Editing Matriarchy (section)

== In feminist thought ==
{{Feminism sidebar|theory}}
{{For|groups and communities without men|Feminist separatism}}
While ''matriarchy'' has mostly fallen out of use for the anthropological description of existing societies, it remains current as a concept in [[feminism]].<ref name="AppsFLegalTheoryWLSVWR-p9">Weisberg, D. Kelly, ed., ''Applications of Feminist Legal Theory to Women's Lives: Sex, Violence, Work, and Reproduction'' (Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 1996 ({{ISBN|1-56639-423-6}})), p.&nbsp;9 ("women must organize against patriarchy as a class") but see p.&nbsp;11 ("some radical feminists&nbsp;... opt&nbsp;... for anarchistic, violent methods").</ref><ref name="FStateWelfare-p52">Dale, Jennifer, & Peggy Foster, ''Feminists and State Welfare'' (London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1986 ({{ISBN|0-7102-0278-4}})), p.&nbsp;52 ("radical feminist theory&nbsp;.... could, indeed, be said to point in the direction of 'matriarchy{{'"}}) and see pp.&nbsp;52–53 (political separatism).</ref>

[[File:Elizabeth Stanton.jpg|thumb|Elizabeth Stanton]]
In [[first-wave feminism|first-wave feminist]] discourse, either [[Elizabeth Cady Stanton]] or [[Margaret Fuller]] (it is unclear who was first) introduced the concept of matriarchy<ref>{{harvp|Donovan|2000|loc=p.&nbsp;55 & n.&nbsp;15}}, citing Stanton, Elizabeth Cady, ''Address'' (Washington Woman's Rights Convention, 1869), in ''History of Woman Suffrage'', vol. 2, pp.&nbsp;351–353.</ref> and the discourse was joined in by [[Matilda Joslyn Gage]].<ref>{{harvp|Donovan|2000|p=57}}, citing Gage, Matilda Joslyn, ''Woman, Church and State: A Historical Account of the Status of Women through the Christian Ages; with Reminiscences of the Matriarchate'' (Watertown, Mass.: Persephone Press, 1980 (1893)), p.&nbsp;21.</ref> [[Victoria Woodhull]], in 1871, called for men to open the U.S. government to women or a new constitution and government would be formed in a year;<ref>''A Lecture on Constitutional Equality'', also known as ''The Great Secession Speech'', speech to Woman's Suffrage Convention, New York, May 11, 1871, excerpt quoted in {{harvp|Gabriel|1998|pp=86–87}}.</ref> and, on a basis of equality, she ran to be elected president in 1872.<ref>{{harvp|Gabriel|1998|loc=''passim'', esp. pp.&nbsp;54–57}}</ref><ref>Underhill, Lois Beachy, ''The Woman Who Ran for President: The Many Lives of Victoria Woodhull'' (Bridgehampton, N.Y.: Bridge Works, 1st ed. 1995 ({{ISBN|1-882593-10-3}}), ''passim'', esp. ch.&nbsp;8.</ref> [[Charlotte Perkins Gilman]], in 1911 and 1914,<ref>The dates are those of two original editions of the same work, both cited herein.</ref> argued for "a woman-centered, or better mother-centered, world"<ref>{{harvp|Donovan|2000|p=61}}, citing {{harvp|Gilman|2001|loc=''passim''}}</ref> and described "government by women".<ref>{{harvp|Donovan|2000|p=62}}, citing {{harvp|Gilman|2001|p=190}}</ref> She argued that a government led by either sex must be assisted by the other,<ref>{{harvp|Gilman|2001|p=177}} and see p.&nbsp;153.</ref> both genders being "useful&nbsp;... and should in our governments be alike used",<ref>{{harvp|Gilman|2001|p=153}}</ref> because men and women have different qualities.<ref>{{harvp|Gilman|2001|pp=153, 177}}</ref>

[[Cultural feminism]] includes "matriarchal worship", according to Prof. James Penner.<ref>Penner, James, ''Pinks, Pansies, and Punks: The Rhetoric of Masculinity in American Literary Culture'' (Bloomington, Ind.: Indiana University Press, 2011 ({{ISBN|978-0-253-22251-0}})), p.&nbsp;235.</ref>

In [[list of feminist literature|feminist literature]], matriarchy and patriarchy are not conceived as simple mirrors of each other.<ref name="RelativizingPatriarchy-p287">{{harvp|Eller|1991|p=287}}</ref> While ''matriarchy'' sometimes means "the political rule of women",<ref>{{harvp|Eller|2000|p=12}}</ref> that meaning is often rejected, on the ground that matriarchy is not a mirroring of patriarchy.<ref>{{harvp|Eller|2000|p=12}} (quoting also Mary Daly ("matriarchy 'was not patriarchy spelled with an "m.{{"'"}}, probably – per {{harvp|Eller|2000|loc=p.&nbsp;12 n.&nbsp;3}} – in Daly, Mary, ''Beyond God the Father'', p.&nbsp;94)).</ref> Patriarchy is held to be about power over others while matriarchy is held to be about power from within,<ref name="RelativizingPatriarchy-p287" /> [[Starhawk]] having written on that distinction<ref name="RelativizingPatriarchy-p287" /><ref>Starhawk, ''[[Dreaming the Dark: Magic, Sex, and Politics]]'' (Boston, Mass.: Beacon Press, 15th Anniversary ed. 1997 (original 1982) ({{ISBN|0-8070-1037-5}})), ch.&nbsp;1 (original 1982 ed. cited in {{harvp|Eller|1991|p=287}}).</ref> and Adler having argued that matriarchal power is not possessive and not controlling, but is harmonious with nature, arguing that women are uniquely capable of using power without exploitative purposes.{{efn|Adler wrote a matriarchy is "a realm where female things are valued and where power is exerted in non-possessive, non-controlling, and organic ways that are harmonious with nature."<ref>{{harvp|Adler|2006|p=187}}, as quoted in {{harvp|Eller|1991|p=287}}.</ref>}}

