@boag
> What exactly is the edge women have in this world to be granted so much political influence over noble men?
The nobility descended from adventurers, and the new humans are said to have taken over the world with magic.
So I'd assume that women have just about as much if not more magic power than men.
> Also how in the hell is this a matriarchy if most men are still doing most of the dangerous jobs like military?
If we're gonna take a cynical view on this... men will always be more expendable than women even if the power dynamics are reversed.
e.g. You only really need one "strong male" in the reproductive role and all the other "weaker males" would then be redundant.
"Protect the women and the children" isn't only about protecting the weak - they're just more valuable.
I suppose a matriarchal society would also have been inevitable if women could exert power through violence equally, because women would be the majority.
> How is this world supposed to be a matriarchy if the princes seems to have enough political power to completely ignore requests from upper echelon female nobles?
> Yeah this isnt making any sense, unless the queen dotes a lot on the prince and is overprotective there is no way he would get away with that much rudeness.
@MagiciansBlack
royalty > duchess
Nobility ranks precedes gender. If gender can override rank, then imagine a baron being rude to the king's daughter - that would be inappropriate even if it were a patriarchal society. The protection of a noble extends to their house, and an insult to a member of the family is an insult to the head, which in this case, would be the queen.
But of course, the prince likely wouldn't be able to get away with that much rudeness later, as the queen still has to maintain good relationships with her subjects.