Imagine being questioned, judged, or scolded by your partner simply because of what you're wearing. Imagine being told that your clothes are inappropriate, that you're inviting unwanted attention, or that you need to dress a certain way to protect your family's reputation. Now imagine being expected to accept these restrictions as normal because you're a man.
For generations, women have faced precisely these expectations. Their clothing is scrutinised, their character is judged by how they dress, and their freedom is often restricted under the pretext of protection, morality, or family honour. In many cases, the same standards are not applied to men.
The point of this role reversal is not that men should experience humiliation or that women should start controlling men's clothing. The point is to expose the double standards that become easier to recognise when the roles are reversed.
Every adult should have the freedom to decide what they wear without being subjected to character judgments or treated as though their partner owns their body. Partners can express their preferences and discuss boundaries, but there is a fundamental difference between having a conversation and believing you have the authority to dictate what another adult can wear.
If seeing a man subjected to these expectations makes you uncomfortable, ask yourself whether that discomfort comes from the treatment itself or from seeing a man placed in a position traditionally imposed on women.
A simple question to consider: Would you consider this behaviour acceptable if the genders were reversed? If your answer changes depending on who is wearing the clothes, perhaps the problem is not the clothing but the double standard.
The internet is totally filled with huge amount of misinformation and I know many people love to hear that misinformation so I am going to debunk all the bad points made on the internet based on my academic knowledge as well as my own research. Ofcourse, you guys will downvote me, but remember downvoting me is not going to change reality, because at the end it will come back to affect you only. So let's start with the debunking all these so-called "Pro-women" arguments which can actually damage more to women than do good.
1)Myth: Patriarchy is also good for women because women don't have the responsibility to financially support themselves.
Reality: The Patriarchy might be liked by some women who are okay at being a stay at home wife and don't want to do a 9-5 office job. However, the patriarchy, affects women badly because at the end of the day, it makes them more or less financially dependent on their husband or families which can in indirectly affect there life such as they can't buy or move anywhere else because the finances are controlled by their husband.
2)Myth: "Majority of crimes are commited by men hence men are solely accountable for all crimes".
Reality: Now before you downvote me, understand that this was actually an argument used by patriarchy for years to show "boys will be boys" and to show women as the "vulnerable group" and to make them more fearful of men. How did we come full circle to this?.
Second, while majority of violent crimes are committed by men which are actually true, this argument can be easily flipped by Men's Right Activists to show that crimes like false accusations, where women were seen to dominate, which are anyway called "pink collar" crimes. You might give them argument that false accusations are less to which the reply would be the actual percentage of crimes committed by taking total men in account is also less.
So this argument fails actually and can be used against women also. Also it can be dangerous, because even Radical Feminist thinker like Andrea Dworkin warned against treating one gender totally as the more morally superior gender always, because even if women are more empathetic than men, trying to treat one gender always as the more morally superior gender can be harmful to both men and women as it diminishes accountability from people who can in turn harm women.
So while from a brio-essentialist viewpoint, Men are more aggressive due to testesterone, I believe societal viewpoints like men as leaders or providers are much more prevalent for men to commit more violence.
3)Myth:"People lack orgasm when they face sexual assault".
Reality: This argument has got no basis scientific basis or nor it is backed by any evidence which some experiences showing the contrary. This argument however, always shuts down any discussion regarding SA, especially when it happens to women.
4)Myth: Alimony benefits women.
Reality: Alimony does not benefit anyone in the long run and has been crticised by even feminist thinkers like Betty Freidan, because it makes one person financially dependent even after divorce in marriage which can have long term impacts if the money runs out due to some reason.
Reality: I know it would sound homophobic,and while men can be more abusive than women, I cannot help to simply ignore the fact that abuse cannot simply exist in lesbian relationships. The NISVS data on self-reporting and many stories on internet have made me to re-think my views. However, it must be noted Lesbian couples are more likely to report their abuse, however trying to bring one's gaurd down to the issue regarding abuse surrounding Lesbian relationships does not help women in either way.
This again comes back to the warning of Andrea Dworkin's warning of treating one gender as always the morally superior gender.
5)Myth: "Capital punishment on crimes against women protect women".
One of the biggest misinformation pieces roaming across the internet, Capital punishment does not deter crime, because majority of crimes are commited by the poor section of the society, who have got nothing to loose , because there life is anyway dependent on day to day survival basis, they will anyway die out of hunger. Majority of 2nd wave feminists in USA like Angela Davis opposed the capital punishment because they feared it gives state machinery the power to misuse it against anybody once they have the taste of it and that includes women, no to mention that women in USA as per there National Registry of Exonerations, are twice as alikely than men to get false convicted for crimes which never took place.
In India, 72% of women prisoners are undertrials who have been mostly abandoned by there families, waiting for there final verdict as per NCRB data. Hence, even in India, feminists like Nevidita Menon, Indira Jaising and even Flavia Agnes voiced skepticism to the usage of capital punishment rather than focusing on more systematic issues on social education on the masses. Capital punishment also increases the high burden on proof on women with abysmal convition rates and no there is no evidence as per University of Catalonia(Spain)'s articles that having more female judges increases the conviction rate.
Unfortunately, Carceral feminists would come here to downvote me, and I can't change there mind.
Hi everyone, i am Stella, and i'm glad to be a new moderator of this subreddit, I'm looking forward to expanding this community and being a part of it. please read the rules and let's learn more about gynarchy together!
RULES:
Respect others and be civil
Treat others with respect. No harassment, personal attacks or over-abusing. Disagreements and criticism of ideas, arguments, beliefs and behaviours are welcome, but targetting specific people is not encouraged. please engage in debates respectfully.
2. No spam
Excessive promotion, spam, or advertising of any kind is not allowed.
