When Most People Mature: An Intellectual Blueprint for a Post-Patriarchal Civilization - Part II

Culture and Values: Healing, Creativity, and Inclusion

Finally, the broader culture – media, arts, religion/spirituality, and community life – would mirror the psychological maturity of its members. Several shifts can be anticipated:

• Narratives and Media: Storytelling in a mature society would gravitate away from glorifying violence, domination, and hyper-competitiveness (which have been staples of patriarchal entertainment) and move toward themes of cooperation, personal growth, and reconciliation. This doesn’t mean all stories become saccharine or without conflict; rather, conflicts are depicted with psychological depth and resolutions that highlight understanding or transformation. One could compare, for instance, a traditional action movie where a macho hero simply vanquishes an enemy, to a nuanced drama where adversaries come to understand each other or a systemic problem is solved collectively – the latter would likely be more common and celebrated. Importantly, representation in media would be diverse and egalitarian: gender, racial, and other stereotypes would fade because mature audiences demand more authentic and complex characters. The male gaze and objectification of women (a product of immature sexuality in patriarchy) would diminish, replaced by portrayals of mutual respect and genuine intimacy. We see glimmers of this already in some contemporary media that challenge toxic masculinity and highlight emotional vulnerability as heroic (for example, children’s programming like Steven Universe or Encanto, which emphasize empathy and healing). A fully mature society would amplify these trends mainstream.

• Art and Creativity: Freed from the constraints of rigid gender norms and fear-driven censorship, creative expression could flourish in new ways. Art might play a conscious role in collective healing – for instance, community theater or art therapy sessions that allow people to process trauma together. The concept of “trauma as cultural capital” (Cvetkovich, 2003) suggests that when trauma narratives are openly shared, they can actually forge solidarity and understanding. In a post-patriarchal culture, rather than hiding historical traumas (such as the traumas of war, colonization, oppression), society might ritually acknowledge and work through them via commemorative art, truth and reconciliation processes, and intergenerational dialogues. The arts could help people imagine alternatives to patriarchal patterns by presenting compelling visions of partnership, peace, and integration with nature. Furthermore, participation in the arts – singing, dancing, crafting, storytelling – would be encouraged for all as part of a fulfilling life, not relegated to a professional elite. This democratization of creativity aligns with a mature ethos: valuing intrinsic joy and communal connection over external status.

• Religion and Spirituality: While patriarchal forms of religion have often reinforced hierarchy (e.g. male gods, male clergy, doctrines of female subservience), a mature civilization would likely reshape spiritual life around principles of equality and personal growth. We might see greater prominence of nurturing, feminine imagery of the divine, or simply a shift to spirituality that emphasizes inner development (meditation, self-realization) and ethical action in the world over dogmatic authority. Notably, many mystical traditions within major religions (Sufism in Islam, Vedanta in Hinduism, Quakerism or certain contemplative Christian paths, etc.) already focus on love, unity, and compassion – those could come to the fore. Additionally, interfaith dialogue and secular-humanist perspectives would flourish in a climate of tolerance; people would be less threatened by differing beliefs because they possess an identity not dependent on us being totally right and them wrong. Some theorists like Ken Wilber have suggested that at higher stages of consciousness, individuals see the common truths in different religions and move beyond fundamentalism. So a mature society might have a spiritual culture that is pluralistic and growth-oriented – for example, community rituals might celebrate life transitions or gratitude in ways accessible to all, not causing sectarian splits.

• Community and Social Connection: A hallmark of an emotionally mature society would be strong, inclusive communities. The epidemic of loneliness and social isolation identified in many current countries (often attributed to hyper-individualism and fraying social bonds) would be addressed by deliberate community-building. Urban design might include more communal spaces, co-housing arrangements, parks, and community centers to facilitate people coming together. Initiatives like community dialogues, volunteer projects, and neighborhood councils would empower locals and create a sense of belonging. Because people have well-developed empathy, one would expect higher rates of volunteering and civic engagement – taking care of neighbors, mentoring youth, and so forth. In essence, social capital would be abundant. Sociologist Robert Putnam warned of “Bowling Alone” – a decline in community engagement – but in a society that values maturity, the trend could reverse, as people find meaning in connection. One concrete example is how elders are treated: in a patriarchal, youth-obsessed culture, the elderly may be marginalized; in a mature culture, elders could be integrated as respected mentors (drawing perhaps on models from indigenous communities where elders hold honored roles). This provides purpose for older adults and wisdom for younger ones, a symbiosis that benefits all and heals the generational divides.

