Steve.

Totalitarian can only come about through force, by forcibly restricting other people’s power. In a true democratic system no matter what type of government you have, they can always be voted out if they do a bad job. So if a matriarchal political party gets into power they will be voted out of office if they do not satisfy the voters. So women can only rule through the will of the people.

It is not women’s nature to take over by force. This is even true in the Femdom scene; men serve and worship women because they want to do this. Although it seems to be all about leather and whips, in reality, if a submissive man wants to defy a dominant woman there is nothing she can do about it. Unless a woman becomes at bodybuilder or karate expert there is no-way she can force a man to do anything.

It is only men who can use force and violence to restrict other people’s power, this is why they make such a bad job in ruling our world.

William Bond

Totalitarian can only come about through force, by forcibly restricting other people’s power. In a true democratic system no matter what type of government you have, they can always be voted out if they do a bad job. So if a matriarchal political party gets into power they will be voted out of office if they do not satisfy the voters. So women can only rule through the will of the people.

It is not women’s nature to take over by force. This is even true in the Femdom scene; men serve and worship women because they want to do this. Although it seems to be all about leather and whips, in reality, if a submissive man wants to defy a dominant woman there is nothing she can do about it. Unless a woman becomes at bodybuilder or karate expert there is no-way she can force a man to do anything.

It is only men who can use force and violence to restrict other people’s power, like the way they have suppressed women for thousands of years.

William Bond

Well, a lot of my post was actually not addressed to you. I’m guessing you are used to being argued with, and tend to think it’s all about you. But the quote I labelled totalitarian was not actually by you.

However, seeing as you are determined to argue, I can tell you why I think some aspects of what you are saying is totalitarian:

I see no reason why a patriarchal system, which sets men up as superior leaders and thereby fails miserably, is any justification for the creation of a matriarchal political meme, which, if ever put into practice, would fail miserably for exactly the same reasons.

Given that you are such a staunch advocate of democracy, you cannot advocate a clear path away from patriarchy by female force or domination, so instead you insist that people should naturally wish to elect women as leaders on the basis that they would be superior to men in that regard.

By doing so, you wish to create and foster the idea of matriarchy in exactly the same way that patriarchy has commonly been fostered in democracies - as an idea within society, rather than as totalitarian male-led regime using force.

Let’s distinguish between a totalitarian government and a totalitarian idea. Any notion that suggests that people of one race, class, gender or sexual orientation are better suited to rule and lead than others is heading towards being a totalitarian idea.

The link is that, as you yourself have basically pointed out, ideas support governments. So if you want a totalitarian government, a widespread totalitarian idea is a good place to start…

So, these people you are so perplexed by, who automatically equate matriarchy with totalitarianism, probably equate patriarchy with it, too. (I doubt it’s matriarchy in particular they have it in for. Far more words have been spent fighting racism than matriarchy, but the principles of the argument are similar…)

These people that argue with you, they are the people who turn up on voting day hoping for a sensible balance of male and female views, strong leadership from both sexes, and the slow demise of patriarchy and racism into political and economic equality.

All of which is not a cause that’s going to be helped by some facile attempt to replicate male patterns of social domination for women, expecting a different outcome from the same thing.

If the same type of social control norms are used to establish the idea (i.e., the positioning of one sex as ‘better’ due to their perceived inherent moral qualities, sexual objectification of one gender, perception of one sex as better suited to service, etc), then why would you expect the resulting political outcome to be any different?

Besides which, having now read a little bit of your writing, I am inclined to agree with the first post on this thread. There are essentially two William Bonds. One is the guy who has a fairly ordinary femdom / male slave fetish. The other is the guy who tries to dress it up as rational political thinking, and, I’m guessing, ends up selling short what really turns you on.

But why? Why confuse a kink with a social imperative?

I don’t go around proclaiming women as better fit to rule just because I submit to my wife. That would be like the husband of a submissive wife thinking that his domestic and sexual power over her would somehow translate well into political power. Has that sort of thinking had a good outcome?

Finally, you can ‘assume’ I have been influenced by “extreme freedom fantasies” all you like, provided you tell me what one is. In the meantime, I’ll go get my wife’s lunch ready.

S

Well i did say that matriarchy can only come about through democratic means, which rules out dictatorship and totalitarianism.

If you assume that matriarchy government must be a totalitarian then i assume you must be strongly influenced by extreme freedom fantasies. Can i point out to you that ALL totalitarian governments in history were all patriarchal governments.

In a democratic system, individual people do have the freedom to have whatever private life they like. Even in our present patriarchal society it is possible for submissive men to live with dominant women. Likewise in a matriarchal democratic society it still will be possible for dominant men to live with submissive women.

In none of my writing i have never said that ALL men have to be submissive and All women have to be dominant. I don’t know where you got an idea like that from.

William Bond

Well i did point out that women can only get into power through democratic means. So this rules out dictatorship and a totalitarian government.

Even in patriarchal countries it is still possible to have submissive men live with dominant women. So in a democratic matriarchal government, likewise, it will be possible for dominant men to live with submissive women.

I really don’t understand why people associate matriarchy with totalitarianism. I can only assume that people who do are influenced by extreme freedom fantasies.

William Bond

I didn’t say I thought matriarchy was about women in leather suits, or anything about women being violent, or a great Amazon army, or any of that. I think you are arguing with someone else, and confusing them with me.

Most of my statements were actually addressed to ‘femsup’ and doris, but you can take them on board if like, provided that you actually answer them…

Basically, I just don’t see how any blueprint regarding the behavior of all men and all women towards one another can possibly satisfy everyone, or even every woman. And that is exactly what’s being talked about in some of the posts here:

I suspect that there really are few women who truly do believe in their superiority. This is a shame because every woman could so easily control almost every man.

THAT’S TOTALITARIAN. TOTALITARIAN = BAD. READ SOME HISTORY!!!!

And, I ask again, what about women who like being submissive to men? Does your scheme serve their interests? I’ve met quite a few since I started blogging and they are genuine, intelligent, good-natured individual people.

Honestly, I’d much rather read their ideas about providing love through service to their partners, than the ideas of someone, male or female, who keeps trying to proscribe what “the woman” or worse, “the female” will do, and what women will be like generally, in some kind of facile, depersonalized system where roles are allocated solely on the basis of gender.

(Got a feeling I’m wasting my breath here. This has all been done before, right.)