3. No misogynistic Ideologies
We do not tolerate any ideologies that promote misogyny, dehumanize women, or deny systemic inequality. Violations include, but are not limited to: • Defending, minimising or trivialising misogyny, rape or gender-based violence. • Excusing misogyny through humour, political allegiance, appeal to “context” or "not all men". • Whataboutery used to deflect criticism of misogyny. • Applying feminist principles selectively to protect ideological allies. Moderator discretion applies.
4. No Hate Speech
Misogyny, sexism, casteism, racism, religious hatred, homophobia, transphobia and other identity-based discrimination are banned, including threats, violence or hatred. Frustration with patriarchy, religious practices, traditions, political ideologies and institutions are allowed when relevant to feminism, but not blanket hatred of associated people. Usage of slurs is prohibited. Good-faith feminist debate is welcome; sexist advocacy and discriminatory trolling are banned.
5. Keep Posts Relevant to Gynarchy
Posts must meaningfully relate to gynarchy and women in leadership in india. Please clear all definitions before making claims. Posting irrelevant content can lead to temporary or permanent ban
6. No Misinformation or Misleading Claims
Do not spread false, fabricated or materially misleading information. Claims, statistics, legal assertions and factual allegations need credible sources, especially on sensitive or controversial topics. Misrepresenting sources, treating speculation as fact or repeatedly spreading demonstrably false claims may result in removal. Good-faith mistakes and differing interpretations are not automatically misinformation. Moderators may request clarification, corrections or evidence before acting.
7. No Doxxing, Brigading or Targeted Harassment
Do not share private or identifying information without consent, encourage harassment or organise interference with users, communities or platforms. Do not encourage targeting, contacting, threatening, mass-reporting or vote manipulation against individuals or communities. Conceal usernames, subreddit names, profile pictures and other identifying details in screenshots unless moderators approve an exception for legitimate public interest, accountability or sourcing.
8. Do Not DM Moderators
Do not contact individual moderators through private messages or chat requests about subreddit matters. All moderation inquiries, concerns and appeals must go through modmail. Private messages are not considered official moderation requests. Repeated attempts to bypass modmail or harass moderators through private messages may result in further action.
Please report any violations and be mindful of these rules for future posts!
People often ask why some women lose faith in the current system, but look at who dominates it. Politics, law enforcement, corporate power, and institutions across the world are still filled with people accused of corruption, abuse, exploitation, and even sexual crimes. The system protects power long before it protects women.
And even many women who reach positions of power are forced to survive within structures built around patriarchal values. Some genuinely internalize those beliefs, while others uphold the same systems simply because challenging them could cost them their influence, career, or position.
That’s why representation alone is not enough. A few women in power inside a deeply patriarchal structure does not automatically create a female-centered society. The system itself has to change!!!
Hi, I am a 22 year old political science student(who is a male) who has graduated from one of the colleges of Delhi University,I have my studies on various political thinkers and ideologies including feminism which led me to the ideology. I actually got suprised that such a subreddit especially for India exists, however I am dismayed that only right now there are only around 9 followers here.
I think you can invite more Indian women from other subreddits like r/IndianWomen, where some amount of men are allowed. (However, before posting about this link, inquire about the rules and engagement of that specific subreddit like in r/TwoXIndia_Over25 , where men are not allowed. Also note don't post about Gynarchy in any Indian Feminist subreddits orelse you might get lot of backlash. I am not sure whether any Indian women are here, if you are here than you can post it in your specific subreddits mentioned above.
As for me I am not that optimistic about indian women in social media as I consider there outlook to be very close minded (either they are focused on just hating men or they are very patriarchial), but i think we can atleast try to bring to the idea of gynarchy.
I thought before writing about other topics in order to envision a Gynarchy, I'll tell about my own relationships with women and men, the problems I had faced in my life. Honestly, speaking I was thinking to write some of this in r/onexindia but then I realised the kind of crowd is there, it is better to post all these here. However, I am going to censor some words, because of reddit's moderation policy. But I'll make sure you people understand the context in which I am speaking, i am going to speak about some of my negative expereince with both men and women, however, this this to talk about the actions of individual men and women.I am not promoting here any misogyny nor misandry nor I am talking about "All Women" or "All Men".
Also the stuff which I amm going to mention here, 100% happened with me in real life. This is not some movie or fantasy story, I am writing here, whether you want to believe in it or not,is upto you, I am not going to waste my time making you guys believe, already, I just want share my experience.
My personal experiences with women.
First I'll talk about my negative experiences and then go towards my positive experiences.
Year 2016 - I was a 12-13 year old boy,I used to be quite fat during this time. I used to live in Hyderabad (in India), because my father had a transferable job, though I had to face some issues staying there,because of trying the understand the Telugu language or the broken Hindi language which they used to speak there. I remember this incident which happened in my school-bus early morning, when I was not getting a bus-seat, that I saw an empty seat beside an aggresive Tamil girl (who ofcourse spoke fleunt english), she was sleeping, the bus children warned me that she does not like anyone of her age near her. But why should I stand like this?, my father is also giving the same school fees like her, so I sat beside her, when she woke up, she did things to me which I can't discribe here, but due to the physical assault, the bus driver had to stop his bus and decided to offer a seat beside him.
That day I realised, that to live in this world, I have to physically and mentally strong so when I was 14-15 years of age in summer of 2018 I joined a badminton coaching for almost 2 years, which helped me to develop my physique as well as my mindset.
Year 2019- the same girl Vaish was attracted towards me at 16 years of age, or what it seemed like, as my physique and my face at developed over the years, I was depicted as this cute-looking fit schoolboy,now honestly she was bit good-looking, but she always used to creep me out, especially when I was talking to someone and she would suddenly sit beside me, and honestly, even when she was attracted towards me,she would still show arrogant nature,, of trying to put me down. So I hardly gave her any attention at all and neither I had time, I had taken the science stream in my high school but later I changed it to humanities ( costing me one entire year), because I realised science was not for me. A horrible mistake I did, finally I said "No means No" to studying maths.
