Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Would the world have been better off if women had a more dominant role over the past 2000 years?

367 replies

Trebe · 31/03/2019 18:32

Hi, this is my first time posting on here but this question has sparked my curiosity. Would like to find out the views from the feminist stand point. Now I get the feeling this question coukd get a little uncivil, that is not my intention but a little bit of tenacity and passion would be nice to see.

The reason I see this question getting messy is simple, at some point stereotypes and generalisations are almost certainly going to come into this. In some ways I welcome that because it means we are having an honest discussion. Some stereotyping about men and women is going to be impossible to avoid as we are guessing and generalising the history of the past 2000 years. So yes men are more violent and yes women are more emotional, these in general terms, are facts. I think to even remotely answer the question generalisations, are necessary. So no offence intended when I generalise both men and women.

Obviously over the past 2 millennia men have ruled the roost, so we could attribute every good thing or every bad thing that has happened to men. The question I'm trying to ask is would we have had more atrocities if women had a more dominant role in decision making? Would we be as technologically and scientifically advanced? Would we be a more empathetic and understanding society and civilisation?

As a man I like to and would like to think men did the best they could in certain areas such as war (over 2000 years wars will happen no matter who is in charge), the advancement of science and maths, architecture, art etc. There are things men are good at (in general, I'm only saying in general once as almost everything about this is generalised), organisation, logic, maths and massive over-generalisations! Anyway these things have given us great advancements but it has also caused a lot of suffering in the process.

The logical, organisational, scientific mind is what caused atrocities such as the holocaust. The organisation and systematic nature of the concentration camps came from such thinking. It begs the question would women have done similar things if they were in charge, or at least had equal influence. The simple statement I have on it is, the extermination of certain peoples may have still happened I'm just not so sure it would have been done in such a cold blooded and efficient manner. I firmly believe that only a male would conceive of concentration camps. So on the death, destruction and famine part I'm gonna side on women doing a 'better' job than men.

To the question of technological and scientific advancements, I claim indifference to an opinion on whether we would be more advanced or not. It is a very difficult question to have a solid opinion on to be honest. It's very difficult to know as women to a certain extent (Madame Curie being the obvious exception but there are others), have been for lack of a better word, excluded from the sciences especially in the first 50 years of the 20th century when a lot of important science we use today was being discovered. Some feminists, well usually misandrists to be fair, don't like to admit that we live in a world that was created by men and that includes the good things such as the massive and rapid advancements in technology, health and science. That I do believe is helped by the way the male brain works.

When it comes to things like art, poetry, architecture, religion, psychology (especially psychology), sociology and many more of the humanities could have done with the influence of women. We would have a massive wealth of extra art, literature, architecture, poetry, music and more just by women having a stronger input over the past 2000 years. When it comes to more recent times I think womens input into psychology would have been massive, I don't think we would have gone down such extreme routes to control people like we did with the holocaust if women had their input on things like behavioural psychology.

I think war would have been (as much as possible) more humane and over much quicker. Do I think women can wage war just like any other human? Of course I do, I also believe there would have been wars, I don't believe that war would disappear if men did. I just believe women wouldn't want the carnage, the salt the ground or scorched earth policies men have adopted in the past.

Anyway I'm sort of rambling so I'll conclude. I am basically trying to engage in a discussion about women over the past 2000 years but also the past couple of hundred of years. Yes I'm sure there is absolutely loads I could add to this but I would like to hear your views on the question at hand. Feel free to generalise as much as is necessary just don't try to do it to be a dick, do it because you have a point.

Looking forward to hearing your thoughts!

OP posts:
GrapefruitsAreNotTheOnlyFruit · 01/04/2019 08:08

I can't imagine a world where women dominated men. For reasons of less muscle mass and childbirth this could never happen.

However I have often imagined a world with no men, and I have a number of completely speculative ideas....

