Archaeologica.org

It always goes back to might makes right. The first matriarchies in this series evolved in Anatolia, and we can see the revolution from patriarchy to matriarchy in the arts at Chatal Hoyuk. Hodder does not really understand it, but he sees the dramatic shift 9000 years ago from frescos of men out hunting and even taunting or torturing wild animals. Artwork that had been painted over with new such images for centuries.

They didnt have chimneys, and interior walls got smoky and needed to be brightened up with new white plaster. But then, all that stops, and pottery came in, the craftsmanship is now spent on much more utilitarian items, we see some weaving, and we see the carefully modeled goddesses.

But concurrently, the military situation changed dramatically. In an era when the world was full of nomads and hunter tribes of 75-150, now all of a sudden there are these communities, a lot like Hopi Pueblos, with *thousands* of people living in them.

Warriors were useless. The new stock breeding and grain growing resulted in 500 times as much food from the same territory. Hodder shows us the dating chart- 12 cities in the 7th millennium, which left us no sign of warfare among them at all.

We all know what it is like after a successful seige. Rape, Pillage, Burn. In that order. There are shards of broken arrow points when they hit a wall. The bodies are left where they lay and the fires collapse the roofs to bury them, with a general layer of burnt rubble from one end of town to the other. There is not any of that in these Anatolian cities.

Chatal Hoyuk was occupied for 1500 years, with no sign of general violence during that whole span of time. Steven Pinker, "The Blank Slate" and LeBlanc "Constant Battles" both report that the graveyards of the primitive hunters show 20 times the rate of violent assault on the bones as seen in the graves of the yeoman farmers. And that farming tradition begins here, in Anatolia.

Hodder found 91 bodies, all ritually buried in Chatal Hoyuk. He mentions *one* dude with a broken arm that had healed. But he wasnt a warrior. It had been broken a couple years before his death in the 60's. Prolly a fall from the steep stairways that were all over town. Look at the warrior graveyards and you see the front teeth routinely bashed in, and where jaws had been fractured from a hard right.

Agreed that the Amazon evidence relies on just a few graves. But who else was there? Nobody. And we see the graves of the Tocharians, by their hundreds, with the same language, technology, and even DNA. Only now, we have the documents of a literate culture.

They did not need warriors either. The road to Kucha was famously, and clearly, marked with the skeletons of the dead going across the desert. The name, "Taklamakhan" meant in Chinese "go in, do not come back out." The desert protected the cities from armies. the few small wells along the route simply didnt have enuf water for an army, and were easy to poison with e coli. Just shit in the water.

But the oasis towns didnt have enuf water to support large populations either. Kucha was only 30,000 max. It was women in control of their own birth rate that made the system work. There was only so much land they could irrigate, and they knew how much food they could grow to feed how many children.

Eventually, there was a series of wet years, the rivers thru the desert were high with flash floods, and the Mongol hordes came in, then after crossing the desert, crossed the rest of Asia.

But more to the point. We are again at where women can use modern weapons as well, if not better than, male warriors. All the debate about whether the ancient matriarchies may take up space here, but it wont make any diff to the bitches who are taking over. They will look at the ancient record and make up their own minds. Argue with them. Its not like I am promoting matriarchy. What I think dont matter. I'm looking at what was to see what is coming, whether we like it or not.

I'm not trying to argue with you or women, D/B. I'm trying to understand if there is validity to your extrapolations as you obviously have thought deeply about these subjects. Perhaps my world-view is more niaive but I don't believe the growing empowerment of women today is leading to the mind-set required to sustain a matriarchal hegemony and there is no way that today's intelligent and capable females can impose rule by force of arms. In general, the systems of the present world order are designed to enforce the present patriarchal domination. An armed revolution would be met with the same resistance as any dictatorial power shift is today. Basically its impact on the present world order would be weighed and appropriate reprisals put into place to protect the status quo.

