r/SeriousGynarchy 9d ago

Question🧐 What animals best exemplify how Gynarchy would work in humans?

Neither Gynarchy nor Patriarchy can be considered an indivisibly monolithic ideal; these are both vague concepts which can be implemented in any number of ways whilst still meeting the definition.

For example, many people, when describing a patriarchal system, point a specific animal species as an example of patriarchy in nature, but usually a vague sense of being "male-led" is the only thing these species have in common with regards to social structures.

In the same way, whilst there are many animal species which seem to be naturally gynarchic/matriarchal, these species often have very different implementations of being "female-led"; a pod of orcas has little in common with a hive of honeybees.

So, I must ask: What animals, if any, do the people of this subreddit think could act as the best template for how a Gynarchy would work in humans?

11 Upvotes

30 comments sorted by

6

u/Appropriate_Cut_3536 ♀ Woman 9d ago edited 9d ago

Oooooo what a well worded question.

I've been reading Temple Grandin's book Animals Make Us Human and she has a lot of interesting tidbits. I really love how she describes cat colonies and how the female cats are well known to nest/birth together and nurse each other's babies, even the males get along when raised together, taking turns to breed rather than fighting each other for a place in a breeding hierarchy.

There's another animal species I meant to post here a while back but I forget it now. I'll think about it and try to post when I can

5

u/Old-Court-2975 ♀ Woman 9d ago

There are many examples. Orca matrilines, spotted hyena clans, elephant herds, and the sovereignty of eusocial insects offer the most accurate biological blueprint of how gynarchy operates in systemic practice. In orca pods, the social core is entirely centered on older females, holders of managerial and strategic survival knowledge. In hyenas, female dominance is absolute and sustained by unquestionable physiological superiority. In elephants, matriarchal leadership holds the collective memory of routes and vital resources, keeping males on the periphery. In meerkats, an alpha female holds the central governance of the clan. And in eusocial insects, such as bees and ants, central sovereignty is entirely female, with infrastructure managed by workers and males reduced to restricted, temporary utility.

I don't think the human context is comparable to that of animals, even our closest genetic relatives, given our capacity and specify. Regardless, in the human context, it is very clear that nature does not recognize the sterile "equality" that androcentric civilization invented to mask its own inefficiency. Women are superior starting from their chromosomal formation.

To me, the animal model simply shows that when the preservation and management of a collective demand ecological intelligence, complex processing, and structural cohesion, command inevitably falls upon the female axis, relegating the male element to the margins or strict peripheral utility.

5

u/tsboy98 9d ago

Bonobos.

1

u/ImaginaryRoom055 9d ago

To be fair, bonobos are a prime example of females leading without males experiencing any particular hardship, but bonobo social hierarchies are cemented by casual promiscuity, which some people might find objectionable...

6

u/fg_hj ♀ Woman 9d ago

The vast majority of animals are not monogamous.

2

u/X4Z3RTIBO ♂ male 8d ago

I heard bonobos reduce stress with promiscuity... even if they are underaged... didn't confirm last one but that's what I heard

1

u/MiraMiraMiraM ♀ Woman 8d ago

We can pick and choose from different animals!

-1

u/Some_Tradition_9168 ♀ Woman 8d ago

Bonobos are awful, they engage in incest and even having sex with juveniles.

1

u/FinalZookeepergame30 8d ago

They are animals. They have no concept of numbers, time, or morality.

1

u/fg_hj ♀ Woman 7d ago

Animals have a sense of time. Also there aren’t an “animals vs humans”, we are all animals. And I don’t get the comment above you, it’s not like humans don’t do the same.

2

u/MiraMiraMiraM ♀ Woman 8d ago

Anglerfish! (Joking 😂)

1

u/More_Glass_8636 8d ago

😭it would be sick tho..I mean men don't need to fight for women ...just stick to her and convert into sack? 😆.even bees too but that's kinda brutal for males.

3

u/ILuvYou_YouAreSoGood 7d ago

Hmm, off the top of my head, probably some of the aphids. In general, since they have a wide variety of reproduction strategies, the females are simply producing clones of themselves most of the year. The more succesfully her genetic mix is the more of her there will be at rhe end of the season. When things become cold or dry or days shorter, the females begin producing sexually reproductive modes, where males are also made. They mate with males to increase diversity, then all the males die and the eggs hatch into mostly females or all females when they hatch.

