The Roots of Misogyny

[wukter]

Why is practically every human society across all times, places and cultures dominated by men?
I have read that War on Women article that MillyR linked to. It's chilling. Why is it everywhere?

I would be interested in your thoughts, or maybe there is actually a simple, widely accepted answer that I could be pointed to.

V interesting thread. The why do men have more inventions to their credit intrigues me. I suspect it is to do with the mono-tasking versus multi tasking combined with womens responsibilities.

I can't actually imagine a man who is trying to make something work being interrupted by thoughts of clean underwear requirements, lunch, others needs. Not to mention the fact the great male inventor probably had a woman looking after his needs ensuring he was fed, watered, clean clothes etc.

For a long time royal betrothals took place in childhood, quite often with the girl being fostered in her future husbands court, presumably to guarantee correct lineage of children.

just read that female inventions site.

Lots of inventions created to fill a need in there.

Me again, Roman law also encouraged patriarchy,wiki - "It was normal Roman practice to allow allied kingdoms their independence only for the lifetime of their client king, who would agree to leave his kingdom to Rome in his will: the provinces of Bithynia[11] and Galatia,[12] for example, were incorporated into the Empire in just this way. Roman law also allowed inheritance only through the male line. "

primrose;

Not all females are married or have children, so we can't keep making those excuses for their lack of inventiveness, and likewise, not all male inventors had/have females on call 24/7 to cook & clean for them.

And like I said earlier, men dominate professionally in the traditional female type roles, (chefs/fashion/art etc)...these professions aren't reliant on physical strenght or great intelligence.....so where are all the women? maybe it's because
females lack the drive and ambition that alot of men have..?

Plus I don't think the vast majority of men do hate women, most men I come into contact with love and admire women and are all for equality, which is why I would never call myself a "feminist" I wouldn't want to be associated with a movement that is overrun with militants.

I want equality & fairness for all.

I think PrimroseCrabapple's post make perfect sense and are very interesting.

DP just to answer one of your points, I don't think anyone see this in literal terms of mean hating women, it is more subliminal then that, more about how society is organised and encouraged to move along.

I don't hate women Riven, but what I do hate is their constant moaning about equality - for example; moaning about male only golf clubs but wanting (and getting) 100's of female only clubs.

Why can't men have clubs that are just for them?...what is wrong with that, why can't they have a bit of peace ?

On women inventors. In the past, women did not own their own property, including intellectual property. They were the property of her husband. Many women would have been put off inventing because they knew, before they even started, that they would be very unlikely to receive credit for or financial benefit from any invention.

You don't need much of an education to pick up a brush and paint a few water lillies floating on a pond...but Monet managed it.

This thread motivated me to start reading "A Brief History of Misogyny" by Jack Holland. I have found the book very interesting.

The author puts the start of misogyny (at least in the Judeo-Christian civilization) at the 8th century BC - with the Ancient Greek myth of Pandora and the Jewish myth of Eve. He emphasises the irony that the earliest anti-female laws occurred alongside the birth of democracy.

Golf clubs?? maybe try standup instead of this

and I'm not saying your funny dp, just saying you may be a bit frustrated here.

Hmmm....funny women, good point seashore..

I could count them on one hand..

Sarah Silverman is generally regarded as the best in the world.

Laura Solon, French and Saunders,Victoria Wood, Lucy Porter,Ellen DeGeneres, Janeane Garofalo, Sandra Bernhard, Joan Rivers, Whoopie Goldburg, Rita Rudner . . .

I'm starting to think you are a bloke dp.

Most female genital mutilation is carried out by women, on other women. A lot of resentment of women comes from other women.

My "favourite" female inventor is Hedy Lamarr - she invented vital parts of modern communications technology (important in World War II and the basis of all moble phones) and she was a Hollywood filmstar too. She wanted to invent more things to help in World War II but the US Government refused her permission. They insisted she stick to morale-boosting for the troops, because of her beautiful appearance and celebrity.

Nigella has made her curves into herself. All that arch posing at the camera and sucking a finger, etc.

I am a former Mensa member and Oxbridge graduate. I have worked in the city, in the eighties, at a time when women were just starting to penetrate these 'male' areas. I have had every opportunity that my brother had. Nobody held me back.

I have not found any doors barred to me on the grounds of sex. I have barred some doors myself, on the grounds of an instinctive refusal to separate myself from my children for lengthy periods of time, because my intuition tells me that they do best when I am around when they come home from school. That's nothing to do with men putting me down, that's just something deep in my genes that can't be rationalized but is very powerful.

And DP the waterlillies were the distillation of a lifetime of observation and knowledge, most painting from the mid 20 century grew out of Monet's pond.

That's some sentence you put there about Monet. Very

Dittany, I wasn't intending to imply that men were the providers in hunter-gatherer groups. I was discussing the role of men as the more people who do something to support the upbringing of children, the better chances of survival that child has. I have been arguing against there being a genetic basis for the oppression of women, and while I am talking about evolution, I am not talking about evolutionary psychology which is considered to be dubious by many people working in evolutionary biology. The points that I have made are about the evolutionary consequences of human choices; I am not arguing that why people behave in certain ways is caused by their genes.

I was quite reticent to join this discussion initially, and the reason for that is because these type of discussions always seem to jump from tracing the roots of misogyny to people starting to argue that the oppression of women is natural.

Human are not just animals; we are animals with culture. The reasons why we can sit around discussing the past is because we know we have one. A pig or a thrush have absolutely no idea what pigs and thrushes were doing a few thousand years ago or what other members of their species are doing a few thousand miles away. That means humans can consider the wider implications of how we live beyond the impacts on our kin.

It is really leading nowhere to sit around and talk about what the behaviour was during the period when humans evolved, because we don't live that life anymore. We can't make decisions based on the survival of our kinship groups because the entire world has become connected. What happens to women in Pakistan has an impact on my life, and the whole fate of humanity is linked. There is no pint talking about individual reproductive decisions when the evolutionary and, more importantly, ethical consequences are being determined for our whole species at a global level. Trying to successfully nurture our daughters under such conditions is again a choiceless choice. We have to look to find solutions that are global, environmental and feminist.

In terms of the selfish gene, I do think that the success of humans (or any animals) in evolutionary terms, is a result of reproductive and nurturing behaviour, although that nurtring behaviour tends to include things like altruism to non-kin. But I don't believe that misogyny carries an evolutionary advantage and I don't think that Dawkins work supports such a belief or that he is arguing for such a belief.

In response to the memes point, I am talking about evolutionary consequences to forms of behaviour, and those consequences are genetic so I am not talking about memes.

Seashore; I'm not a man (although I don't think I'm 100% female, probably some sort of sub species)

Y'know there was a woman amongst the impressionists. Mary Cassatt.

She was painting 150 yrs ago, so no excuse for women today to say they're held back by men..... no one's buying it.

Riven, thank you for list of inventors.