To sum up, the cultural ethos of a mature post-patriarchal civilization would be one of inclusion, reflection, and growth. Instead of perpetuating trauma through cultural expressions (think of how misogyny and violence in media can retraumatize or normalize harm), culture would aim to heal trauma and inspire developmental progress. It would normalize kindness and cooperation the way patriarchal culture normalized toughness and competition. The net effect would be a society more at peace with itself, less in need of enemies or scapegoats, and more capable of collective creativity to face challenges (like climate change or technological disruption) with unity and ingenuity.

Obstacles and Critiques

The vision outlined above is undoubtedly ambitious, and it invites numerous questions and critiques. Is it realistic to expect the majority of adults to achieve psychological maturity, given our ingrained habits and the scale of global problems? What about recent authoritarian resurgences worldwide – do they indicate that people are actually regressing, not progressing, in maturity? How to handle global fragmentation, where different cultures may not share the same values or developmental pace? And importantly, will people even want to do the hard work of emotional growth, or is there a resistance to emotional work built into society (especially among those who benefit from the status quo)? In this section, we engage with these and other critiques, offering responses that acknowledge the challenges but also point to pathways forward.

“Utopian and Unfeasible” – Human Nature and History

One immediate critique is that this blueprint is utopian, underestimating human nature. From a pessimistic view, hierarchies and dominance behaviors are deeply rooted in our biology (as seen in many animal social structures), and every society in history has had some form of patriarchy or inequality. Some evolutionary psychologists and social conservatives argue that male dominance and aggression have evolutionary advantages and thus will always reassert themselves. The notion that we could largely eliminate patriarchy through psychological maturation might be seen as naive idealism.

It is true that humans have evolutionary tendencies toward both competition and cooperation. However, human nature is not a fixed constant; it expresses differently depending on environmental and cultural context. Anthropological evidence reveals an enormous variety of social arrangements throughout history and across cultures. While patriarchal structures have been widespread in the last few millennia (especially under agricultural and industrial civilizations), there are documented examples of societies that were far more egalitarian or matriarchal. For instance, archaeologist Marija Gimbutas and historian Riane Eisler argued that prehistoric Old European cultures (Neolithic era) were gylanic (partnership-oriented) rather than patriarchal, emphasizing cooperation and goddess-centered spirituality (Eisler, 1987). Although Gimbutas’s specific claims are debated, more recent work by anthropologists like Douglas Fry (2019) on nomadic forager societies shows that many of them operate with fierce egalitarianism. In such societies, strong norms prevent anyone from dominating – leaders are temporary and decisions often by consensus. Fry documents that nomadic foragers, who live more like our ancestral environment, tend to have low rates of violence and relatively equal gender relations, which suggests that strict hierarchy is not inevitable but context-dependent.

Moreover, even within the mainstream of recorded history, we have instances of societies reducing their patriarchal character. Consider the dramatic changes in the last 150 years: campaigns for women’s rights around the world have led to women gaining legal equality in many countries and entering formerly male-dominated spheres. While we have not reached full parity, the direction has been toward less patriarchy. Similarly, child-rearing practices have shifted – the prevalence of physical punishment has declined in many countries, and children’s rights are better recognized now than a century ago. These shifts show that cultural evolution is possible and can outpace genetic evolution. Human nature includes the capacity for learning and adaptation; we are arguably wired for culture, meaning we can internalize new norms and behaviors within one or two generations if motivated and if structures support it. For example, the widespread decline in violence over centuries, documented by Steven Pinker (2011), is often attributed to stronger states, rule of law, and changing norms that elevated self-control and empathy (through novels, universal education, etc.). Pinker’s thesis, while not uncontested, illustrates how what is considered “normal” human behavior (like public torture or constant feuding) changed markedly as societies developed new institutions and expectations. By analogy, fostering psychological maturity in the majority might seem radical today, but if we set the conditions right (through the educational and social policies discussed), what we define as “normal” adult behavior could shift toward greater emotional regulation and empathy.

