But there's plenty of history that disproves what you're saying to support that.
No it doesn't.
Matriarchal societies have been around forever,
Name one successful one. Hell just name one.
and many of those cultures exist at a subsistence level, so that kind of ruins the whole "men will dominate when society doesn't hold them back" thing.
Except history proves the opposite. Theres a reason there is Alexander the Great, Julius Caesar and Napoleon Bonaparte and not Alexandria, Julinana or Napoleona. Men are naturally, biologically the dominant gender. Theres a reason the men went out and hunted the mammonth while the women stayed behind and took care of the children. It's basic biology.
Those closer to a "survival of the fittest" situation tend have less time for cultural notions about men vs women,
Except it's not a "cultural notion" that men are generally stronger and more suited to dominant positions such as hunting, fighting, and leading the group, it's a biological fact.
It's also a biological fact that if you don't make offspring your people/group/civilization/whatever will die.
So if a woman kicks ass, people would respect that.
If they are one of the few exceptions to the biological rule, sure. But they are just that, exceptions, rarities, abnormalities.
Things like "patriarchy" or "heteronormativity" are simply "Normal".
It's civilization that packages people into convenient slots.
No, that would be biology. Cultures didn't make men on average genetically stronger, more dominant and suited to roles just as fighting as I mentioned before and it's not culture that made women genetically better at taking care of children, the home and more submissive roles. Just cause you can name a few exceptions to the over whelming majority doesn't change it from being an abnormality which "le stronk women" and homosexuals are.
You're defining "fringe" according to modern American/European terms, so that's a big problem in your assumptions.
No, I'm defining "fringe" according to statistics and common sense. if the majority of people were exclusively homosexual, throughout all of history, their civilizations would have died out or at the very least not expanded as greatly due to there being less children born. Like I said, even the stereotypical homoerotic Greeks and Romans still prioritized having children just like ancient tribes prioritized protecting the young and animals all instinctively try to procreate.
And you're talking about procreation as if a group of individuals in an anarchic situation will somehow prioritize that for the good of a state that doesn't exist?
"Anarchy' is an impossibility. There will always be groups that form and it will always be a natural biological pull to procreate and pass on their genes and so thus a group will always try and keep their group going. It doesn't matter if it's at a state, tribal, or simply animalistic level. We all have an innate pull to continue on our lineage unless we have some sort of defect.
Regardless, I assume you're familiar with the famous speech from the Spartan general to his troops, encouraging them to go sleep with their wives, right? The soldiers were so busy screwing each other that it got people worried about the future of the country.
I don't see how this hurts my point and helps yours....
Exclusive homosexuality is almost always discouraged and is a extreme rarity.
Anyway, I'm really arguing that in a post-apoc society, there will be more anarchy, less rules, and less civilization.
But none of that will stop basic biological rules. A collapse of society won't suddenly make 1/3 of the population crave cocks. It will remain a fringe sexuality as it always has.
In that situation, if a charismatic person is a woman or gay man, they will likely have a huge influence over the local culture. In general there will be much greater diversity in thought, similar to early Christianity or Islam, both of which had wild variances in belief and practice until they got organized. I would imagine some really bizarre cult-like communities popping up.
I don't see how this is related to your complaint about there not being enough gays in Fallout 2.