For radical feminists, the importance of matriarchy is that "veneration for the female principle&nbsp;... somewhat lightens an oppressive system."<ref>{{harvp|Castro|1990|p=42}}</ref>

[[Feminist utopia]]s are a form of advocacy. According to Tineke Willemsen, "a feminist utopia would&nbsp;... be the description of a place where at least women would like to live."<ref>{{harvp|Willemsen|1997|p=5}}</ref> Willemsen continues, among "type[s] of feminist utopias[,]&nbsp;... [one] stem[s] from feminists who emphasize the differences between women and men. They tend to formulate their ideal world in terms of a society where women's positions are better than men's. There are various forms of matriarchy, or even a utopia that resembles the Greek myth of the Amazons.... [V]ery few modern utopias have been developed in which women are absolute autocrats."<ref>{{harvp|Willemsen|1997|p=6}}. See also {{harvp|Poldervaart|1997|p=182}} ("Tineke Willemsen distinghuishes {{Sic}} in her article three large classes of utopias:&nbsp;... 2) feminists who emphasize the difference [between "women and men&nbsp;... in rights and possibilities"]; in these utopias women have a better position than men or feminine qualities are more valued than masculine ones").</ref>

A minority of feminists, generally [[radical feminism|radical]],<ref name="AppsFLegalTheoryWLSVWR-p9" /><ref name="FStateWelfare-p52" /> have argued that women should govern societies of women and men. In all of these advocacies, the governing women are not limited to mothers:
* In her book ''Scapegoat: The Jews, Israel, and Women's Liberation'', [[Andrea Dworkin]] stated that she wanted women to have their own country, "Womenland,"<ref name="Guardian-TakeNoPrisoners">Quotation: [https://www.theguardian.com/books/2000/may/13/politics1 ''Take No Prisoners'', in ''The Guardian'', May 13, 2000], as accessed Sep. 6, 2010.</ref> which, comparable to Israel, would serve as a "place of potential refuge".<ref name="Guardian-TakeNoPrisoners" /><ref>Other than quotation: Dworkin, Andrea, ''Scapegoat: The Jews, Israel, and Women's Liberation'' (N.Y.: Free Press, 2000 ({{ISBN|0-684-83612-2}})), p.&nbsp;246 and see pp.&nbsp;248 & 336.</ref> In the ''Palestine Solidarity Review'', Veronica A. Ouma reviewed the book and argued her view that while Dworkin "pays lip service to the egalitarian nature of&nbsp;... [stateless] societies [without hierarchies], she envisions a state whereby women either impose gender equality or a state where women rule supreme above men."<ref>{{usurped|1=[https://web.archive.org/web/20101208074544/http://psreview.org/content/view/38/99/ Ouma, Veronica A., ''Dworkin's Scapegoating'', in ''Palestine Solidarity Review'' (''PSR''), Fall 2005]}}, as accessed Oct. 21, 2010 (''PSR'' was challenged on its reliability, in [http://www.jpost.com/Opinion/Op-EdContributors/Article.aspx?id=145131 Frantzman, Seth J., ''Do Arabs and Jews Realize How Much They Look Alike?'', in ''The Jerusalem Post'', Jun. 10, 2009, 11:43 p.m. (op-ed opinion)], as accessed May 15, 2011.)</ref>
* [[Starhawk]], in ''[[The Fifth Sacred Thing]]'' (1993), fiction, wrote of "a utopia where women are leading societies but are doing so with the consent of men."<ref>{{harvp|Schönpflug|2008|p=22}}</ref>
* [[Phyllis Chesler]] wrote in ''Women and Madness'' (2005 and 1972) that feminist women must "''dominate'' public and social institutions".<ref>{{harvp|Chesler|2005|p=347}} (italics so in original) and see pp.&nbsp;296, 335–336, 337–338, 340, 341, 345, 346, 347, & 348–349 and see also pp.&nbsp;294–295</ref> She also wrote that women fare better when controlling the means of production<ref>{{harvp|Chesler|2005|p=337}} and see p.&nbsp;340</ref> and that equality with men should not be supported,<ref name="WomenMad-05p338-72p287">{{harvp|Chesler|2005|p=338}}</ref> even if female domination is no more "just"<ref name="WomenMad-05p338-72p287" /> than male domination.<ref name="WomenMad-05p338-72p287" /> On the other hand, in 1985, she was "probably more of a feminist-anarchist&nbsp;... more mistrustful of the organisation of power into large bureaucratic states [than she was in 1972]".<ref>Chesler, Phyllis, in {{harvp|Spender|1985|p=214}} (reply from Phyllis Chesler to Dale Spender).</ref>{{Efn|[[Anarcha-feminism]], a philosophy combining anarchism and feminism}} Between Chesler's 1972 and 2005 editions, [[Dale Spender]] wrote that Chesler "takes [as] a&nbsp;... stand [that]&nbsp;.... [e]quality is a spurious goal, and of no use to women: the only way women can protect themselves is if they ''dominate'' particular institutions and can use them to serve women's interests. Reproduction is a case in point."<ref>{{harvp|Spender|1985|p=151}} (emphasis in original).</ref> Spender wrote Chesler "remarks&nbsp;... women will be superior".<ref>{{harvp|Spender|1985|p=151}}</ref>
* [[Monique Wittig]] authored, as fiction (not as fact), ''[[Les Guérillères]]'',<ref>{{harvp|Wittig|1985|loc=''passim'' and see pp.&nbsp;114–115, 127, 131, & 134–135}}</ref> with her description of an asserted "female State".<ref>{{harvp|Wittig|1985|pp=114–115}}</ref> The work was described by Rohrlich as a "fictional counterpart" to "so-called Amazon societies".<ref>Both quotations: {{harvp|Rohrlich|1984|p=xvii}}.</ref> Scholarly interpretations of the fictional work include that women win a war against men,<ref>Moi, Toril, ''Sexual/Textual Politics: Feminist Literary Theory'' (London: Routledge, 2d ed., 2002 ({{ISBN|0-415-28012-5}})), p.&nbsp;78.</ref><ref>Auerbach, Nina, ''Communities of Women: An Idea in Fiction'' (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1978 ({{ISBN|0-674-15168-2}})), p.&nbsp;186.</ref> "reconcil[e]"<ref name="Porter-Fantasy-p267">{{harvp|Porter|1992|p=267}}</ref> with "those men of good will who come to join them",<ref name="Porter-Fantasy-p267" /> exercise feminist autonomy<ref name="Porter-Fantasy-p267"/> through [[polyandry]],<ref>{{harvp|Wittig|1985|p=112}}</ref> decide how to govern,<ref name="Porter-Fantasy-p267" /> and rule the men.<ref>{{harvp|Zerilli|2005|p=80}}, quoting {{harvp|Porter|1992|p=261}}</ref> The women confronting men<ref>{{harvp|Farley|1984|pp=237–238}}</ref> are, according to Tucker Farley, diverse and thus stronger and more united<ref>{{harvp|Farley|1984|p=238}} and see Baruch, Elaine Hoffman, ''Introduction'', in Pt. Four (''Visions of Utopia''), in {{harvp|Rohrlich|1984|p=205}}.</ref> and, continued Farley, permit a "few&nbsp;... men, who are willing to accept a feminist society of primitive communism,&nbsp;... to live."<ref>{{harvp|Farley|1984|p=238}}</ref> Another interpretation is that the author created an {{"'}}open structure' of freedom".<ref>{{harvp|Zerilli|2005|p=80}}, purportedly quoting within the quotation {{harvp|Porter|1992|p=261}}.</ref>
* [[Mary Daly]] wrote of hag-ocracy, "the place we ["women traveling into feminist time/space"] govern",<ref>{{harvp|Daly|1990|p=15}}</ref>{{efn|For another definition of ''hag'' by Mary Daly, see Daly, Mary, with Jane Caputi, ''Websters' First New Intergalactic Wickedary of the English Language'' (London, Great Britain: Women's Press, 1988 ({{ISBN|0-7043-4114-X}})), p.&nbsp;137.}} and of reversing phallocratic rule<ref>{{harvp|Daly|1990|p=xxvi}}</ref> in the 1990s (''i.e.'', when published).<ref>{{harvp|Daly|1990|p=xxxiii}}</ref> She considered equal rights as tokenism that works against sisterhood, even as she supported abortion being legal and other reforms.<ref>{{harvp|Daly|1990|loc=p.&nbsp;375 & fnn. and see p.&nbsp;384}}</ref> She considered her book pro-female and anti-male.<ref>{{harvp|Daly|1990|p=29}}</ref>
* [[Rasa von Werder]] has also long advocated for a return to matriarchy, a restoration of its status before its overthrow by patriarchy, along with associated author [[William Bond (author)|William Bond]] as well.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://embodimentofgod.com |title=Embodiment of God|publisher=University of Mother God Church |date= |access-date=2022-04-25}}</ref>