Finally, labeling something utopian should not dismiss it outright; rather, it sets a high bar to strive for. We can acknowledge that complete eradication of dominance behaviors is unlikely – humans will always have conflicts and flaws – but significant reduction in patriarchal dynamics is plausible. It’s helpful to recall other once-“utopian” ideas that partially came true: ending absolute monarchies, abolishing slavery, ensuring mass literacy. All were thought unrealistic until they happened through human effort and moral vision. The post-patriarchal ideal may guide gradual progress even if the endpoint remains a horizon. As one critic of our hypothesis might say “you can’t change human nature,” our rebuttal is: we can change the conditions and contexts that human nature operates in. By doing so, we effectively change the predominant expression of that nature.

Authoritarian Resurgence and Global Backsliding

A more concrete contemporary obstacle is the apparent democratic recession and authoritarian resurgence in many parts of the world. In the 2010s and 2020s, numerous countries have seen the rise of strongman leaders, nationalist movements, and erosions of liberal democratic norms. Examples include the consolidation of power by autocrats in Russia, China, Turkey, and the Philippines; democratic backsliding in Hungary, Poland, India, Brazil; and even threats in established democracies like the United States. This trend, documented by organizations like Freedom House, shows 19 consecutive years of declining global freedom as of 2024, with 60 countries deteriorating in political rights and liberties just in the past year. One analysis noted that only 6.6% of the world’s population now lives in a “full democracy,” down from 12.5% a decade ago, while authoritarianism has re-emerged even in regions considered democratic strongholds (Emole, 2025). How can we square this reality with the notion of society moving toward greater maturity and empathy? Doesn’t this trend suggest people are choosing regression – preferring the simplicity of authoritarian solutions and tribal loyalties over the “mature” path of pluralism and emotional growth?

The resurgence of authoritarian tendencies can indeed be seen as a reaction to certain stresses and anxieties – in a sense, it is a symptom of insufficient maturity in the face of rapid change, rather than evidence against the possibility of maturity. Erich Fromm’s insight is salient: when societies undergo crisis (economic dislocation, cultural upheaval), many individuals experience what he called “fear of freedom,” leading them to seek refuge in authoritarian movements. This is exactly what we have witnessed: economic globalization, rising inequality, cultural shifts, and fast technological change created a sense of insecurity for many, which demagogic leaders exploited by offering scapegoats and the promise of a return to “greatness” (often a patriarchal golden past). In psychological terms, this is a regression under stress – akin to an overwhelmed adult temporarily reverting to childish coping mechanisms.

Recognizing this dynamic actually reinforces our hypothesis: it highlights the need for building psychological resilience and maturity at scale to resist such regressive pulls. Some political scientists argue that liberal democracy’s survival now depends not just on institutions but on the psychological qualities of citizens – tolerance for complexity, empathy for different groups, and resistance to authoritarian messaging (Levitsky & Ziblatt, 2018). These are precisely the qualities of mature individuals. So rather than invalidating the project, the current backsliding is a wake-up call about what happens if we ignore psychological development. It’s notable that even during this period of backsliding, there are counter-movements and signs of hope: for instance, in 2020–2021 we saw unprecedented global protests for racial justice and women’s rights (e.g., the #MeToo and Black Lives Matter movements), suggesting many people are actively pushing for more empathetic, equal societies despite authoritarian headwinds. Freedom House’s 2025 report, while sober, also noted “bright spots” where democratic breakthroughs occurred and long-standing dictators fell, as well as the importance of “democratic solidarity” to push back against repression. If anything, these struggles underscore that the maturation of civilization is not linear or inevitable; it requires conscious effort, coalition-building, and perhaps new strategies.

One promising strategy, drawn from Adorno et al.’s work, is preventing fascist (authoritarian) tendencies at the root by reforming childrearing and social norms. After studying the authoritarian personality, Adorno and colleagues suggested that society promote “more open, anti-authoritarian parenting, develop psychoanalysis (introspective self-knowledge) for mass use, and create a less repressive social order” to immunize people against fascist appeals. These align precisely with our blueprint: nurture children with empathy and autonomy, encourage widespread self-reflection (e.g. normalizing therapy or mindfulness), and reduce everyday oppression. While implementing this is challenging, there are contemporary efforts along these lines – from the spread of positive parenting programs worldwide to the increasing acceptance of therapy and mental health days.

It’s also essential to address the material conditions that fuel authoritarianism. Economic despair and stark inequality make people more prone to extreme politics. A mature society blueprint must include reducing inequality and ensuring basic security (through social safety nets, access to healthcare, etc.), as those reduce the fear and humiliation that authoritarian demagogues prey upon. Thus, moving toward post-patriarchy isn’t just inner work; it has structural components like fair economic arrangements. Some critics might say our essay underemphasizes the political-economic structures while focusing on psychology. We would answer that both are intertwined: a more egalitarian economy supports psychological health, and psychologically mature citizens are more likely to demand and design egalitarian economies. The Nordic countries, often cited for their strong social welfare and relatively high gender equality, also consistently rank high on measures of trust and subjective well-being – suggesting a virtuous cycle can be created.

