What would a true matriarchy look like?

Perhaps men would be the foot soldiers and women the generals?

Or, in a matriarchal society there would be no war, because women would be the political leaders and would ensure peaceful relations.
So there would be nothing to protect the matriarchal society from.

Er....yes? I didn't say we should strip men of testosterone did I? Maybe the negative effects of it just wouldnt be as reveered/respected/admired. (Which in itselft might reduce the bahaviour)

Perhaps It would be similar to the current cliche of the 'hormonal woman'. Testosterone is a hormone too. In a matriachcal society we might recognise how 'hormonal' these men are and the impact they have on society. Difficult to dismiss men as women currently are, as its harder to roll your eyes at violence, anger etc.

If you want children in this utopia men NEED testosterone to be fertile. They also need it for their health.

Yes absolutely. The main difference would be how we deal with testosterone. It would be less 'boys will be boys' and more how can we deal with this dangerous traits. Aggressive behaviour and sexual aggression is often seen as positive/expected in men, particularity in media currently and I think if media was more female led this would be less the case.

I suspect the incel movement would be much worse of course, I can't see the number of sexual crimes dropping much if men would have less control and less access to women. There would be a mens 'sexual revolution' pdq.

The thing is, even if women were in charge, it's not like the men would not have testosterone or would change their essential biological qualities. They would still be more prone to aggression and would be more sexually motivated than women.

I'm not sure why the OP things no one would care about who the father actual was, that doesn't seem to follow at all.

Perhaps patriarchy goes right back to our primate origins, and there never was a the mythical golden age of matriarchy in our pre-history.

Yes and yes. Although still patriarchal, before the Abrahamic religions combined with the Roman Empire, women in the ancient civilisations had more rights and were less unequal.

I'm not sure why you think matriarchy would be like opposites day. Women and men aren't opposites (well only in that they are opposite sex) they aren't opposite in behaviour, abilities or personality.

Gendered difference are limited (and likely caused by nurture as much as nature) so it's hard to say if a female led society would be more nurturing for example, if women were in power or came to power some decades ago.

The main difference I can see is testosterone. If the power wasn't held by hormonal men, would society be less aggressive and sexual (as we would see fewer examples in media, ) it wouldn't be held up as aspirational to be aggressive, angry or violent.

I suspect it would be more child focussed, CMS would be sorted pdq. Childcare would be government funded, absent father's would socially shunned/shamed and as a result there would be fewer of them. Possibly there would be more absent mothers as the stigma would be less.

Court may be biased in women's favour, child custody especially as men are more of a 'risk'. With their violent ways and big muscles....

I don't think it would be the same but with women on top. We are not driven by sex to the same extent. Power maybe, control? Possibly. But just that one thing could make a huge difference.

if we actually had a cms system that took into account all income and wealth and jailed and/or removed the drivers licence and passports of non payers.

Perhaps a matriarchal society would pay women for having children, without reference to who their fathers were.
Child maintenance would not be a thing paid by men.

if we actually had a cms system that took into account all income and wealth and jailed and/or removed the drivers licence and passports of non payers.

Perhaps a matriarchal society would pay women for having children, without reference to who their fathers were.
Child maintenance would not be a thing paid by men.

From the few examples of matrilocal and matriachal societies, what happens isn't dominance, but group rule. Instead of competition you get community property and clear roles for each member.

For example, there is a small matriachal tribe in China where marriage is not practised. (sorry: I can't remember the name right now) The home belongs to the mother, her sons stay with her and her daughters can stay or move out as they wish. Men flirt and make assignments with their lovers (and there are long term lovers), but the children belong to the women's family, which means he invests in his nieces and nephews. From what I have read, women are responsible 'for things of life' so they tend the fields and home. Men are responsible for 'things of death' so they look after cattle, slaughter chickens etc. Everyone has a role. Expensive equipment (e.g tractors or vans) are shared. Community bonding takes place through parties and dancing.

It sounds a lot better and calmer than the patriarchal societies we have now. I've thought for a long time that men are more content when they have a clearly defined role and a place of value, whilst women get honoured for the way they network and organise.

Equally a dystopia is impossibly unrealistic. Humans would never let it happen.
(Atrocities do of course happen, but a whole dystopian society? No)

Still, intriguing to imagine how a matriarchy could actually exist in today's world.

Some people seem to be misunderstanding this thread.
I am not advocating for matriarchy.
It is a useful mental exercise to imagine dystopias as well as utopias.

Perhaps in a matriarchal society men would have been socialised to be less violent and sexual.

Most could live active physical lives doing the work that requires their strength.
In their free time they would be exercised a lot in organised sports to blow off steam.

Afterwards they would go to their campus bath house and be looked after to prevent injuries, like prize race horses.

They could be housed in catered dormitories, no worries about food or bills and the like, football or cycling everyday if they wanted.
A lot of men would love this!

Others with talent for hosting, the arts or sciences could be siphoned off for training to join the society of women.

I don’t see a true matriarchy fundamentally as a project of replacing the patriarchy
I am not sure what you mean. Matriarchy is the exact opposite of patriarchy, so by definition a true matriarchy would replace patriarchy.

Of course the third option is to have neither.

if we actually had a cms system that took into account all income and wealth and jailed and/or removed the drivers licence and passports of non payers.

Perhaps a matriarchal society would pay women for having children, without reference to who their fathers were.
Child maintenance would not be a thing paid by men.

That would be great, but it would not be matriarchy.