Some such advocacies are informed by work on the matriarchies of the past:
* According to Prof. {{ill|Linda Zerilli|it}}, "an ancient matriarchy&nbsp;... [was "in early second-wave feminism"] the lost object of women's freedom."<ref>{{harvp|Zerilli|2005|p=101}}</ref> Prof. Cynthia Eller found widespread acceptance of matriarchal myth during [[second-wave feminism|feminism's second wave]].<ref>{{harvp|Eller|2000|p=3}}</ref> According to Kathryn Rountree, the belief in a prepatriarchal "Golden Age" of matriarchy may have been more specifically about a matrifocal society,<ref>{{harvp|Rountree|2001|p=6}}</ref> although this was believed more in the 1970s than in the 1990s–2000s and was criticized within feminism and within archaeology, anthropology, and theological study as lacking a scholarly basis,<ref>{{harvp|Rountree|2001|pp=5–9 & ''passim''}}</ref> and Prof. [[Harvey Mansfield|Harvey C. Mansfield]] wrote that "the evidence [is]&nbsp;... of males ruling over all societies at almost all times".<ref>{{harvp|Mansfield|2006|p=72}}</ref> Eller said that, other than a few separatist radical lesbian feminists, [[feminist theology|spiritual feminists]] would generously include "a place for men&nbsp;... in which they can be happy and productive, if not necessarily powerful and in control"<ref>{{harvp|Eller|1995|pp=183–184}}</ref> and might have social power as well.<ref>{{harvp|Eller|1995|p=184}}</ref>
* [[Jill Johnston]] envisioned a "return to the former glory and wise equanimity of the matriarchies"<ref name="LesbianNation-p248">Johnston, Jill, ''[[Lesbian Nation: The Feminist Solution]]'' (N.Y.: Simon & Schuster, 1973 (SBN (not ISBN) 671-21433-0)), p.&nbsp;248 and see pp.&nbsp;248–249.</ref> in the future<ref name="LesbianNation-p248" /> and "imagined lesbians as constituting an imaginary radical state, and invoked 'the return to the harmony of statehood and biology....{{'"}}<ref>{{usurped|1=[https://web.archive.org/web/20130511161913/http://www.law.nyu.edu/ecm_dlv1/groups/public/%40nyu_law_website__journals__review_of_law_and_social_change/documents/documents/ecm_pro_066374.pdf Franklin, Kris, & Sara E. Chinn, ''Lesbians, Legal Theory and Other Superheroes'', in ''Review of Law & Social Change'', vol. XXV, 1999, pp.&nbsp;310–311]}}, as accessed (at a prior URL) October 21, 2010 (citing in n.&nbsp;45 ''Lesbian Nation'', p.&nbsp;15).</ref> Her work inspired efforts at implementation by the [[Lesbian Organization of Toronto]] (LOOT) in 1976–1980<ref>{{harvp|Ross|1995|loc=''passim'', esp. pp.&nbsp;8 & 15–16 & also pp. 19, 71, 111, 204, 205, 212, 219 & 231}}</ref> and in [[Los Angeles]].<ref>{{harvp|Ross|1995|p=204}}, citing {{cite journal |last1=McCoy |first1=Sherry |last2=Hicks |first2=Maureen |title=A Psychological Retrospective on Power in the Contemporary Lesbian-Feminist Community |journal=Frontiers: A Journal of Women Studies |date=1979 |volume=4 |issue=3 |pages=65–69 |doi=10.2307/3346152 |jstor=3346152 }}</ref>
* [[Elizabeth Gould Davis]] believed that a "matriarchal counterrevolution [replacing "a[n old] patriarchal revolution"]&nbsp;... is the only hope for the survival of the human race."<ref>{{harvp|Davis|1971|p=18}}</ref> She believed that "spiritual force",<ref name="1stSex-p339">{{harvp|Davis|1971|p=339}}</ref> "mental and spiritual gifts",<ref name="1stSex-p339" /> and "extrasensory perception"<ref name="1stSex-p339" />{{Efn|[[Extrasensory perception]] (ESP), perception sensed by the mind but not originating through recognized physical senses}} will be more important and therefore that "woman will&nbsp;... predominate",<ref name="1stSex-p339" /> and that it is "about&nbsp;... ["woman" that] the next civilization will&nbsp;... revolve",<ref name="1stSex-p339" /> as in the kind of past that she believed existed.<ref name="1stSex-p339" /> According to critic Prof. Ginette Castro, Elizabeth Gould Davis used the words ''matriarchy'' and ''gynocracy'' "interchangeably"<ref name="AmFeminism-p35">{{harvp|Castro|1990|p=35}} and see pp.&nbsp;26, 27, 32–36, & 42.</ref> and proposed a discourse "rooted in the purest female chauvinism"<ref>{{harvp|Castro|1990|p=36}}</ref>{{Efn|[[Chauvinism]], partisanship that is extreme and unreasoning and in favor of a group}} and seemed to support "a feminist counterattack stigmatizing the patriarchal present",<ref name="AmFeminism-p35" /> "giv[ing]&nbsp;... in to a revenge-seeking form of feminism",<ref name="AmFeminism-p35" /> "build[ing]&nbsp;... her case on the humiliation of men",<ref name="AmFeminism-p35" /> and "asserti[ng]&nbsp;... a specifically feminine nature&nbsp;... [as] morally superior."<ref name="AmFeminism-p35" /> Castro criticized Elizabeth Gould Davis' [[essentialism]] and assertion of superiority as "sexist"<ref name="AmFeminism-p35" /> and "treason".<ref name="AmFeminism-p35" />
* One organization that was named [[The Feminists]] was interested in matriarchy<ref>{{harvp|Echols|1989|pp=183–184}}</ref> and was one of the largest of the radical feminist women's liberation groups of the 1960s.<ref>Tong, Rosemarie Putnam, ''Feminist Thought: A More Comprehensive Introduction'' (Boulder, Colorado: Westview Press, 2d ed. 1998 ({{ISBN|0-8133-3295-8}})), p.&nbsp;23.</ref> Two members wanted "the restoration of female rule",<ref name="DaringBad-p184">{{harvp|Echols|1989|p=184}}, quoting Barbara Mehrhof and Pam Kearon. Full names per {{harvp|Echols|1989|pp=407, 409}} & memberships per {{harvp|Echols|1989|pp=388, 383 & 382}}. See also p.&nbsp;253 ("moved toward&nbsp;... matriarchalism").</ref> but the organization's founder, [[Ti-Grace Atkinson]], would have objected had she remained in the organization, because, according to a historian, "[she] had always doubted that women would wield power differently from men."<ref>{{harvp|Echols|1989|pp=183–184}}; foundership per {{harvp|Echols|1989|p=388}}</ref>
[[File:RobinMorgan profile.jpg|thumb|Robin Morgan]]
* [[Robin Morgan]] wrote of women fighting for and creating a "gynocratic ''world''".<ref>Morgan, Robin, ''Going Too Far: The Personal Chronicle of a Feminist'' (N.Y.: Random House, 1st ed. 1977 ({{ISBN|0-394-48227-1}})), p.&nbsp;187 (italics so in original).</ref>
* Adler reported, "if feminists have diverse views on the matriarchies of the past, they also are of several minds on the goals for the future. A woman in the coven of Ursa Maior told me, 'right now I am pushing for women's power in any way I can, but I don't know whether my ultimate aim is a society where all human beings are equal, regardless of the bodies they were born into, or whether I would rather see a society where women had institutional authority.{{'"}}<ref>{{harvp|Adler|2006|p=198}} ("Maior" so in original)</ref>