Global Fragmentation and Cultural Differences

Another critique is the global fragmentation of values and the difficulty of achieving a mature civilization on a global scale. The world contains diverse cultures, some of which are deeply patriarchal, and they might not embrace the changes described here. While one part of the world moves toward gender equality and emotional openness, another might double down on patriarchal tradition or religious fundamentalism. We see a kind of cultural polarizing in some areas: for example, LGBTQ+ rights are celebrated in some countries while others concurrently intensify anti-LGBTQ laws. Can a post-patriarchal civilization truly be global, or would it remain an island of “maturity” surrounded by resistant societies? And if the latter, how would that play out in terms of conflict or cooperation?

It is unlikely that all cultures will evolve in lockstep. However, globalization means no culture is completely isolated; the flows of information, people, and ideas make it hard for any society to ignore changes elsewhere. Over time, successful models tend to attract emulation. If a group of societies demonstrably achieves better quality of life by adopting mature, post-patriarchal practices, others will take notice. For instance, the empirical link between women’s empowerment and national prosperity/health is now well-documented. The Economist and United Nations data have shown that societies that educate girls and give women equal opportunities see higher economic growth and better outcomes for families. Even if some leaders resist these truths for ideological reasons, reality creates pressure – countries that marginalize half their talent pool (women) or brutalize their populace eventually face stagnation or instability. We might predict that in the long run, patriarchal societies will struggle to compete with or even pose a threat to more mature societies, somewhat how closed authoritarian states struggled economically against open democratic ones in the 20th century (with some exceptions).

That said, the transition period could be tense. Mature societies would need to uphold their values without imposing them by force (which would be an immature act). Soft power and cultural exchange are key. The global women’s rights movement, for example, has made inroads even in conservative regions by leveraging local voices and framing equality in locally resonant terms (e.g., highlighting positive roles for women in religious history to argue for modern rights). Similarly, the language of trauma and healing might enter global discourse in various forms – note that even in conflict-ridden areas, there are efforts at trauma-informed peacebuilding and reconciliation.

An often overlooked factor is the youth. Worldwide, younger generations tend on average to be more open on issues like gender equality and mental health, partly due to internet connectivity and exposure to global media. This gives hope that a cohort effect may advance maturity as today’s young become tomorrow’s leaders. Of course, there are also young people attracted to extremist ideologies, but they often come from contexts of unemployment or propaganda; improving conditions and education tilts the balance.

Global fragmentation is real (we see blocs forming, like liberal democracies vs. rising autocracies), but it’s not static. Remember the Cold War division – it eventually ended not through a direct clash but through internal evolution in the Eastern bloc (e.g., the cultural and economic unsustainability of Soviet authoritarianism). A parallel might be drawn: If we cultivate flourishing post-patriarchal societies that are economically and culturally vibrant, patriarchal societies may face internal pressures to change. Already we see global movements for women’s rights, democracy, and mental health (for instance, awareness of depression and trauma is increasing even in places traditionally reticent to discuss it). International organizations and agreements (like United Nations initiatives on gender equality or children’s rights) provide platforms to encourage change without imposing it by arms.

In practical terms, mature societies would likely use their foreign policy and international aid to support development along these lines: funding girls’ education, supporting grassroots psychological health programs, facilitating cross-cultural dialogues (such as international student exchanges focusing on peace and empathy). They would also need to defend against regressive forces (e.g., transnational extremist networks) through intelligent policing that includes prevention (countering hate online, etc.) rather than purely military means.

In essence, achieving a post-patriarchal civilization is a globally uneven process, but one that can have a ripple effect. It’s analogous to how some countries abolished slavery earlier and others later, but eventually the norm shifted and even holdouts had to follow. The moral arc can bend in the right direction, but it requires demonstration, persuasion, and patience. Part of maturity is patience, a virtue needed at the civilizational level too.

