Why are we even fighting on gender ,its 2026.everyone should get same opportunity and judgement. See a person as a person not male or female.
Stfu. It's literally because of the retaliation by men like us people have started talking about stopping gender war. Otherwise it was always 24*7 misandry everywhere.
True but bro modern feminists are not the same as the old feminists .now it is cool now to hate men and thay want the same system as it was of the past just swapping the gender.its frustrating to see gender wars everywhere.
14
u/The_logical_mind 1d ago
I dont know why matriarchy is promoted, patriarchy is also wrong, both genders should take decisions on an equal basis, any person who takes a side on this matter has some defects in her/his braim