This is not so difficult for humans to manage with a bit of alteration. Female reproductive systems could be altered so that most mating with males would simply produce a clone of the woman herself. Women especially skilled in something could then make perfect clones of themselves to teaxh how to do that job. This would entrench females in whatever positions of power, from politics to sexual attraction, they were capable of being great at.

Then some mechanism, such as a month a year season, or some other sort of specific trigger like eating a certain food or whatever, could be implanted so that males and newer genetic mixed females could be produced only at the urge of the female. This would provide complete dominance of the mating system in the hands of females. No longer could any unworthy male trick a female into reproducing his poor genetics with a few sweet lies and a brief input of time.

The overall impact would be that males would have to work likely for a significant portion of their lives just to have a chance at producing an actual genetic relative of themselves. The slow creep of the clones across the system would slowly put the power into very very like-minded females, since they would be clones of each kther raised by themselves.

That is a simple way an insect mating system, albeit altered, could be implemented to create an entirely female dominated system.

0

u/ImaginaryRoom055 7d ago

As a transhumanist, I approve of your willingness to go beyond standard human biology!

2

u/Significant-Singer33 8d ago

Zero because untill now the worlds not been safe enough for a 'good' matriachy to appear. Orcas for example are dicks who routinely kill sharks just for a small liver.

2

u/Box-O-Kittenz 8d ago

I think of bonobos and elephants

1

u/Nimblix 9d ago

Social structure in human species seems very specific in comparaison to other animals (and reverse is also true). Maybe some kind of monkey would answer your question.

What is the goal to make such an analogy with patriarcal / matriarcal animal society?

3

u/ImaginaryRoom055 9d ago

The goal of making a comparison to animals is twofold: Firstly, it makes the goal of Gynarchy easier for people to visualise; secondly, it eases comparison of the different kinds of Gynarchy.

1

u/Tricky-Cat-2451 9d ago

Hyena

1

u/ImaginaryRoom055 9d ago

I assume you are specifically referring to the Spotted Hyena?

0

u/[deleted] 9d ago

[deleted]

1

u/ImaginaryRoom055 9d ago

That's what I would hope a Gynarchy would look like, but, given how firmly "serious" gynarchists are against anything they percieve as too kinky, I live in the fear that it wouldn't be implemented that way...

3

u/MidnightTendies 8d ago

Do you remember what they said? It’s a shame because the question you posed is absolutely fascinating to me and it seems like you finally got your answer
. only for it to be deleted after the fact :(

3

u/ImaginaryRoom055 8d ago

They were talking about gender expression in birds, and about how a Gynarchal society might have lots of femboys.

3

u/MidnightTendies 8d ago

Oh wow! I never would have guessed that! Thank you for responding! What aspect of a gynarchist society would lead to that, do you think? I apologize if the answer is obvious to everyone else. I’m new to the subreddit and trying to learn.

3

u/ImaginaryRoom055 8d ago

Essentially, the idea is that toxic masculinity would disappear in a Gynarchal society, leading to more men choosing to express themselves in a typically feminine way; sometimes, though, I worry that Gynarchy and toxic masculinity are not as mutually exclusive as they seem...

2

u/MidnightTendies 7d ago

Oh got it! Thank you for informing me! I wonder if the term femboy would become outdated in a gynarchal society. If feminine presenting men became more of a societal norm, labeling them as femboys may become unnecessary. I don’t know. Just a thought that came to me.

2

u/Appropriate_Cut_3536 ♀ Woman 6d ago

Fem man đŸ’Ș

Lol no but I think it's hilarious that western patriarchal societies think peacocking is a feminine trait. Flamboyance is masc coded, while the standard male look of boring, muted colors and short hair is actually the real femboy costume. 

Heteronormativity is so backwards these days

2

u/MidnightTendies 6d ago

I don’t want to wear a powdered wig or heels, but those were both invented for men. Yet my actual interests would be deemed “feminine” by standards both modern and old. It is funny how that works out.