Resistance to Emotional Work and the Comfort of the Status Quo

A more psychological critique addresses whether people will willingly undertake the kind of emotional work and introspection this vision requires. Becoming “mature” in the sense used here often means confronting one’s traumas, admitting one’s biases and privileges, learning new ways of relating – essentially, change and effort. Many may simply not want to do this. There is a status quo bias: people prefer the devil they know, and doing deep emotional work can be uncomfortable or even frightening. This is compounded by stigma – in many cultures, seeking therapy or talking openly about feelings (especially for men) is seen as weakness. For example, surveys show large percentages of employees still fear disclosing mental health struggles to employers due to stigma. How, then, do we motivate a critical mass of people to invest in psychological growth? Could efforts to push this be met with backlash (as we sometimes see with terms like “toxic masculinity” – some men react defensively to being told to change)?

These are valid concerns. Change often begins with a minority of pioneers and then spreads when the benefits become apparent or when not changing becomes more painful than changing. Right now, we can observe a growing movement normalizing mental health care and emotional learning, albeit unevenly. Celebrities and public figures speaking about their therapy or vulnerabilities (from athletes like Simone Biles discussing mental health to men like actor Dwayne Johnson talking about depression) help chip away at stigma. When 58% of U.S. employees say they feel comfortable talking about mental health at work, that’s far from perfect but is higher than it would have been a generation ago. Each younger generation seems more open to these discussions, suggesting a cultural shift is underway.

To reduce resistance, it’s important to frame emotional work not as a personal failing (“you are immature and need fixing”) but as a positive growth opportunity and even an adventure. The self-help and personal development industry, for all its flaws, indicates that many people do have an appetite for self-improvement if it’s packaged attractively. In a mature society, emotional education could be woven into enjoyable, community-based activities rather than feeling like stern therapy. Think of practices like mindfulness meditation, yoga, or group dialogues – these have gained popularity worldwide, essentially helping people develop emotional regulation and empathy under other guises. Even something like the popularity of cooperative games or escape rooms reflects a desire for collaborative, non-zero-sum experiences among younger folks, which in a way trains social skills.

Peer influence and social norms are crucial. If, for example, in a workplace the manager openly shares that they sometimes consult a counselor for stress, it gives permission for others to consider it. Once a tipping point of openness is reached, the rest often follow. The comfort of the status quo starts to erode when the status quo is clearly not working for many – and indeed, high levels of burnout, suicide, polarization, etc., are signals that current norms are failing. When suffering becomes salient, people become more willing to try something new. The COVID-19 pandemic, while traumatic, also forced a collective reckoning on mental health; we saw significantly more conversation about anxiety, grief, and coping. This could be seen as a catalyzing event that made clear the importance of emotional resilience. Mature societies may emerge not gradually but in response to crises that lay bare the cost of immaturity. We might speculate, for instance, that climate change’s looming challenges will demand unprecedented global cooperation and psychological steadiness; if petty nationalisms and denialisms hold sway, we could face disaster, so there will be intense pressure to evolve beyond them. The communities that do will survive and lead; those that don’t may perish or face ruin – a kind of natural selection at the societal level favoring maturity.

In addressing backlash (like men’s defensiveness around “toxic masculinity”), again framing and inclusion are important. Bell hooks wrote The Will to Change (2004) precisely to invite men into the healing process rather than make them adversaries. She emphasizes that patriarchy harms men deeply, and freeing them from it is an act of compassion. Approaches that empathize with the difficulties men face in shedding old norms (rather than simply shaming them) tend to be more effective. In practical terms, initiatives such as men’s support groups, fatherhood programs, or school curricula that encourage emotional literacy in boys can plant seeds to prevent the backlash. Indeed, some resistance we see is the last gasp of patriarchy’s older generation; as they age out, the hope is that younger men who grew up with different expectations carry less of that chip on their shoulder.

Technology could be leveraged to assist emotional growth rather than hinder it. While social media often exacerbates polarization (immature communication), we could envision apps or platforms designed to facilitate understanding – perhaps AI that mediates online arguments by prompting users to rephrase insults into “I feel” statements, or virtual reality experiences that put someone in another group’s shoes. Already, experiments have shown that simple interventions, like prompts that ask users “Is this post reliable?” can reduce sharing of misinformation. Future systems might similarly prompt empathy. In a fanciful but not impossible scenario, imagine an “AI therapist” widely accessible that helps individuals work through minor emotional issues or conflicts in real time (some prototypes exist, like chatbots for anxiety). This could make at least basic emotional support scalable and less stigmatized (since it’s private and not necessarily a human judgment).

