There is a fairly popular perception that feminism or Female Supremacy is all about "male bashing", and it has to be admitted that in many feminist books this comes across very strongly, which leads people to think that the women's movement is a male v female argument. The problem with this concept is that some of the most strident critics of feminism are other women. While there are many men who are quietly supporting the women's movement, the role of men in the women's movement is mostly unseen and forgotten. In much the same way as in a Patriarchal society, where the women's role in unseen and not appreciated.

At the beginnings of the women's movement during the 19th century and early 20th century, their is much written about women demonstrating on the streets to have the vote. Or women courageously taking on careers that used to be exclusively for men. What is forgotten is that it was men in completely male dominated legislative, who were willing to vote for women having the vote, and later on anti-sexist legislation. Likewise when women tried have careers in male dominated professions, much is made of the fact that many men opposed this, but for these women to be successful in their quest, means that there had to be a large number of other men who quietly supported these women.

In recent years the women's movement is changing from wanting only equality to some women demanding domination over men and society. In this new phase of the women's movement not only have men played a role in this but have led the way.

The concept of women ruling society comes from men. About the same time the women's movement was starting at the turn of the 20th century, scholars like Johann Bachofen, Robert Briffault and Edward Hartland, claimed that in pre-historic times Matriarchy existed in many societies and backed up these assertions with a great deal of evidence. They also claimed that these societies were a more "primitive" form of society and the later Patriarchal societies were more developed. Probably they said this to make the idea of Matriarchy acceptable to their colleagues. But despite this these claims were attacked by other scholars and even today are not accepted by the academic establishment. The important point is that it brought to people's notice the idea of women ruling and dominating society in much the same way as men had in historic times.

So in spite of academic disapproval the concept has refused to go away, and later on Robert Graves wrote about it in his now famous but confusing book "The White Goddess". This book make similar claims as other Matriarchal scholars but he also goes so far as to claim that people were far better off under the ancient Matriarchal rule. Graves spent his whole life campaigning for Matriarchy, but it was only towards the end of his life that women authors and scholars began to support his beliefs.

In the 1970s two books by women authors made much the same claims. The first one was called "The First Sex" by Elizabeth Gould Davis which was a more easy-to-read "popular" book, and the second and more scholarly book was called "When God was a Women" by Merlin Stone. After this other women began to write similar books and it is now becoming an acceptable part of feminism, though some feminist authors like to insist that in these ancient Matriarchal societies men and women lived in equality. Even though what little evidence we have of these very ancient societies point to the fact that women dominated men in those times. So even today in academic circles there is still the attitude that it is all right for men to have ruled and dominate society but the idea that women might of done the same is still unacceptable.

Another new concept in the matriarchal movement has been Goddess worship, which again was advocated by Robert Graves. But it was another man who put it forward in a practical form.

In 1954 the British Parliament in an effort to get rid of old out-dated laws repealed the Witchcraft Act, because as far as they were concerned there were no Witches left and they had doubts if they ever did exist. Then a man called Gerald Gardner claimed that there were still witches living in Britain and he should know because he was one. He said he had been initiated into a coven that dated back to the middle-ages and that he broke their code of silence to bring witchcraft to all who were interested in it. He started what was called Gardnerian Witchcraft and this form of witchcraft was quite sensational in nineteen fifties Britain. They worshipped in the nude, (which proved a bit impracticable in a cold climate like Britain). They scourged the new initiates, (though most covens were only willing to do this ritually and not for real). They practised the Great rite which was when the High Priestess and High Priest had ritualised sex together. (Again most covens were not willing to go all the way and only simulated the sex-act). And they also worshipped both a God and Goddess.

Today even among modern witches there is a lot of doubt if Gardner ever was initiated into a genuine witch's coven and what he claimed to be witchcraft was probably his own invention. Though people who have investigated his life, have claimed that they have discovered that the person who he claimed initiated him into witchcraft was a real person. So perhaps he might have been telling the truth after all. Or he might have found the remains of a genuine Witch-cult and then "modernised" it for people of the nineteen fifties. Whatever is the correct explanation, he started the modern pagan movement which then spread to the USA and Europe.