Some fiction caricatured the current gender hierarchy by describing an inverted matriarchal alternative without necessarily advocating for it. According to Karin Schönpflug, "Gerd Brantenberg's ''[[Egalia's Daughters]]'' is a caricature of powered gender relations which have been completely reversed, with the female sex on the top and the male sex a degraded, oppressed group";<ref>{{harvp|Schönpflug|2008|p=108}}, citing [[Gerd Brantenberg]], ''Egalia's Daughters'' (Norwegian original published in 1977).</ref> "gender inequality is expressed through power inversion"<ref>{{harvp|Schönpflug|2008|p=19}}</ref> and "all gender roles are reversed and women rule over a class of intimidated, effeminate men" compelled into that submissive gender role.<ref name="Karin-p20">{{harvp|Schönpflug|2008|p=20}}</ref> "''Egalia'' is not a typical example of gender inequality in the sense that a vision of a desirable matriarchy is created; ''Egalia'' is more a caricature of male hegemony by twisting gender hierarchy but not really offering a 'better world.{{'"}}<ref name="Karin-p20" /><ref>''Egalia's Daughters'' as fiction: [http://www.worldcat.org/search?qt=worldcat_org_bks&q=Egalia%27s+Daughters&fq=dt%3Abks ''WorldCat'' entry], as accessed August 29, 2012.</ref>

On egalitarian matriarchy,<ref>[http://www.hagia.de/de/matriarchy.html ''Matriarchal Studies'' (International Academy HAGIA)] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110719034836/http://www.hagia.de/de/matriarchy.html |date=July 19, 2011 }}, as accessed January 30, 2011.</ref> [[Heide Göttner-Abendroth]]'s International Academy for Modern Matriarchal Studies and Matriarchal Spirituality (HAGIA) organized conferences in [[Luxembourg]] in 2003<ref>[http://www.second-congress-matriarchal-studies.com/1st_congress_submenu.html 1st World Congress on Matriarchal Studies], also known as [http://www.goettner-abendroth.de/en/index.php Societies in Balance] {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110217062239/http://www.goettner-abendroth.de/en/index.php |date=February 17, 2011 }}, both as accessed January 29, 2011.</ref> and [[Texas]] in 2005,<ref>[http://www.second-congress-matriarchal-studies.com/ Societies of Peace: 2nd World Congress on Matriarchal Studies (home page)] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20141218072003/http://second-congress-matriarchal-studies.com/ |date=December 18, 2014 }}, as accessed January 29, 2011.</ref><ref>For a review of the conferences, esp. that of 2005, by a participant, see [http://matriarchy.info/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=97&Itemid=83 Mukhim, Patricia, ''Khasi Matriliny Has Many Parallels'', October 15, 2005], as accessed February 6, 2011 (also published in ''The Statesman'' (India), October 15, 2005).</ref> with papers published.<ref>{{harvp|Goettner-Abendroth|2009a|loc=''passim''}}</ref> Göttner-Abendroth argued that "matriarchies are all egalitarian at least in terms of gender—they have no gender hierarchy&nbsp;.... [, that, f]or many matriarchal societies, the social order is completely egalitarian at both local and regional levels",<ref>{{harvp|Goettner-Abendroth|2009b|p=23}}</ref> that, "for our own path toward new egalitarian societies, we can gain&nbsp;... insight from&nbsp;... ["tested"] matriarchal patterns",<ref>{{harvp|Goettner-Abendroth|2009b|loc=p.&nbsp;25 and see p.&nbsp;24}} and, in {{harvp|Goettner-Abendroth|2009a|loc=''Introduction'' & pts. I & VIII}}</ref> and that "matriarchies are not abstract ''utopias'', constructed according to philosophical concepts that could never be implemented."<ref>{{harvp|Goettner-Abendroth|2009b|p=25}} (emphasis so in original).</ref>

According to Eller, "a deep distrust of men's ability to adhere to"<ref name="RelativizingPatriarchy-p290">{{harvp|Eller|1991|p=290}}</ref> future matriarchal requirements may invoke a need "to retain at least some degree of female hegemony to insure against a return to patriarchal control",<ref name="RelativizingPatriarchy-p290" /> "feminists&nbsp;... [having] the understanding that female dominance is better for society—and better for men—than the present world order",<ref name="RelativizingPatriarchy-p291n27">{{harvp|Eller|1991|p=291}}</ref> as is equalitarianism. On the other hand, Eller continued, if men can be trusted to accept equality, probably most feminists seeking future matriarchy would accept an equalitarian model.<ref name="RelativizingPatriarchy-p291n27"/>