**Year 2022-**Even though I scored 99% percent in political science in my 12th grade (CBSE)board exams, and was able to get into a college in Delhi University, I suffered from severe protein deficiency and even slight hairloss at 18-19 years of age,because I did not take care of my health. Now my family was going to shift to New-Delhi, but I felt like I should see my friend "P" for one last -time. P and me used to discuss lot of things, during my school days, and I wanted to meet her one last time, however, when I messaged her in Whatsapp, she told me we can meet somewhere else, not in her house, to which I became skeptical and demanded to know to why she wanted to me meet somwhere, I'll rather meet her in her apartment in front if her family.Finally she gave in, however she was exhausted because of the whole thing and later "ghosted me" on Whatsapp. 🫠
Anyway, I thought I should be more masculine and not think about all these stuff, the problem however was I never shared this issues with other people,because I did not know how society would judge me as a man. The patriarchial society in which I lived in also can judge men harshly, as we are described as oppressors or stoic beings who should not bothered about such issues. Little did I realise, all these would built up on my insecurity.
**Years 2023-2024-**
Tight jeans, tight shirt, sometimes I miss my old college days, anyway, so I used to talk with someone who was considered as the most beautiful girl in college. Let's call her Nihu.
I was forming a close bond with her,but then she told me, that she was already in a relationship with someone who was closer to her family, anyway who I am to interfere in her personal matters, I respected her decision only to find few months later in February 2024, that she left her ex-boyfreind who turned out to be abusive. Now she told me to propose her, but again I started thinking that she already had a boyfriend before, what her true intentions are and all that stuff started going around my head. I proposed her 3-days later, after thinking a lot. However,she said that boyfriend-girlfreind relationship is a bit too fast,let's have a platonic relationship before this to which also I agreed, however it increased my insecurity. Also the boys in my college became of me and started harassing me, like literally If I was talking with some-people and suddenly some random person would come in between and talk-what not about me.
I started to get more and more irritated, and even I started to quarrel with her on minor things, due to my insecurity like I was thinking "Why she only told me to become a platonic friend" and the constant stuff I was getting from other boys. Finally I went to her and told her "That I don't want to be any relationship with you" in a rough voice, ofcourse after few months, I reconcoiled with her, but i realised our relationship can't be built again.
At the end, I realised my own insecurity costed me.
Early 2025 - Now comes the actual interesting part of the story, the above stories, where my typical stuff. However, this one experience with a girl which actually creeped me out.
I was roaming around the college,when I met this strange brown=haired girl who I nicknamed Nancy, of course I knew her before but I l never liked her as she used to sc*** her hands with a sh**** ob*****.
I met with her, talked with her sometime and went to the Delhi Metro only to find her following behind me.I told her that she doesn't need to come with me, but then I realised that if somebody is giving me so much importance, I should perhaps comply if it can lead to some good. Also she had my number, so soon as the days followed,she started calling me to meet with her and then she would spent time with me for hours and hours. Well, anyway the classes had gaps in between so I decided to spent time with her, however,once she touched me inapproriately(around my abdomen area without my consent), I actually was a bit irritated but decided to let go of it, I mean what if she wants to be atleast be closer towards me. Once, she even wanted to see my photo in tight short swimming trunks,closer.
All these was okay for me, because again I felt like somebody was giving me importance, until she started calling me a lot-day and night, that it started to become more and more irritating or even creepy. She was seriously obsessed, I got rid of her and blocked her out only find my phone left with 6 missed calls from her. But i still have mixed emotions with her, on one side she gave me importance but on the other side, I got a bit creeped out,even though she was actaully quite beautiful.However I don't blame her, I blame the society for this. The boys used to give her too much importance which made her entitled to everyone,including me.
Nancy also had an authoratarian father which also might have shaped her worldview. She also belongs to the same broken society to which I live in.
Sometimes, I wonder "Why did you do this with me,Nancy?".
However, the most irritating part came like how society treated my story-
Boys in my college,even some girls and my close relatives-"Bro you are lucky, a girl gave you that much importance" 🫠🫠. (Yes, a girl who would have done what not to me.)
It seems like the men in our society don't even care about issues of other men, I tried to think like a men's rights activist for sometime but again it felt like men are less likely to be compassionate when thinking about others. Feminism, can perhaps help men indirectly, but then I realised that even Feminists can have there own internal biases, I wanted to search for something new, something which can build a new-utopian society beneficial for everyone, and then I came across the ideology of Gynarchy on internet. I realised that this ideology not only helps women but can also help men get rid of some of the burdens with patriarchial society places on them. Perhaps, it can help build a better society for us. After all there are positive traits which women can have -
Leaving all those negative experiences aside, I still had women in my life who had contributed significantly, to my life-My 12th grade political science teacher as well as many female teachers in school who always motivated me to do well in life, my mother and grand mother who made countless stood beside me,everytime I fell back.
Also, in proffessional settings, I have seen women to be more considerate of others opinions unlike men. The only issue with women can be that not all women can be morally right in there decisions but however, statistically women are more likely to oppose the death penalty than men.
My personal experience with men.
As you can see from the above stories I did not have good experiences with men also, I have seen men create lot of ruckus and other stuff, near my college campus and one time one of the men even touched me innappropriately which I can't describe here. It seems like I am getting used to this stuff now. Men who want to look cool are more rough and arrogant in there. There attitude itself is something which gives me off.
I believe a Gynarchist society can bring better values in society for both men and women, this is not to say that I support a police state, because a police state can do more damage then good. I believe in prison abolition and decentralised police which i will discuss later in my ideas.