He created one problem with his form of witchcraft in that he made the High Priestess, the most important figure in the coven. Unfortunately very few women in nineteen fifties and sixties Britain were authoritative enough to take on this role. So either the High Priest had to take over as leader, or he had to look for and train a High Priestess to act authoritatively. The real achievement of Gardner is that he brought back Goddesses and Priestesses into modern western life as well as showing that sex could be a sacred act.

The only area in our modern society where Matriarchy has gone "all the way" is in the modern S/M Dominatrix scene. Even hundreds of years ago in the rigid Patriarchal society, some men have paid prostitutes to dominate them and to allow themselves to be worshipped by their clients. The word masochism come from a man called Von Sacher-Masoch who wrote books in the 19th century like the famous "Venus In Furs" about men being dominated and humiliated by women.

In recent years the S/M Dominatrix scene has been growing in leaps and bounds. In the nineteen fifties many prostitutes were surprised to find clients who were not demanding sex at all and were willing to pay for the privilege of doing their housework for them. Then other clients were asking to be whipped by prostitutes and to be allowed to worship them. At the same time many were encouraged to dress up in macho black leather, rubber and P.V.C and so the modern Dominatrix came into being. The interesting point about this is that it is men who demanded and paid for women to behave like this.

At first Dominatrices were only contented to simply fulfil the client's sexual fantasies but even this is changing. Many Dominatrices are finding they are enjoying dominating their clients and when the clients come to them it is they who set the agenda and not the client. So it is coming to a situation where the client is paying for the privilege of serving and giving the Dominatrix a good time. Some of these women do not like to be called Dominatrices and they point out that many Dominatrices only fulfil the client's sexual fantasies. So they like to call themselves Dominas or other names to show that they are the ones in charge and not the client. Other women are going further than this and call themselves lifestyle Dominatrices or Dominas. That is to say they have permanent male slave(s) who live with them to do their bidding.

In our present society a women can only dominate a man with the man's consent. Because a man is mostly bigger and stronger than a woman, this is also true in cases where a women uses physical violence on a man. Even if the women is into Body-building or karate, a man is still free to walk out of the relationship. So again it is men who are helping and encouraging women to dominate them. If a man refuses to hit back against a violent woman or stays in a violent relationship, he is in effect communicating to the woman he still loves her in spite of how she is treating him. Which is a great boost to the woman's ego and encourages her to continue to abuse him.

In pornography a sex-education film that only shows men and women having normal sex becomes quickly very boring. To make pornography interesting it requires either the man to dominate or degrade the women or the women to dominate or degrade the man. This is probably a clue why men find the feminist ideal of equality between the sexes boring and uninteresting, to the degree that many men treat feminists with contempt, probably because they fall between two stools. They are not passive enough for Patriarchal men to dominate them and so are not interested in them and are not assertive enough to dominate men and so fail to excite Matriarchal men.

There has never been a point in history where men and women have been equal. In recorded history men have dominated women and today where we are supposed to have equality, there seems to be a sex-war, with over half of all marriages now breaking down and the need to have marriage councillors to settle disputes in marriage. Many reasons are suggested for this breakdown in traditional marriage, but the main one given is that today women are demanding more from men. This has resulted in turning marriage into a battle ground where both partners are striving to gain power over the other.

In the past marriage was easy because society dictated that it was the man who wore the trousers and was the boss. Now it is politically correct that marriage should be equal, but somehow this is unacceptable to both men and women. The relationship between men and women will once again become harmonious when it becomes acceptable that women should be the boss in any relationship between men and women.

In the future if women are to take control of society they cannot do this without the active support of men. This is because men for thousands of years have been learning to love themselves which means they have larger egos than women. This makes men more confident, arrogant and assertive than women. Because women have far smaller egos than men, it becomes difficult for women to be assured and conceited enough to say that they should rule society. Men have far less problems with this and are more able to criticise the Patriarchal society and praise the behaviour of women.