Ultimately, change happens when the narratives of what is desirable change. If the cultural narrative prizes psychological insight, emotional bravery (like the courage to cry or apologize), and interpersonal kindness, people will strive for those as they once strove to be the toughest or most stoic. We can already observe this shift in some communities. The task is to amplify those narratives and provide institutional support (policies, programs) so that acting on them is feasible. Resistance will gradually weaken as more testimonies accumulate of how maturity improves life: happier marriages, healthier families, more productive and pleasant workplaces, and safer communities. Success stories from pilot programs (like a school district that implemented trauma-informed practices and saw improved graduation rates and reduced suspensions, or a city that adopted restorative justice and saw drops in recidivism) will be crucial in convincing skeptics.

In sum, while not everyone will eagerly volunteer to do emotional work, many will if given the tools and a sense of collective purpose. A post-patriarchal civilization would frame that purpose as a noble one: to end cycles of trauma and build a world where every person can thrive and feel valued. That is a motivational vision on par with, say, the Enlightenment ideals of liberty and equality that galvanized revolutions in the past. Emotional growth could be cast as the “next frontier” of human progress – an adventure of inner space as significant as any conquest of outer space.

Conclusion

This exploration began with a bold hypothesis: a truly post-patriarchal civilization will emerge only when the majority of adults achieve a substantial degree of psychological maturity. Through philosophical and social analysis, we have sketched what such a civilization might look like and grappled with the challenges to reaching it. It is a vision of society as a kind of collective adult, having outgrown the “adolescent” hallmarks of patriarchy – violence, rigid hierarchy, fear of difference – and moved into a more stable, caring, and creative stage.

In a mature post-patriarchal civilization, political life would be characterized by genuine democracy infused with empathy and reason, rather than demagoguery and division. Educational and familial institutions would systematically break the trauma-repetition cycle, raising new generations with secure foundations and emotional intelligence. Workplaces would harness collaboration and purpose, shedding authoritarian management in favor of participatory structures that respect human dignity. Cultural narratives would celebrate healing, connection, and complexity, moving away from glorifying domination or submission. Crucially, men and women alike (and people of all genders) would be free to develop the full range of human capacities – rational and emotional, assertive and nurturing – no longer split by the strict gender binary that patriarchy imposed on our psyches. The result would not be a conflict-free utopia, but a trauma-informed and trauma-resilient society: one that recognizes pain and injustice when they occur and seeks to repair them rather than reflexively retaliate or deny.

What would it take to move toward this vision? The analysis suggests several interlocking conditions: widespread education reform focusing on social-emotional learning; public health emphasis on mental health and accessible therapy; economic and social policies that reduce existential insecurity (so people aren’t pushed into fear-based worldviews); and role-modeling of mature behavior by leaders in every domain. Underlying all these is a shift in values – to see care, empathy, and self-reflection not as “soft” or secondary, but as foundational strengths of a society. In essence, a post-patriarchal world requires a redefinition of what it means to be civilized. Not technology, nor military might, nor GDP alone, but the quality of human relationships and the degree of consciousness would be measures of progress.

We must acknowledge that elements of this blueprint are already being built in the present. Around the globe, there are initiatives large and small aiming to create more enlightened systems: communities experimenting with restorative justice, countries instituting parenting support programs, transnational networks of youth activists practicing leaderful (non-hierarchical) organizing, and even businesses that call themselves “teal organizations” operating on self-management principles. These are like seedlings of the future in the soil of today. Conversely, we also see the dangerous storms of regression – authoritarianism, hate, polarization – that threaten to wash these seedlings away. The outcome is not predetermined; it hinges on human choices, collective and individual.

One might ask, what is the role of philosophy or theory in all this? Why sketch a theoretical “monograph-introduction” of a future society? The answer is that imagination sets the direction for action. As the saying often attributed to Kant goes, “Out of the crooked timber of humanity, no straight thing was ever made.” Perhaps absolute perfection is beyond reach, but our ideals give us something to straighten toward. By articulating a concrete image of a post-patriarchal, mature civilization, we make the end goal less vague and thereby easier to strategize for. It is a form of cultural blueprinting: just as an architect’s blueprint doesn’t guarantee the house will be built, but no house gets built without one.