  1. There would be no war. All technologies that have been developed relating to warfare would be less advanced.
  2. There would be much less violence. Any violence that occured would be taken extremely seriously. People would still be horrid to each other but via different means.
  3. Onset and cessation of menstruation would be major life events complete with special events and parties as would childbirth.
  4. Care of children would be considered extremely important. It would be a major and important subject of university research and there would be heated tv debates about the exact details where passions would run high.
  5. Medical treatment of children and of childbirth related injuries would be exceptionally advanced with an extremely low level of infant mortality.
  6. All tools, implements and equipment would have been designed to make them perfect for slightly smaller people with less muscle mass ie women
  7. Sport would be totally different and designed to highlight all the best attributes of the female body. There would be many types but probably some form of gymnastics or dance would be the most admired and best paid.
wrathofVitriolKlop · 01/04/2019 09:21

Obviously over the past 2 millennia men have ruled the roost
And obviously modern human beings have been living very successfully for 70,000 years.
That's 68,000 years in which our species had immense knowledge of how to live and thrive.

The author Daniel Quinn refers to this as the 'Great Forgetting'

It is as if nothing ever happened prior to this. Nothing at all.

The rise of patriarchy is to blame.

StopThePlanet · 01/04/2019 16:30

Have women been discouraged from STEM in the western world over the last 25yrs?

Oh yes, yes we are... I'm discouraged on a daily basis as a professional. In full business attire I am assumed to be the CEO's wife ('oh, oh so you're the CEO's wife' to which the CEO always makes some snarky sexually-charged comment about me or my body). And of course I'm supposed to ignore it or laugh it off you know because it is acceptable for them to insult me by assuming I am not intelligent enough to hold a powerful role on my own without sleeping my way to the top or having a title bestowed upon me that I did not earn.

These men use elementary level mathematics to attempt to combat my conclusions and recommendations based in grounded understanding of modeling and how to extrapolate those models in real scenarios. Upon explaining the concepts I am met with their boredom. The board ultimately decides what happens, they force action based on decisions I'm not included in, and then expect me to present failing results to whatever audience it applies. The majority of the time their concepts fail and we end up trying mine as a last resort... and guess what mine usually work!

See, here's the thing it doesn't matter where I go I am met with these behaviors in every workplace. I work hard, I do good things for the organizations I work for - my family and friends call me a workaholic. I am dedicated and loyal to a fault but as a woman those qualities are heavier. Why? Because as soon as a male higher up in power gets comfortable with me his next step is always to attempt to get in my pants. I can't reconcile my dedication/loyalty/effort with constant unwanted advances and assumptions about my ability. I'm constantly expected to prove my worth, meanwhile, I can't tell you how many men manage to spend their days at the golf course reaping the benefit of a six figure salary while I put in my 70 plus hours a week... Oftentimes doing the work of the men out playing golf.

While I have never let men's assumptions behaviors or desires get in my way I am still met with their assumptions behaviors and desires in my daily life.

I was verbally pushed from the time I was 5 years old by the men in my life to just enjoy being pretty - it didn't matter if I was good at math or smart. Hours and thousands of words could be spent breaking down for you all of the roadblocks I encountered and the discouragement experienced (regarding STEM - not to mention non-STEM which is another story) merely for being a female.

StopThePlanet · 01/04/2019 16:34

Good grief my post was long Smile

Prawnofthepatriarchy · 01/04/2019 17:26

Long and powerful. Very clear.

MsTSwift · 01/04/2019 17:32

Excellent post stop.

My great grandmother was one of the first women to get a degree. Despite getting excellent results she wasn’t awarded an actual degree just a permit to teach.

We have been thwarted and held back for hundreds of years. We’ve done incredibly well to fight back to the extent we have. If men had their way we still wouldn’t have jobs or the vote - we had to fight tooth and nail to get anywhere. When women were first allowed to go to Cambridge the men fucking rioted. Educate yourself op.

ErrolTheDragon · 01/04/2019 17:33

Good grief my post was long

No blokes interrupting or talking over you.Smile

StopThePlanet · 01/04/2019 18:20

Prawn - thank you

MsT - thank you

Errol - no shit, right? Ha!

Companion42 · 01/04/2019 19:51

How different would healthcare look if women had run the world?