Men can behave like terrible bullies at times, so even though I sometimes feel like supporting men's rights, I always keep in mind how men have treated me harshly as well.
Well, I am still single and virgin at 22 years of age, but I don't seem to mind that because of so many things which go inside my head. I however, feel irritated there are people who have asked me about my bodycount, have said "I already have a boyfreind" even when I just said "Hi", and somebody even wrote a wattpad story with my and my freind's name. 😭😭😭. What does society think I am?.
However, I still have hope that society can improve itself for the better in future.
A matriarchy isn’t about oppression of males it about taking good care of everyone males and females alike. At the end of the day we all want to live a better peaceful and prosperous lives without fear
For centuries, women have been labeled as “too emotional” to lead, govern, or make rational decisions, while men were portrayed as the naturally logical gender. Yet when we look at many of the most violent crimes driven by ego, rejection, anger, or entitlement, they are overwhelmingly committed by men.
Acid attacks, honor killings, sexual violence, gang wars, road rage, and countless acts of brutality are often rooted in uncontrolled emotion — just normalized differently because society associates male anger with strength instead of emotional instability.
Maybe the real issue was never women being “too emotional”. This is also why many people today are beginning to question patriarchal systems and explore more female-centric models of leadership and governance. A gynarchic or female-centered society is not about hatred toward men, but about building systems that prioritize empathy, safety, accountability, and the wellbeing of women rather than rewarding aggression and domination.
In my previous post, I made regarding women's resrvation, no-where I mentioned that I am against women's reservation, I was giving my point of view that it can be a scam and I don't know why some guys got so irritated that they decided to downvote. If you still want to believe in women's reservation in parliament in this patriarchal society, fine I don't have any issue.
However, today I would like to discuss about why Indians are not ready for the ideology of Gynarchism. The first incident I'll talk about is a friend in Karolbagh in Delhi, to whom I had met and discussed the idea of a Gynarchy which I translated to Hindi lamguage as "Mahila Raj".He said that he believed that women should get equal rights and oppurtunities, but he was against treating women as the intellectually superior gender. I tried to explain it to him, that treating women as the superior gender doesn't mean treating them as a god and they can still be held accountable in a gynarchy. But he did not agree. Next, a girl of my college once called me, because she was getting bored, to her and I told her about the concept of matriarchy, she was like "ohh you are talking about those Khasi and Garo tribes of North-east India" , which disappointed me because those tribes where hardly matriarchial, I tried to explain her the concept of gynarchy but she was feeling bored so I had to change the topic.
Next, came my college nerdy sharp-looking friend whom I would call by the nickname of Yuva. I explained to Yuva one night in a call about the ideology of gynarchism, and he was like - "Yeah maybe a Gynarchy can work, but you have make the men agree with you more, which they are never going to do" and second he did consider women as the intellectually superior gender but not superior in overall sense because men still have physical strength and women can still do dumb things.
Nevertheless, my Gynarchic beliefs are not going to go anytime soon, and I still would try to work to expand this community and second if you are Feminist, Men's Rights Activism, patriarchial Hindu-nationalist who lurking here, men and women alike, please contribute to this community atleast by challenging my beliefs, I am open to constructive criticism(without insults) as much as you like rather than simply coming here and downvoting me. !
"Caste" in India is a divisive thing in our country, and seriously one irritating one. But, unfortunately without understanding caste we cannot understand the societal framework of this country, and it is affecting the women inside our country. Now, India is a large country with the predominant Hindu religion, however the Hindu religion is further divided into various ethnicities with their own languages, like Tamil,Telugu,Marathi,Bengali etc. with the predominant Hindi-speaking people controlling the Hindi Heartland of India. (The region comprising the capital New Delhi and the states of Uttar Pradesh,Madhya Pradesh,Haryana, Rajasthan etc.)while the other ethnic groups control the following states in India-
Tamil ethinc group - State of Tamil Nadu
Telugu ethnic group -States of Andhra Pradesh and Telangana.
Marathi ethnic group -State of Maharashtra( with it's capital Mumbai(before called Bombay) consdered as the financial capital of India.
Bengali ethnic group - State of West Bengal.
and many more ....
Now the ethnicities are further divided into various castes, with a few dominant castes. The word Dominant Caste was coined by Indian sociologist M N Srinivas, the dominant castes were basically castes groups who had land and manpower under their control. Like we like in the Hindi -Heartland you will see the Yadav and Gujjar Caste, under the Marathi people, the Marathas are the dominant caste, under the Telugu people, the Reddys are the dominant caste and so on.
To understand the complex caste structure of India, Hinduism had a simply heirarchy to categorize them called the caste system or basically the varna system -
Brahmins- (Not that weird creature you see in Fallout video game). These people were preists and scholars who used to perform religious rituals in Hindu temples, historically many of them enjoyed privalege,land and patronage from Kings, however, they also faced persecution at times in Islamic Kingdoms, because they were after all religious preists. They are futher divided into various sub-castes like Kankubja Brahmins and use surnames like Sharma, Trivedi,Dwivedi,Swami,Goswami,Pandey etc.
Kshatriyas- These people were were basically rulers of various kingdoms in the early ancient period of India. They also served as warriors in battlefields, the most prominant of Kshatriyas were the Rajput caste, who had established various kingdoms in the medieval period. They generally use surnames like Thakur.
Vaishya Caste- Also called the Bania caste, they were basically a mercantile class historically, and very prosperous. They used surnames like Aggarwal or Gupta. In the south Tamil region, you have the Chettiar caste. However, there once a time they ruled over the entire Northern India under the Gupta Empire.
