You are correct that I’m not interested in assigning blame, although I am very interested in creating a world that is less systemically harmful to women. Patriarchy is a dominance hierarchy and truly only really benefits a few men at the top, whilst giving the rest of men some small measure of dominance over women, although at a personal cost to them as well. As I pointed out in my recent article, patriarchy is not so much about individual men as it is a social system (which women participate in as well). So although it may look like women are shrieking about men, they are actually shrieking about the experiences that they are no longer willing to tolerate at the hands of this social system.
And social systems aside, women are human beings, just as capable of human frailty and excess as men. It’s just that quite often, due to lack of power in the hierarchy, that frailty doesn’t always come with the same level of societal impact, although it undoubtedly impacts the other individuals in her sphere. I think part of the current disconnect comes from too many people trying to process the shortcomings of a social system through the lens of personal identity, which doesn’t go anywhere and just leads to bad feelings.
But to speak to your question more directly, I am not aware of any analysis of feminine archetypes that is nearly as good as what Harry has provided. Perhaps he will undertake to write one at some point. The feminine archetypes are The Queen, The Mother, The Wise Woman and The Lover, and just like the masculine ones, each of those archetypes has potential for excess or lack. For example, The Queen (just as with The King) has the potential to be a Tyrant or a Weakling. The Mother has the potential to be either Distant or Possessive, The Wise Woman may lean towards being either a Witch or a Fool, and The Lover has potential to be either a Seducer or Frigid. If you look for Jungian feminine archetypes on-line, you should be able to get a better sense of what the potentials are for each.