"Demographic[ally]",<ref name="MythMatriarchalPre-p10">{{harvp|Eller|2000|p=10}} (whether author's data global unspecified)</ref> "feminist matriarchalists run the gamut"<ref name="MythMatriarchalPre-p10" /> but primarily are "in white, well-educated, middle-class circles";<ref name="MythMatriarchalPre-p10" /> many of the adherents are "religiously inclined"<ref name="MythMatriarchalPre-p10" /> while others are "quite secular".<ref name="MythMatriarchalPre-p10" />

Biology as a ground for holding either males or females superior over the other has been criticized as invalid, such as by Andrea Dworkin<ref>[http://www.nostatusquo.com/ACLU/dworkin/WarZoneChaptIIID.html Dworkin, Andrea, ''Biological Superiority: The World's Most Dangerous and Deadly Idea'' (1977), from Dworkin, Andrea, ''Letters From a War Zone: Writings 1976–1989'', Pt. III, ''Take Back the Day''], as accessed December 25, 2010 (first published in ''Heresies No. 6 on Women and Violence'', vol. 2, no. 2 (Summer 1978)).</ref> and by Robin Morgan.<ref>Morgan, Robin, ''The Demon Lover: On the Sexuality of Terrorism'' (N.Y.: Norton, 1989 ({{ISBN|0-393-30677-1}}) (rev. ed. 2000 ({{ISBN|0-7434-5293-3}}))), p.&nbsp;27 (pagination per edition at Amazon.com).</ref> A claim that women have unique characteristics that prevent women's assimilation with men has been apparently rejected by Ti-Grace Atkinson.<ref>Badinter, Elisabeth, trans. Julia Borossa, ''Dead End Feminism'' (Polity, 2006 ({{ISBN|0-7456-3381-1}} & {{ISBN|978-0-7456-3381-7}})), p.&nbsp;32, in [https://books.google.com/books?id=of1pH73sNFYC&dq=%28%22female+nation%22+OR+%22female+nationalism%22%29+AND+%28%22Ti-Grace+Atkinson%22+OR+%22Atkinson%2C+Ti-Grace%22%29&pg=PA32 ''Google Books''], as accessed December 4, 2010 (no source cited for Ti-Grace Atkinson's statement); ''Amazon Continues Odyssey'', in ''off our backs'', December, 1979 (interview) (mentioning "female nationalism" (relevant herein insofar as the female nationalism is matriarchal) & women as nation); Atkinson, Ti-Grace, ''Amazon Odyssey'' (N.Y.: Links, 1974 (SBN (not ISBN) 0-8256-3023-1)) (may preclude female nationalism (relevant herein insofar as female nationalism is matriarchal)); also there exists (not read by this Wikipedia editor) Atkinson, Ti-Grace, ''Le Nationalisme Feminin'', in ''Nouvelle Questions Feministes'' 6–7, Spring 1984, pp.&nbsp;35–54 (French) (Eng. trans., ''Female Nationalism'' (unpublished), was held by author) (relevant herein insofar as female nationalism is matriarchal) (cited by {{cite journal |last1=Ringelheim |first1=Joan |title=Women and the Holocaust: A Reconsideration of Research |journal=Signs |date=1985 |volume=10 |issue=4 |pages=741–761 |doi=10.1086/494181 |jstor=3174312 |s2cid=144580658 }} ([§] ''Viewpoint'') (also in Rittner, Carol, & John K. Roth, eds., ''Different Voices: Women and the Holocaust'' (N.Y.: Paragon House, 1993), pp.&nbsp;373–418) & by Weiss, Penny A., & Marilyn Friedman, ''Feminism & Community'' (Temple University Press, 1995 ({{ISBN|1-56639-277-2}} & {{ISBN|978-1-56639-277-8}}))), p.&nbsp;330.</ref> On the other hand, not all advocates based their arguments on biology or essentialism.

A criticism by Mansfield of choosing who governs according to [[gender or sex]] is that the best qualified people should be chosen, regardless of gender or sex.<ref>{{harvp|Mansfield|2006|pp=241–242}}, citing Plato, ''Republic''.</ref> On the other hand, Mansfield considered merit insufficient for office, because a legal right granted by a sovereign (''e.g.'', a king), was more important than merit.<ref>{{harvp|Mansfield|2006|loc=pp.&nbsp;173–174 & nn.&nbsp;14, 16–17, & 19}}, citing Hobbes, ''Leviathan'', ch.&nbsp;10, 14–15, & 21, [[Tuck, Richard]], ''Natural Rights Theories'' (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1979), ch.&nbsp;6, & Tarcov, Nathan, ''Locke's Education for Liberty'' (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1984), p.&nbsp;38.</ref>

Diversity within a proposed community can, according to Becki L. Ross, make it especially challenging to complete forming the community.<ref>{{harvp|Ross|1995|p=208}}</ref> However, some advocacy includes diversity, in the views of Dworkin<ref name="Guardian-TakeNoPrisoners"/> and Farley.<ref>{{harvp|Farley|1984|p=238}} (respecting Wittig, Monique, ''Les Guérillères'').</ref>

