Quote:
Originally Posted by ChainLegacy
You bring up some interesting points, but I do not necessarily ascribe to the viewpoint that premodern life necessitated women as unequal members of society. There have been societies that did not operate like this, one example that springs to my mind is the ancient Britons (as described by Romans, anyways) who were even led in a military uprising by Boudica, a woman. I do think men made concerted efforts to consolidate their 'superior standing,' but I'd attribute it largely to cultural reasons than an inherent part of premodern life.
|
There were no truly matriarchal human societies, and it's obvious as to why--men are bigger and stronger than women on average. This is due to a lot of factors, but mostly because women are not expendable for reproduction while men are. A female's time, energy and health investment in making more humans is much, much greater than a male's.
If pre-modern life did not necessitate women as objects rather than agents, then they would not have remained objects. In fact, as soon as modern technology bridged the gap, women began pushing for their own agency, and thus far have mostly obtained it.
Some men make concerted efforts to consolidate their superior standing in society. Others don't. Some don't give any fucks and think humans should just be treated equally based on competence rather than sex, gender identity, sexual orientation, race and so forth. I'm personally not a feminist--I don't hate men at all and I think a lot of feminists, even moderate ones, are trying to railroad men without thinking about the price men paid for their agency in pre-modern times.
Most of the time that price was paid in blood.