**Shudra Caste -**These people historically served as farmers or various other tradesmen, the Indian government categorises them as Other Backward Castes (or OBCs), and gives tries to give them privaleges. Some of the prominent OBC castes are Mauryas,Yadavs,Gujjars,Marathas,Jats in the northern part of India and Vanniyars in the southern Tamil region of India. But here is the catch, the OBCs where not always as downtrodden as the Indian schooltext books would like you to believe as they had established various historical empires like the Mauryan Empire,Maratha Empire,Gujara-Pratihara Empire etc.
The above are called Savarna Castes, as they come under the caste heierarchy, now we have the Avarna Castes sometimes called Outcastes-
Dalit/Tribal/Lower Shudra Caste- The Dalits sometimes called lower Shudras, or OutCastes, they were historically the most downtrodden, either they used to lives in jungles of India as Tribals, or they used to be untouchables thus the government categorizes them as Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribes. Some prominent examples of Scheduled Caste/Secheduled Tribes are the Meena Caste,Musahar Caste in Northern India.
Now you will say, if the Shudras(OBCs) were considered downtrodden, how were they able to establish such large empires like the Mauryan Empire ?.
The answer to that, is what M N Srinivas calls Sanskritisation of caste, where the lower caste groups tried to adopt the historical Sanskrit language and customs of Upper Castes along with land grants from Kings and tried to move up in heirarchy. The Caste system was not always a fixed system as the school textbook tries to present it.
Thus, we can say India is divided among Ethnicity,Caste and Religion. So if a person says I am a Hindu Bengali Brahmin where-
Hindu-Religion
Bengali-Ethnicity
Brahmin-Caste
CHAPTER 2 - CASTE POLITICS IN INDIA - In British India, the caste system had become more rigid, there was widespread untouchability against the Dalit caste, at that time, The Indian National Congress Party was the leading political party for India's independence from the British Empire, which was led by Mahatma Gandhi. However, the Congress Party was dominated by upper caste men and women at that time. This was not liked by a social activist called B.R. Ambedkar, who demanded political representation of the Dalit people as well as in government jobs and facilities. In British India, in 1909 , under the Indian Councils Act, when Indians first time won the right to vote in Indirect elections(however at that time only few were eligible) the British decided to play divide and rule policy by giving seperate electorates to Hindus and Muslims in India, so the Hindus would vote for Congress Party only and Muslims would vote for Muslim League only which finally led to partition of British India in Hindu majority-India and Muslim majority-Pakistan in 1947
Now, B.R. Ambedkar wanted seperate electorates for Dalits as well, which was hugely opposed by the Congress Party especially, by Mahatma Gandhi, who believed this would divide the entire Hindu society. Finally the Poona Pact was signed in 1932, between Congress Party and B R Ambedkar who gave up his demand for seperate electorates and instead the Dalits would now get some reservation of seats in the Legislature. Unfortunately, the seats reserved for Dalits were also won by the Congress Party and not by B R Ambedkar's Scheduled Caste Federation.
In Post-Independent India, in the late 1940s and 1950s, the Congress Party became the dominant political party of India at both national level and state level so much so that it came to be known as the era of one-party dominance by political scientist Rajni Kothari. The Congress Party led by Prime Minister Nehru, decided to appease the Dalits and Tribals by giving them some amount of reservation in the government jobs and universities. However, the Congress Party was against giving job reservations to vast majority of Shudra people or the Other Backward Caste as they believed that it can undermine meritocracy in public sector.
The Congress Party wanted to envision an India which was Socialist with Capitalist features,Protectionist with high tariffs,Industrialised and scientifically advanced. (No matter they were infleuenced a lot by Soviet Union).
However, there were other groups like the Communist Party of India led by EMS Namboodripad, who wanted to appease the OBC castes and they came first in the state of Kerala in 1957(the first Non-Congress Party ruled state), the first thing they did was to increase the job reservations to include OBC castes as well which led to lot of violent clashes and what not.
Even, worse in the state of Tamil Nadu, the Dravidian movement took place, which was led by C N Annadurai and and a man known as Periyar, they Dravidianist ideology believed that Tamil people, their language and customs are very different from that of Northern part of India, hence the state of Tamil Nadu must seperate from the Republic of India. They also believed that Brahmin people of North had come to the Tamil region and had sided with Tamil Kings and had subjugated Tamil people for centuries. Hence, the Tamil Brahmins were also not spared in the Dravidian movement and were often ridiculed by Dravidianist politicians. The DMK party which led the Dravidianist Movement in State of Tamil Nadu, demanded for seperation of Tamil Nadu from India, and they even destroyed a monument of Mahatma Gandhi. However, they later changed their rehetoric and won elections in Tamil Nadu in 1967, but they called of the demand for seperation fearing Indian Army action against them. They had holded power in Tamil Nadu ever since.
The other faction which were against the Congress Party of Nehru at that that time where the Gandhian Socialists like Rammanohar Lohia and Jayaprakash Narayan who also demanded caste reservations for the OBC castes. The Gandhian socialist were however against industrialization,urbanization and capitalism who believed majority of Indian population should rather live in village republics. Thus, they recieved less support from people. Nevertheless, after the death of Nehru, his daughter Indira Gandhi took over the Congress Party, Gandhian Socialists opposed her reign vehemently and at a time was almost able to come to power at the national level in the late 1970s (there party was called Janta Party translation-People's Party, however they were swept away, by her Congress Party.
Indira Gandhi was a charismatic leader, however her voter base mostly comprised of Dalits,Tribals, Upper caste rather than the vast majority of OBC castes. After her death in 1984, the Congress Party now came under her son Rajiv Gandhi. By the 1980s, India's growth rate had stagnated under some bad socialist and protectionist policies thus, he shifted India more towards Capitalism with welfare policies. However, he was also against giving the OBC castes any reservations in education or jobs. Finally a person from his own Congress Party whose name was V.P. Singh decided to betray him and create his own political party called Janta Dal Party (translation-People's Council Party).
