enchanted

@Lila9where does the idea come from that a long time ago humans were matriarchical? Is there any evidence for this?

I see, thanks for clarifying and eloquently stating your case. I have no real disagreements with your ideas, I think they would work. One points of contention is that the labels are problematic. If you call it patriarchy the women get upset and if you call it matriarchy the men won't like it. It's probably the reason the idea of "matriarchy" will never take off. Basically what you are saying is we need a more equitable and just society no matter what you call it. Addressing the declining birthrate would force us to value motherhood more and see women differently and is probably the reason nobody wants to talk about it. Also there is a fear on both sides to suggest women should be at home reproducing more. You are right, if we want more kids in society to replace the old people we need to support the endeavor somehow.

This is awesome

We do care, and we are especially concerned about the Jewish space lasers

So patriarchy is cause both high and low birth rates?

Kenl Lacort analyzes furries in his unique way.

You make interesting points and much of what you say is largely true in that we could create a better world if we incorporated more perspectives including an especially the female perspective. This idea of everything would be perfect if there was a matriarchy could be just wishful thinking. Especially since you say it's never been tested on the large scale. Blaming all society's problems on a particular group is not a responsible or a conscious leadership trait. Under a matriarchy what is to stop the more greedy, aggressive, and corrupt women from running amok? What metrics would you use that would indicate that we are now living in a "matriarchy" and everything is finally ok? You could argue that the current system has become less greedy over time and more equitable and therefore it could be hypothesized that a better society can be run with a more conscious form of patriarchy too.

Yes you probably don't fall into this dilemma because you are probably more conscious than 99% of women (and men) but I think a lot of women do, just like many minorities do. I assume those women who bring up "the patriarchy" in every sentence do. And many women I know do that.

It's not a black and white issue but a million shades of grey. While the US isn't perfect its arguably the "cleanest dirty shirt in the laundry hamper". The fact remains that in Iran you get arrested and maybe killed if you speak out against the regime on TV yet in the US you can still do that (for now lol). This is what they talk about in the interview and it's fascinating to see both sides of the debate play out.

Hey thanks for checking it out. Yes it was incredible to watch Piers bringing this up and his guest had no reply except anger. I wonder if Piers went to Iran would he be kidnapped and killed, yet his guest insists he does that.

Destiny goes meta and makes a video with an integralist. Destiny debates himself in a video title "what if both sides are right?"

Piers Morgan is a UK based journalist. I think all perspectives are worth listen to if you want to learn how the world works. Perhaps you would agree with the Iranian professor and thus you might enjoy the interview after all.

Good points

The patriarchy might be one reason but then how does it explain Africa and the middle East where there is more patriarchy and very high birth rates? And Iceland, a country with the most gender equality, still have low birth rates below replacement?

In the end of the video Piers Morgan interviews an Iranian university professor. It is an incredible debate and a perfect example between a typical western and Iranian perspective and why it's so hard for people and countries to agree on simple "facts". Both people bring up good points but I think Piers wins it. What do you think? I bet you know a lot of conversations that go on a similar way.