Matrilineal societies are more peaceful than patriarchal ones? Common sense says that's how it should be, and history suggests that it was. Only, as we know, traditional societies, of hunter-gatherers, they were very different from each other in terms of organization. Eibl-Eibesfeldt, in "Human Aggression" he says that all societies have known war, whatever that means (that is, not what we see now in Ukraine), but some are of a pacific ideal and others of a warlike ideal. The societies in which most of us now live are of the warrior ideal. And patriarchal. It could be that societies with a pacific ideal are often matrilineal? Probable, and. Although there are exceptions, such as cables, a matrilineal society, with wealth and rank transmitted through the female line, but warrior.
It's probably a connection between the lack of resources and the warrior ideal, suggested by many data. And the patriarchy (the transmission of rank and wealth through the male line), with male dominance over society, it is more effective in serving the warrior ideal. That would explain the immense spread of patriarchy around the globe, which could actually be the result of the spread of the warrior ideal, advantageous in crisis conditions, in the situation where culturally and linguistically different populations meet, who cannot negotiate in the classic way, as societies with a pacific ideal do. They dilute the chances of war through multiple negotiations and complicated rituals.
Among the societies with a pacific ideal described by Eibl-Eibesfeldt are the Eskimos (Inuit), but they also knew war. Matrilineal societies are described in these populations, present until recently, a few decades ago. A Scandinavian researcher studying the Spanish flu virus in the 1950s, negotiated with the matriarch of the Inuit group in northern North America for access to studies on members of the group who died of this disease in the early 20th century. A few decades later she talked to her granddaughter, reached this position.
The female presence in the decision-making structures of the community would greatly diminish the chances of war. However, in matrilineal societies, gender roles are separated, although different in various cultures, which shows what the genre is (culture around a biological reality, but culture is different in different places and times). And in matrilineal societies, war is mostly men's business. I mean they are all warriors.
We can imagine a modern matrilineal society? This society would transmit rank and wealth through the exclusively female line, but if it had evolved over time and developed, would have had other institutions, other relationships between the sexes and within the same sex. If he had known war? Probably yes, but the ideal would have been peaceful, and the destructive wars of modernity would have been difficult to conceive. It would have had fewer or no casualties, but they would have been more effective and specific. Dagger and poison have been female political weapons since ancient times. We could speculate further by recalling not only famous political assassinations committed by women, such as that of Marat, but also the commando created by Golda Meir to kill the heads of Palestinian terrorist movements. It would be interesting how many women now have fantasies about the assassination of a certain leader who initiated and continues the war in Ukraine. We could speculate, considering the behavior of other primates, but also of his own species, that in the case of women, war or political crime have purely utilitarian functions, it is not a show of force, as in the case of men. But sure, studies are needed.