If anything, there is a tendancy in the western-world to relenquish patriarchal dominance in favor of a non-hierarchal structure but even this is somewhat in the juvenile growth stage. Case in point: the present presidential campaign. The mere fact that many men would never consider the possibility of a female president, testifies to the prevailing mind-set. And be sure those more liberal, open-minded members of our male dominated society who see no problem with it, are content as long as equality between the sexes is the common objective. Most males in the west, will never accept a fully matriarchal power structure. Even in Europe where there is less of a religous bias toward male dominance, the cultural bias prevails. In many modern european countries women are relegated to simple service jobs. Few are given the opportunity to rise through the corporate ranks on the basis of their strength and merits.

It seems the only way such change in thinking and ingrained cultural bias can be overcome is through isolation and separation of young boys who may then be indoctrinated by the females. But this is unlikely to occur on a scale large enough to threaten the present order. It would just be like any other freaky anomolous culture which can then dance for tourist dollars.

The cost of labor is now trivial. Transnationals and investors are starting to pay attention to the cost of managment. women provide cheaper management. After all, while power may still be an aphrodisiac, they dont need to use it to support both a trophy wife at home and a mistress downtown. They dont need expensive status symbols to get laid.

So- they accept lower management salaries. Simple capitalism. The more women move into the boardrooms, the more they will extend benefits from healthcare to childcare, and then fertility clinic services. Unlike male bosses, they wont be using stupid bitches to bear the next generation of management, but instead will select from among thousands of the most gifted lines of the Y chromosome.

Armed with modern DNA data, each generation of management will become more competent, more innovative, and more competitive in the global market. But the transnationals they run will still have lobbyists and their media will still be selecting the political leadership.

DB did you ever here of the term "boy toy" ?
I saw it on the tags of a BMW convertible that was pulling into a fancy restraunt the other day. He was toothy and tanned, she was older but still fine looking.
I don't know who thought the other was a trophy, but I don't think he picked out the tag.
Women can have just as big an ego as a man.

Oh yes; some of my friends are boy toys. One of them has a problem now with a fag hag. Its an ancient institution. We all know what a buddha looks like; the little pot bellied bald headed fellow. But look at http://www.dc-pc.org/artifax/artifax.html ; give it a minute, there's lotsa jpgs. But just above the last, the rotund merchants, we see an example of a Kuchan Bodhisattvah.

Long black curly hair. thin waist with thunder thighs and bronze buns. broad shoulders, whispy whiskers, and those prehensile fingers fondling his pearls. This is but one of scores of such boy toys in the frescos of the Buddhist temples at Sibushi, 12 miles north of Kucha.

Kucha was run by women. Closer to the top of the link is a Minoan fresco at Thera, depicting the city of At Lunus. Here we see the penthouse balconies all have women, and if any men are present, they are behind. Down at the dock, there's a line of 19 barebreasted girls in miniskirts to welcome the sailors.

Which is why the boys are rowing so hard. Were men in charge, the king with his goon squad would be on the dock. Women can have big egos, but lacking testosterone, not quite as big. After all, they like boy toys, but they dont try to fill a while palace with them. One at a time will do.

We all know that China got rich selling silk to the rest of the world. But the Silk Road ends at the "Jade Gate" because Jade is what China bought with the money. And where did the jade come from? Kucha. If you imagine how rich China got off silk, now imagine how much richer Kucha got off Jade.

But go there. Were the place run by a king, we'd find a palace to rival that of any other city, for in its time, it was the richest. No palace. What Kucha had, with Gautamid Queens running the place, was the richest *middle class* the world had ever seen. No slums either.

Same deal with the Minoans, who were also ruled by women. Knossus was not actually a palace, but an administrative center with many apartments. And no slums in the area until the Mycenaean warriors took over. Likewise, at Thera, all the houses excavated so far are comfortable, well made, with nice artwork. Again, no slums yet found.

3630 years ago, in the time of the 12th Egyptian dynasty, the middle class houses on Thera had hot & cold running water with flush toilets. While the pharoah himself hadda shit in a pot. This too was the richest middle class the world had ever seen. Also run by women.