COLUMN: Matriarchy could solve many of the world’s problems

The answer to peace on Earth is being confined to remote places sparsely located across the globe. I believe the new goal of feminism should be to halt capitalist industrial development and spearhead a movement toward matriarchal global takeover.

Oh yeah, I said it. Matriarchal global takeover.

And I’m not kidding.

Look around the world and ponder on how far we’ve come under male rule. For millennia, elite men have been telling marginalized non-elite men what to do, what not to do, what to think, how to feel, what’s acceptable, what’s not, who to be, what to wear, what to believe. the list goes on, into every aspect of life.

This is the masculine way: You listen to me, and I won’t listen to you. And it’s great for a precious little fraction of the world that is the “elite,” but for a vast majority of the world, it isn’t fair. I use capitalism as my example of exploitation because it is applicable to all people. It is the “masculine” Global North, with all its industry and domination; and it is the “feminine” Global South, with its agriculture and exploitation. The masculine Global North thinks it knows what’s best for the feminine Global South, but it doesn’t. The two are completely different. It doesn’t have the understanding to implement a system that works for it onto the feminine Global South.

Modernity today often connotes the result of progressive movements toward democracy, capitalist industrial development, mitigation of wealth disparities and gender, class and racial equality. But what I find interesting is the under-the-radar government discontent, labor exploitation, growing wealth disparities and social inequalities present in “modern” societies, like the U.S.

I cannot help but look at the ideological foundation of these problems. In the case of the U.S., I refer to patriarchy. The most potent connotation of modernity is economic. It is often thought that capitalism and its compliment — democracy — are the basis of all other social improvements. Social improvements mean education for all, which means opportunity for all. But within the framework of patriarchy, these things come at a cost to women.

This cannot be clearly understood without looking at the concept of matriarchal societies, most notably found in non-developed areas around the world, such as the Mosuo civilization in Southwest China, the Igbo people of Nigeria, pre-colonial Cherokees of North America and the Minangkabau peoples of Indonesia.

Study of these societies reveals that the modern economics and democracy of America are not necessarily the answers to gender equality. It is important to look at the discrimination still faced by women in the U.S., both culturally and in their careers at the hands of men. While women in the Mosuo, Igbo, Cherokee and Minangkabau societies have specific roles and duties, these are not dictated by their inferiority to men, while in Western patriarchal society this has always been the case (whether admitted or not, it is clearly evident).

These societies are founded on a system of balance and cooperation between the essential-to-life male and female, which often results in more peaceful relations in the society. This is because “these patterns are not just a reversal of patriarchy, with women somehow ruling over men — as the usual misinterpretation would have it — rather they are … gender-egalitarian societies, and in many cases fully egalitarian societies” (“Matriarchies as Societies of Peace: Rethinking Matriarchy”).

Complete egalitarianism is antipodal to capitalism, which survives by exploitation. This is the underlying difference between patriarchal and matriarchal societies: The former is based on hierarchical structures, the latter on mutual cooperation and harmony. If ideals create systems, then it is clear that masculine ideals are competitively based; it is a race to the top, and the stairs are the heads and shoulders of other people. Feminine ideal, as reflected in all matriarchal societies’ economic and political systems, is interdependence, recognizing that each part is needed and holds value.

The masculine-feminine symbolism is ubiquitous. And in all cases, the female perspective is left out. There is no attempt at mutual understanding on the side of the male. And furthermore, there is no genuine taking into account that the two genders are different.

Let me say that again, they are different. They don’t just have different formulas, they have different kinds of numbers. Before any man tries to tell any woman what to do, he needs to find that Rosetta Stone of male and female languages and translate. Thousands of years of failing to do that has resulted in a world based on disgusting hierarchies.

Brooke Myers

Brooke is a former staff member of The Oklahoma Daily who worked as Copy Editor.