Prof. [[Christine Stansell]], a feminist, wrote that, for feminists to achieve state power, women must democratically cooperate with men. "Women must take their place with a new generation of brothers in a struggle for the world's fortunes. Herland, whether of virtuous matrons or daring sisters, is not an option... [T]he well-being and liberty of women cannot be separated from democracy's survival."<ref>{{cite book | last=Stansell | first=Christine | author-link=Christine Stansell | title=The Feminist Promise: 1792 to the Present | location=N.Y. | publisher=Modern Library (Random House) | edition=1st |year=2010 |isbn=978-0-679-64314-2 | page=394}}</ref> ([[Herland (novel)|''Herland'']] was feminist utopian fiction by Charlotte Perkins Gilman in 1911, featuring a community entirely of women except for three men who seek it out,<ref>Bartkowski, Frances, ''Feminist Utopias'' (Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 1989 ({{ISBN|0-8032-1205-4}})), ch.&nbsp;1.</ref> strong women in a matriarchal utopia<ref>{{harvp|Donovan|2000|p=48}}</ref> expected to last for generations,<ref>{{harvp|Schönpflug|2008|p=21}} and see p.&nbsp;20–21.</ref> demonstrated a marked era of peace and personal satisfaction, although Charlotte Perkins Gilman was herself a feminist advocate of society being gender-integrated and of women's freedom.)<ref>Gilman, Charlotte Perkins, ''What is "Feminism"?'', in ''The Sunday Herald'', vol. CXL, no. 65, September 3, 1916 (Extra ed.), [§] ''Magazine'', p.&nbsp;[7] [of §], of ''The Boston Herald'' (Boston, Mass.) (on genderal integration: "essential duty of the female is&nbsp;... in choosing a father for her children" & "women will always love men", both per col.&nbsp;2, & "closer union, deeper attachment between men and women", per col.&nbsp;3; on freedom: "[women's] full economic independence.... [and] freedom now allowed our girls", per col.&nbsp;1, "freedom" (several references), per col.&nbsp;2, & "feminism&nbsp;.... [will] set free four-fifths of its labor" & "comparative freedom of action possible to women today [1916]", both per col.&nbsp;3) (microfilm (Bell & Howell)).</ref>

