Matriarchal books? (was Gothic House of Black and a bit of Remus/Sirius

[phoenixgod2000]

No: HPFGUIDX 131322

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "horridporrid03" 
<horridporrid03 at y...> wrote:

> As to the Blacks being matriarchal - well it's a common theme of 
> JKR's to have the women folk be far stronger than the men.  (I can't 
> think of a single married couple where the wife doesn't reign 
> supreme.  The Malfoys are an unknown at this point.)  

Why is that? Why portray men as so incompetent when it comes to 
relationships and family while women are inexplicibly knowing?

Why is Ginny more confident with her first boyfriend than most women 
five years older than her and many more guys under their belts?  

Why is Hermione so knowledgeable about dating when she only has about 
fifteen more minutes of experience than both of the boys.

Why is Ron so comically clueless about girls when he has so many older 
brothers he can go to for advice, including one whose basically a 
blend of indianna Jones and a rock star?

Why does it seem like every guy in the book stands around like an open 
mouthed bass when a girl walks around while the women can practically 
read boys brains?

Why is it interesting and compelling to knock James off his pedestal 
while Saint!Lily gets to walk around with a gleaming halo?

And was Arthur Weasley always missing a backbone or did Molly just 
grind into dust while they were married? 

Is it for humor? does she think she's making a social point? Does she 
really think interactions between people are like this? The way she 
wrote James' backstory and Arthur, I wonder if she has some kind of 
issue with fathers in general. Are there any good, strong fathers in 
the book other than five minutes of older James?  I actually find it 
insulting to my gender that she writes men, boys, and fathers like 
this. Although I do have to say I thought Harry/Cho was very well 
done. It's about the most genuine boy/girl interaction in the books. 

phoenixgod2000