Period pain would be taken seriously. Procedures like smear tests would be more comfortable. Abortion would be freely available with no stigma attached. There would be multiple options for contraception. Autism and heart attacks wouldn't be based on mens symptoms.

There's probably more that I haven't thought of. But women's bodies would be better understood and cared for.

Companion42 · 01/04/2019 19:53

And actually how many women would have survived? How many brilliant women did we lose to infections, childbirth, asylums?

wprice81 · 01/04/2019 20:17

@SpartacusAutisticusAHF

quillette.com/2019/03/29/denying-the-neuroscience-of-sex-differences/

sackrifice · 01/04/2019 20:17

How different would healthcare look if women had run the wo

Well for a start, we would havw actually tested drugs in women and men, and developed solutions accordiny, rather than just testing everything on men and assuming the same applies. Imagine how many women could have been treated properly from the beginning?

Companion42 · 02/04/2019 08:02

I think sex might be different too. I mean, for procreation purposes obviously it needs to be VIP, but for recreational sex? I think the focus would be different. And more men would know about female anatomy

Trebe · 27/04/2019 22:23

I have read your answers and they have provoked thought.

However I have two questions if you will so be kind to answer.

  1. Do you believe the patriarchy arose and maintains its power fear, poverty and promise of reward or eternal punishment because they are men or because that's the life they are born to. As a way of status and not starving to death.

As an anti-theist in this day and age, I'm not sure I wouldn't have become a priest if I could believe and prosthyletize without guilt. However I'm sure many religious figures seriously doubt their claims they just lack the courage to say it

OP posts:
Trebe · 27/04/2019 22:25

You think you know more about woman woman's body than women fool. I was 17 before I found the clitoris.

OP posts:
Dervel · 27/04/2019 22:42

I think you committed a false dichotomy in the original post. Why does the backdrop of male/female interactions have to follow a dominant/sub-ordinate paradigm?

What I can commit to is wether women were dominant or equal either case would require bodily autonomy and reproductive rights. There are many many things that happen when women have both those and access to education:

• Less susceptibility to famine
• Reduced political/religious extremism
• Reduced Poverty

Every single time you empower women the world over and throughout history you massively elevate the whole of your society. Happens every time. HTH

Trebe · 27/04/2019 22:54

I agree it empowers womem everytime especially if you throw in female contraception. On my false dichotomy, I think your mistaken in what I say. Is what I'm saying in GENERAL, statistically speaking women are the less dominant race. Its an unfortunate fact but the truth is the truth.

Please people remember I said general, thanks.

OP posts:
Trebe · 27/04/2019 22:55

Should say dominant in some ways.

OP posts:
Trebe · 27/04/2019 23:00

Athleticaly, stem subjects, less aggressive, more compasionate, philosophical, logic (once again philosophical), I'm sure there are loads more. To say women and men are the same is ridiculous.

OP posts:
Trebe · 27/04/2019 23:03

BBy the way I like the way your fighting for the rights of women where they truly are treated terribly. Its admirable.

OP posts:
ScottishDoll · 27/04/2019 23:09

Women are a race now?

I see.

Trebe · 27/04/2019 23:17

Dont be pedantic it lessens your arguement.

OP posts:
Dervel · 27/04/2019 23:22

Actually again depends what you mean by dominant? Women have dominated many essential areas of life, you are coming at this with too many preconceptions of what is essential for life/culture/civilisation.

Furthermore women’s contributions scientifically, philosophically, culturally and politically has been far more comprehensive than perhaps you have been led to believe.

I’d really encourage you to make a study of it, it’s really quite interesting in its own right and inspiring!

Trebe · 27/04/2019 23:24

Also you define a way of defining the sexes that doesnt offend someone. If you're looking for a reason to be offended thats your choice.

OP posts:
Dervel · 27/04/2019 23:25

Also upthread you made the claim that women are the more emotional of the two, but when you factor in male aggression, rage and anger and identify them correctly as emotions then the overall picture changed quite dramatically don’t you think?