This may not end well.

patrilineal clans are still fighting and it's 2018.

Also from history books it has been very obvious that wars, battles, conflicts has only and or more so involved "men" to do the figthing since they have and still claim to be the dominate counterpart.

Then we have the survival of the spieces . . . and the reason why human males carry both Y & X wherein the women only carries X. The odds, more female are concieved and born as nature intended. One male could pregnant many women.

Now Humans can not ever get along right now or in the forseable future, therefore, men will keep knocking each other out of existence although some countries have depleated their males to the extent of now having female fighers.

saw the dwindling of rival tribes males?

It's become a hypothesis that relies on begging the question.

"Let's assume matriarchy. Then, let's reinterpret all the information we have to allow for matriarchy and reclassify as dubious any data that doesn't fit. Having shown that we can construct a scenario that can be made to account for the data if pushed, we've proven our assumption is true." No, at best it's plausible. But in most cases less plausible than the other account.

The guy who really pushed this based on archeological research in Turkey was, in the last year, shown to have forged his evidence. Almost every evidence-based account of matriarchy starts with his work. But all the evidence is he was wrong, knew he was wrong, and didn't let reality get in the way of a good theory.

but then again if we did we would probably find a way to screw it all up.

Somehow, a certain 1960's James Bond parody movie comes to mind.

The researchers looked at some specific places in Europe, Central Asia, and Africa. It's assumed it's applicable everywhere, but that's an assumption.

They point out that the only place where diversity hasn't been re-established has been Central Asia. I don't recall their story for this.