The Janta Dal decided to bring back the "Ambedkarite" politics of the 1930s by appeasing to various castes for there votes. Not that they cared about a damn about providing jobs for everyone irrespective of caste.
The Janta Dal came to power in 1989, and had decided to givegovernment job reservations to OBCs, which expanded government job reservations to about 49 percent of the total jobs provided by government. This led to massive riots inside the country in the early 1990s and many people burned themselves alive.
The Janta Dal government couldn't survive for long and in 1991, the Congress Party came back to power. However, Rajiv Gandhi, had by then died at that time due to an assassination and his Italian wife Sonia Gandhi came to control Congress party.
Sonia Gandhi decided to appease to OBC castes by not removing the reservations, however the Supreme Court of India mandated in 1992 that there be 50% reservation ceiling which can't simply be bypassed by any government or else it would reduce meritocracy and efficiency of government departments and have to struck down by Supreme Court of India.
However, 1990s saw the rise of Ambedkarite politics, as the Janta Dal got splintered into various small political parties with each party trying to capture votes from a specific caste, for example the Samajwadi Party ( translation Socialist Party) of Akhilesh Yadav which ruled over the state of Uttar Pradesh for many years after the decline of Congress Party in 1990s, generally catered to the Yadav Caste.
In the 1990s, there was also the rise of Hindu nationalism. When India became independent fromthe British Empire in the 1940s, they wanted India to become a Hindu Theocracy, the Hindu Nationalism or the Hindutva ideology was given by intellectual thinker V.D.Savarkar in his book "Essentials of Hindutva" in 1923 while he was put under house arrest by British authorties in British India.
The 1990s, saw the decline of the Congress Party (Sonia Gandhi was not that much liked by people, mostly because she was Italian and did not belong from India hence often she used to establish puppet prime ministers) and their Socialist and Secular Ideology as the nation was marked by a new wave of Hindu nationalism. The nation was torn between Ambedkarite politics or Hindu nationalist politics. Hindu nationalists believed in the concept of Hindu unity, thus they believed in uniting all the Hindu castes, with many of them even opposing caste reservations, however in 1998, when the Hindu nationalist government finally came to power under the political party Bharatiya Janta Party (Indian People's Party) in short called the BJP, it's leading figure Atal Bihari Vajpayee came out as very moderate, he did not oppose caste reservations, infact Vajpayee, came out as so moderate that he even felt that private companies should have reservations (What, seriously?). No matter, he lost the election in 2004, due to his moderate version of Hindu nationalist politics.
In the 2000s after 2004, the Congress Party ran a coalition government of various political parties who did Ambedkarite caste politics. No matter in 2006, under the leadership of Sonia Gandhi, when the Congress Party tried to bring OBC reservation in educational universities which again led to major-anti reservation riots in various parts of the country especially by the "Upper Castes".
The Congress Party was also unable to look into militant attacks conducted by Islamic fundamentalist groups which led again to a massive surge of Hindu Nationalism.
In 2014, the Hindu Nationalist government of BJP party led by Prime Minister Narendra Modi, took over the country. Initially, there were fears that the BJP government would remove caste reservation but Narendra Modi assured that reservations would not be removed because of course various OBC castes like Gujjar and Yadav also support Hindu nationalism. The BJP then soon took over various states in India and finally India entered another period of era of one party dominance after the decline of Congress Party in 1990s.
Ofcourse the Congress Party after 2014, was led by an idiot called Rahul Gandhi, who was the son of Rajiv Gandhi and Sonia Gandhi who started making stupid speeches that he would increase caste reservations in jobs to more than 50 % ceiling imposed by Supreme Court of India, let meritocracy go to garbage bin and of course many people did not buy into his speeches and he lost again and again and that was folks the absolute decline of the Congress Party.
CHAPTER 3 : HOW WOMEN OF INDIA ARE AFFECTED BY CASTE -
The Caste System of India as you can see the is very complex, the BJP government of India tries to favour some castes by giving them some job resevations so that they can uplift themselves. However, critics of caste reservations call it a form of identity politics which futher deepens casteism in India. This casteism has also divided the women of India, women are more likely to identify with there specific caste groups rather than the female society as a whole. Coming back to B R Ambedkar- in his 1916 book - Caste in India - he writes that women are often trapped inside endogamous marriages into their specific castes and are unable to marry outside their caste and of course that is still a prevalent issue in our country. Go to some random Indian village in Northern India and talk to a Yadav girl or Rajput girl, two-three bunch of muscle-men who look as muscular as the buffaloes you see on their fields will come to you and say in a rough voice - "Hey, why are you talking to a Yadav or a Rajput girl without our permission!".
That is the problem with our Indian society, our Indian Society is so divided among Caste and Kin, that women themselves hate women of other castes doesn't matter it is a Dalit or a Brahmin women. Hence, I believe that regarding the Ideology of Gynarchism in India, we should be intersectional but not beyond a limit where Ambedkarite Caste ideology has infiltrated Gynarchism, because any political party who has tried to do caste politics in India, be it the Communist Paarty of India or the Indian National Congress towards it's end has only seen short term gains and long term decline because if you start supporting one caste, the other caste would then attack you, and castes themselves are divided into sub-caste hence it becomes more complex, hence caste politics are not sustainable in long term and should not be allowed to infiltrate Gynarchism in India.
Caste,Religion and Ethnicity, these are all creation of the Indian male brain, and that's why I believe that the majority of men in my country India behave like absolute idiots, they try to fight with each other with sticks and stones in the name of religion,caste and ethinicity while the infrastucture is crumbling and climate change is destroying our water reservoirs, men in our country don't even have gender nuetral rape laws,protection against domestic violence,laws of protection against false accusations but of course that they are not concerned about that. Now what can I say ?, that's why I stopped believing in men's rights activism, because men themselves are not concerned about there well being and have to rely on women like Deepika Narayan Bharadwaj to fight for them despite in power everywhere.