In closing, we return to the personal: when most people mature. This phrase implies both timing and condition – a “when” that is conditional on an “if.” It is a call to action as much as a prediction. Achieving a critical mass of mature adults is the linchpin in the larger system change. It suggests a tipping point: we don’t need everyone to be a paragon of wisdom, but if enough people reach a level of conscious maturity, the institutions and culture will shift under their weight (just as institutions and culture now often cater to and amplify our least mature impulses). We can think of it like herd immunity, but for psychological habits: if compassion and reflection become common enough, they become the normative “air” everyone breathes, even influencing those who might not actively cultivate them.

Such a society would not be free of conflict or challenge, but it would meet conflicts in the spirit of problem-solving over enemy-making, and meet challenges with creativity unhampered by internal strife. It would, in short, be a civilization that continually heals trauma rather than replicating it. This is a long-term vision – perhaps the work of generations – but it may be the most worthy project humanity has ever undertaken: to collectively grow up. In the eloquent words of educator Maria Montessori, “Preventing conflict is the work of politics; establishing peace is the work of education.” A mature post-patriarchal civilization seeks to do both, understanding that ultimately, the roots of peace and justice lie in the mind and heart of every person. By educating and elevating our minds and hearts – by growing up – we set the stage for a world beyond the painful dramas of patriarchy, a world where most people being mature is simply normal, and where our civilization can at last attend to higher pursuits of flourishing for all.

References

Abi Rached, M., Hankir, A., & Zaman, R. (2021). Patriarchal upbringing in the 21st century: The impact emotional abuse related to parental styles has on the genesis of gender inequality and the development of unresolved trauma in children. Psychiatria Danubina, 33(Suppl 11), 121–132psychiatria-danubina.compsychiatria-danubina.com.

Adorno, T. W., Frenkel-Brunswik, E., Levinson, D. J., & Sanford, R. N. (1950). The Authoritarian Personality. New York: Harper & Brothers.

Culshaw, A., & Bodfield, K. (2024). Trauma-informed education: A case for compassion-focused teaching? Pastoral Care in Education, 1–12researchonline.ljmu.ac.ukresearchonline.ljmu.ac.uk. https://doi.org/10.1080/02643944.2024.2318776

Emole, E. (2025, November 18). Why authoritarianism is gaining ground and why Africa should care. Mo Ibrahim Foundation Blogmo.ibrahim.foundation.

Freedom House. (2025). Freedom in the World 2025: The uphill battle to safeguard rights. (Y. Gorokhovskaia & C. Grothe, Authors). Freedom Housefreedomhouse.orgfreedomhouse.org.

Fromm, E. (1941). Escape from Freedom. New York: Farrar & Rinehart.

Gilligan, C. (1982). In a Different Voice: Psychological Theory and Women’s Development. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Gupta, M., Madabushi, J. S., & Gupta, N. (2023). Critical overview of patriarchy, its interferences with psychological development, and risks for mental health. Cureus, 15(6), e40216researchgate.netresearchgate.net. https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.40216

Hall, L. (2024, February 7). How parenting style predicts teen mental health. First Things Firstfirstthings.orgfirstthings.org.

Harrison, R. (2025, March 14). Democracy with all the feels: How emotions shape politics. Institution for Social and Policy Studies, Yale Universityisps.yale.eduisps.yale.edu.

Hooks, B. (2004). The Will to Change: Men, Masculinity, and Love. New York: Atria Booksdn721601.ca.archive.org.

Kegan, R. (1994). In Over Our Heads: The Mental Demands of Modern Life. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Landemore, H., & Lacelle-Webster, A. (2025). Democracy with all the feels (conference proceedings summary). Yale ISPS (see Harrison, 2025).

Levitsky, S., & Ziblatt, D. (2018). How Democracies Die. New York: Crown.

Montessori, M. (1949). Education and Peace. Chicago: Henry Regnery (quote: “Preventing conflict is the work of politics; establishing peace is the work of education.”).

Partnership for Public Service. (2021). Why emotional intelligence is integral to 21st-century government leadership. (Author unknown)ourpublicservice.org.

Pinker, S. (2011). The Better Angels of Our Nature: Why Violence Has Declined. New York: Viking.

StatPearls. (2022). Types of parenting styles and their effects on children (E. Black & K. Budzak, authors). StatPearls Publishingfirstthings.orgfirstthings.org.

Vials, C. (2017). Adorno’s The Authoritarian Personality. Against the Current, 187, 31–38againstthecurrent.orgagainstthecurrent.org.

Winnicott, D. W. (1965). The Maturational Processes and the Facilitating Environment. New York: International Universities Press.