Other criticisms of matriarchy are that it could result in reverse sexism or discrimination against men, that it is opposed by most people including most feminists,{{citation needed|date=March 2023}} or that many women do not want leadership positions.{{citation needed|reason=more sources needed; [[WP:EXTRAORDINARY]], [[WP:BIASEDSOURCES]]|date=March 2023}}{{efn|"Women do not run for office as readily as men do, nor do most women, it seems, call on them to run. It seems that they do not have the same desire to 'run' things as men, to use the word in another political sense that like the first includes standing out in front.... Women are partisan, like men; hence they are political, like men. But not to the same degree. They will readily sail into partisan conflict, but they are not so ready to take the lead and make themselves targets of partisan hostility (though they do write provocative books)."<ref>{{harvp|Mansfield|2006|pp=80–81}}</ref> [A] "study&nbsp;.... traces the gender gap&nbsp;... to 'participatory factors,' such as education and income, that give men greater advantages in civic skills, enabling them to participate politically"<ref>{{harvp|Mansfield|2006|pp=79–80}}</ref> "[I]n politics and in other public situations, he ["the manly man"] willingly takes responsibility when others hang back.... His wife and children&nbsp;... are weaker",<ref>{{harvp|Mansfield|2006|p=17}}</ref> "manliness&nbsp;... is aggression that develops an assertion, a cause it espouses"...<ref>{{harvp|Mansfield|2006|loc=p. 49 and see also pp. 170–171 & 204–206}}</ref> "a woman&nbsp;.... may have less ambition or a different ambition, but being a political animal like a man, she too likes to rule, if in her way".<ref>{{harvp|Mansfield|2006|p=161}}</ref> See also {{harvp|Schaub|2006}}.{{citation needed|reason=These sources are seriously dated, while historical context is fine, this could use some fixing, per [[WP:BIASEDSOURCES]]|date=March 2023}}}} governing takes women away from family responsibilities, women are too likely to be unable to serve politically because of menstruation and pregnancy,<ref>{{harvp|Roald|2001|p=195}}</ref> public affairs are too sordid for women<ref>{{harvp|Donovan|2000|p=30}}, citing [[Sarah Grimké|Grimké, Sarah M.]], ''Letters on Equality of the Sexes and the Condition of Woman'' (N.Y.: Burt Franklin, 1970 (1838)), p.&nbsp;81 (objecting to women "participating in government", "reflecting perhaps the Victorian notion that public affairs were too sordid for women").</ref> and would cost women their respect<ref name="PoisoningMinds-pp424-425">{{harvp|Herzog|1998|pp=424–425}}</ref> and femininity (apparently including fertility),<ref>{{harvp|Richards|1997|p=120}}, but see pp.&nbsp;120–121.</ref> superiority is not traditional,<ref>{{harvp|Mansfield|2006|p=72}} ("the evidence [is]&nbsp;... of males ruling over all societies at almost all times" & "males&nbsp;... have dominated all politics we know of") & 58 ("every previous society, including our democracy up to now, has been some kind of patriarchy, permeated by stubborn, self-insistent manliness" (italics omitted)) and see p.&nbsp;66 (patriarchy as "based on manliness, not merely those governments staffed by males", applicability depending on the antecedent for "here").</ref>{{Efn|"Athenians were extreme, but almost no Greeks or Romans thought women should participate in government. There was no approved public forum for ''any'' kind of women's self-expression, not even in the arts and religion [perhaps except "priestesses"]."<ref>{{harvp|Ruden|2010|p=80}} (emphasis in original)</ref><ref>Athenians discussed in the context of play by Aristophanes, {{harvp|Ruden|2010|pp=78–80}}</ref>}} women lack the political capacity and authority men have,{{efn|"[according to] Aristotle&nbsp;....[,] [a]s women do not have the authority, the political capacity, of men, they are, as it were, elbowed out of politics and ushered into the household.... Meanwhile, the male rules because of his greater authority".<ref>{{harvp|Mansfield|2006|p=210}}</ref>}} it is impractical because of a shortage of women with the ability to govern at that level of difficulty<ref name="PoisoningMinds-pp424-425" /> as well as the desire and ability to wage war,{{efn|"ability to fight&nbsp;.... is an important claim to rule&nbsp;..., and it is the culmination of the aggressive manly stereotype we are considering", "who can reasonably deny that women are not as accomplished as men in battle either in spirit or in physique?