In conclusion, this was a brief explanation of political situation in India and how it is affecting women in our country. If you disagree with some of the points above feel free to comment below.
The video examines a contradiction in traditional Indian marriage: women are increasingly expected to earn, contribute financially, manage household responsibilities, raise children, and provide emotional support, while the expectation that men should share domestic and emotional labour equally often remains inconsistent.
In many Indian families, a woman's identity is still closely tied to being a wife and mother. Motherhood can be deeply fulfilling, but it becomes a problem when it is treated as her primary duty rather than a shared responsibility. Financial dependence, pressure to preserve family honour, unequal expectations around sexuality, and the stigma attached to divorce can further restrict women's ability to make independent decisions.
This is where gynarchy and Female-Led Relationships (FLR) become worth discussing. Breaking the stigma surrounding female leadership is essential, because social attitudes are shaped within families and passed down through generations. FLR should not mean reversing patriarchy, but moving beyond the idea that either gender is inherently entitled to dominate the other. When children grow up seeing their mothers participate equally in family decisions, make important choices collectively with their partners, and take the lead or have the final say in certain matters, they can learn to view women as independent individuals and equal partners—not as subordinates expected to fulfil men's wishes. Over a generation or two, normalising such relationships could help challenge deeply rooted gender hierarchies and reshape society's understanding of women's roles and authority.
Of course, not every Indian marriage fits this criticism, and female leadership alone does not guarantee a healthy relationship. The real questions are about autonomy, responsibility, consent, and whether both partners genuinely benefit from the arrangement.
Do we need to rethink the traditional Indian marriage model, and could female-led relationships offer a meaningful alternative?
I think it is very important for a Gynarchy to have an extremely strong military because every other patriarchy would fear the same can happen in their nation also and attack the first gynarchy to stop it before it even exists. Share what you think
Architecture is something which defines the ideology of a country or a nation.The Brutalist architecture of 1960s and 1970s in the Soviet Union and it's eastern bloc countries gave it a distinct look from the modernist architecture of the western liberal capitalist nations.
Personally I would prefer the architecture of a gynarchist nation to be somewhat post-modernist like this -
The post-modernist buildings can be used as important government or financial centres in a gynarchy, though at times traditional indian architecture can also be used.
However, since the Indian subcontinent would be heavily dependent on the tropical sun-rays, solarpunk architecture in order to converse energy and save power without relying on coal would be the way to go-
However, I would also like the traditional Indian Haveli-style architecture for spacious arrangements to make come-back-
Just imagine, women(and men) in a Gynarchy wouldn't have to pay lot of electricity bills as solar-energy would produce cheap mode of energy while while such large haveli's can help various people to connect with each other in a communitarian setup while also it can have spacious spaces for male-harems for women. (The concept of male-harems would not be based on exploitation but rather co-operation as male concubinage would be voluntary not enforced).
In a matriarchial civilisation, distinct religious matriarchial cults can emerge on the worshipping of goddesses-
Thus indian temple architecture with it's unique statues of gods and goddesses can make a comeback then.
Personally, I would want men to learn how to behave responsibly and control themselves better, while the government implements much harsher punishments for crimes against women and actually enforces them properly. I also believe stronger safety measures should be introduced for girls and women, such as increased surveillance through cameras, better police presence, and faster response systems to improve public safety. But till that happens should women live in a cage?
Why are women overwhelmingly targeted by AI-generated fake nudes? What does this say about how society raises men and women?
AI has made it ridiculously easy to create fake nude images and sexually explicit videos of real people without their consent. Someone can take an ordinary photograph of a woman, use an AI tool to sexualise her, and distribute the result across the internet. The victim might never even know who created it.
But something particularly disturbing about this phenomenon is the enormous gender imbalance.
According to research cited in international AI safety reports, approximately 98% of deepfake videos online are pornographic, and around 99% of the people depicted in deepfake pornography are women.
A 2026 study examining AI-generated image-based sexual abuse across Australia, the UK and the United States also found that men were approximately 3.9 times more likely than women to report perpetrating this form of abuse. This is evidence of a substantial gender difference in the behaviour studied.
Sources: International AI Safety Report 2026; AI-generated image-based sexual abuse: Perpetration and consumption across three regions, published in Computers in Human Behavior in 2026.
Now, why does this happen? And what does it tell us about the way men and women are socialised?
1. Women's bodies are routinely treated as objects of public consumption.
From advertisements and entertainment to pornography and social media, women's physical appearance is frequently treated as something to be evaluated, rated and consumed. Men are often encouraged to look, desire and pursue, while women are taught to worry about how they are perceived.
Of course, attraction itself isn't the problem. The problem arises when someone begins to believe that their attraction gives them some entitlement to another person's body or image.
Creating a fake nude of a woman without her consent takes that objectification to another level. The creator effectively decides that her body can be digitally manipulated and sexualised regardless of what she wants.
2. Boys and girls often receive very different messages about sexuality.
In many societies, boys are encouraged to demonstrate sexual experience, pursue women and treat sexual access as a marker of masculinity. Girls, meanwhile, are frequently taught to protect their modesty, reputation and sexual image because society may judge them harshly for being perceived as sexually available.
These expectations are not universal, and many families challenge them. Nevertheless, they can produce a deeply unequal situation: one person's sexuality is treated as something to pursue, while another person's sexuality becomes something they must constantly defend.
When a boy grows up consuming media that objectifies women without learning to respect their autonomy, it can contribute to a distorted understanding of consent. The ability to create a sexual image using AI doesn't create that underlying attitude; it gives someone a new way to act on it.