&nbsp;.... Conservatives say that this proves that women are not the same as men", & "manliness is best shown in war, the defense of one's country at its most difficult and dangerous"<ref>{{harvp|Mansfield|2006|p=75}}</ref> "there might come a point when&nbsp;... stronger persons would have to be fought [by women] rather than merely told off.... The very great majority of women would take a pass on the opportunity to be GI Jane. In the NATO countries where women are allowed in combat units they form only 1 percent of the complement.... Whatever their belief about equality, women might reasonably decide they are needed more elsewhere than in combat"<ref>{{harvp|Mansfield|2006|p=76}}</ref>}}{{efn|''GI Jane'' is 'a female member of a military'.<ref>''Random House Historical Dictionary of American Slang'' (N.Y.: Random House, 1st ed. 1994 ({{ISBN|0-394-54427-7}})), vol. 1, p.&nbsp;892, col.&nbsp;2 (earliest example dated 1944).</ref>}}{{Efn|[[NATO]], North Atlantic Treaty Organization, which provides collective military defense for member nations}} women are less aggressive, or less often so, than are men<ref>{{harvp|Mansfield|2006|pp=63–64}}</ref> and politics is aggressive,<ref>{{harvp|Mansfield|2006|p=62}}</ref> women legislating would not serve men's interests<ref name="PoisoningMinds-pp424-425" /><ref>{{harvp|Roald|2001|p=269}}</ref><ref>Not absolutely but relatively so: {{harvp|Mansfield|2006|loc=p.&nbsp;80 n.&nbsp;51}} ("successful ambition in women [''i.e.'', "women holding office"] makes them more womanish in the sense of representing women's views").</ref> or would serve only petty interests,<ref name="PoisoningMinds-pp424-425" /> it is contradicted by current science on genderal differences,<ref>{{harvp|Mansfield|2006|p=50}} ("our science rather clumsily confirms the stereotype about manliness, the stereotype that stands stubbornly in the way of the gender-neutral society") and see pp.&nbsp;43–49.</ref> it is unnatural,<ref>{{harvp|Mansfield|2006|pp=205–206}}</ref><ref>Schüssler Fiorenza, Elisabeth, ''The Praxis of Coequal Discipleship'', in Horsley, Richard A., ed., ''Paul and Empire: Religion and Power in Roman Imperial Society'' (Harrisburg, Pennsylvania: Trinity Press Intntl., 1997 ({{ISBN|1-56338-217-2}})), pp.&nbsp;238–239 (probably from Schüssler Fiorenza, Elisabeth, ''In Memory of Her'' (Crossroad Publishing, 1983) & edited), quoting Aristotle (''Politics'' I.1254b) ("the male is by nature superior and the female inferior, the male ruler and the female subject").</ref>{{efn|"Mrs. Woodhull offers herself in apparent good faith as a candidate, and perhaps she has a remote impression, or rather hope, that she may be elected, but it seems that she is rather in advance of her time. The public mind is not yet educated to the pitch of universal woman's rights" ... "At present man, in his affection for and kindness toward the weaker sex, is disposed to accord her any reasonable number of privileges. Beyond that stage he pauses, because there seems to him to be something which is unnatural in permitting her to share the turmoil, the excitement, the risks of competition for the glory of governing."}}<ref>{{harvp|Herzog|1998|p=440}}</ref> and, in the views of a playwright and a novelist, "women cannot govern on their own."<ref>{{harvp|Mansfield|2006|p=131}}, citing [[Oscar Wilde]] (playwright, per p.&nbsp;126), and [[Henry James]] (novelist, per p.&nbsp;127).</ref> On the other hand, another view is that "women have 'empire' over men"<ref name="Manliness-p195">{{harvp|Mansfield|2006|p=195}}, citing [[Jean-Jacques Rousseau]], per pp.&nbsp;194–195.</ref> because of nature and "men&nbsp;... are actually obeying" women.<ref name="Manliness-p195" />

Pursuing a future matriarchy would tend to risk sacrificing feminists' position in present social arrangements, and many feminists are not willing to take that chance, according to Eller.<ref name="RelativizingPatriarchy-p290" /> "Political feminists tend to regard discussions of what utopia would look like as a good way of setting themselves up for disappointment", according to Eller,<ref name="LivingLapGoddess-p207">{{harvp|Eller|1995|p=207}}</ref> and argue that immediate political issues must get the highest priority.<ref name="LivingLapGoddess-p207" />

"Matriarchists", as typified by male-conceived [[comic book]] character [[Wonder Woman]], were criticized by [[Kathie Sarachild]], [[Carol Hanisch]], and some others.<ref>Siegel, Deborah, ''Sisterhood, Interrupted: From Radical Women to Grrls Gone Wild'' (N.Y.: Palgrave Macmillan, 2007 ({{ISBN|978-1-4039-8204-9}})), p.&nbsp;65.</ref>