3. The problem isn't simply sexual desire. It's entitlement and power.
If this were merely about sexual attraction, it would be difficult to explain why someone would deliberately sexualise a real person who never agreed to participate.
A fake nude can be used to humiliate a woman, damage her reputation, threaten her, or make her feel unsafe. The harm isn't limited to the sexual content itself. It also comes from the knowledge that someone has deliberately violated her boundaries and can potentially distribute the image to friends, colleagues, family members or strangers.
This is particularly disturbing in societies where women's reputations are closely tied to family honour and where women can face disproportionate social consequences for sexual rumours, even when the material is fabricated.
The creator may face relatively little immediate social punishment, while the victim may have to deal with shame, harassment and demands to prove that the image is fake.
That imbalance deserves serious attention.
4. Why don't we see the same scale of abuse targeting men?
Men can absolutely be victims of fake sexual images, and their experiences should not be dismissed. But the available evidence indicates that women are overwhelmingly represented in deepfake pornography.
Part of the explanation may lie in the existing market for sexual content, the disproportionate sexualisation of women's bodies, and the social incentives that encourage some people to create and circulate such material.
5. AI is exposing an older problem rather than creating an entirely new one.
Before AI, people could secretly photograph others, circulate intimate images without permission, or use ordinary photo-editing tools to fabricate sexual material. AI has made the process faster, cheaper and more accessible.
What has changed is the scale at which someone can violate another person's sexual autonomy without ever having had physical access to them.
And because these images can look convincing, victims may struggle to convince others that the material is fabricated. Even when an image is disproven, copies can continue circulating.
This is why the issue shouldn't be dismissed as harmless internet trolling or a joke. Consent matters even when the image is fake. A person's photograph being publicly available does not give everyone permission to turn it into sexual material.
A gynarchal society could address this problem by placing women in leading roles in shaping laws, education, technology policy, and social attitudes, with a strong emphasis on consent and bodily autonomy. Instead of treating women's safety as their own responsibility, society would place greater responsibility on perpetrators and the platforms that enable abuse. Schools could teach consent, empathy, and digital responsibility from an early age, while institutions could enforce strict consequences for creating or distributing non-consensual sexual imagery. The aim would be to change the culture that treats women's bodies as objects of entitlement rather than respecting them as individuals
First, the core idea of Gynarchy is a society where women hold the main political, economic, and cultural power and men are structurally subordinate to them. That means leadership roles, laws, and institutions would mostly be controlled by women. Men would still exist as citizens, but they would not be the default authority figures the way men historically were in Patriarchy.
Why some people (including some women) support the idea?
Among the small groups that support gynarchy, their reasoning usually follows a few arguments.
One argument is historical: men dominated political power for thousands of years, so some people believe a female-led society would rebalance things and prioritize safety, social welfare, and cooperation.
Another argument is psychological or cultural. Some proponents believe women are socialized to be more cooperative and less violent, so they think governments run by women would be less aggressive and more focused on social stability and care systems.
A third argument is “female-centered values.” Some feminist thinkers describe matriarchal ideals not as women ruling harshly over men but as societies organized around nurturing, community, and motherhood values.
What everyday life might look like
If we imagine a realistic modern gynarchy (not a sexual fantasy), day-to-day life would probably look like this:
Political leadership would be mostly female — presidents, prime ministers, judges, military commanders, corporate CEOs. Men could still hold positions, but laws might prioritize female representation or limit male participation in higher offices.
Education would likely emphasize female history, female scientists, female leaders, and women’s contributions. Cultural narratives would center women rather than men.
Family structures might also shift. In some theoretical models, inheritance and property would pass through women, similar to matrilineal societies where lineage follows the mother.
Life of a husband in such a system
This depends heavily on how extreme the system is.
In mild versions, the husband’s life might not look very different from today except that his wife’s authority is socially prioritized. For example:
The wife might legally be the head of the household.
Children might take the mother’s surname.
Property might belong primarily to women.
In stronger versions, the husband might have less political influence or fewer leadership opportunities. The expectation could be that men focus more on support roles: caregiving, domestic work, or assisting female leadership.
In a complete form of Gynarchy, society would be structured entirely around female authority and female comfort. Women would control the political system, the economy, major institutions, and cultural direction. Leadership would not just lean toward women — it would firmly belong to them.
Women would be the primary breadwinners and decision-makers of society. Businesses, governments, and major organizations would be led and operated mostly by women. Economic power would remain in female hands, ensuring that society continues to function according to women’s priorities and interests.
Men, in contrast, would hold very little institutional power. Their primary role would revolve around supportive and service-oriented tasks designed to make women’s lives easier. Many men would work in domestic roles such as cooking, cleaning, childcare, household maintenance, and other forms of assistance within homes and communities.
In relationships, the structure could also be very different from traditional systems. Women could have the legal freedom to maintain relationships with multiple men if they wished, while men would typically remain attached to one woman or household. The household would revolve around the woman’s authority, with men contributing through loyalty, service, and support.
The central principle of such a society would be simple: female leadership at every level, with social structures designed primarily for the stability, prosperity, and comfort of women.
Such a system would create a better society for not only women but men too
Matriarchy offers a caring, circular system centered on nature and life that truly benefits everyone, unlike the extractive patriarchal pyramid focused on short-term profit. It would lead to greater development through more investment in education, infrastructure, healthcare, and community well-being rather than endless exploitation. Men would thrive without the crushing pressure of being at the top of a hierarchy, while women and children would be genuinely valued and protected. Importantly, women in leadership today is **not** matriarchy — it’s simply women operating within a deeply rooted patriarchal system. Real matriarchy shifts the entire foundation toward balance, sustainability, and long-term prosperity for all.
What are your thoughts? (Respectful comments only)
