Why are women treated so badly?

[cally]

So, parents sell their young female children into slavery. Slavery is endemic throughout the world and female slaves/sex slavery is increasing. In India and China and elsewhere there are not enough females to marry because the female babies are killed. Routinely, women are raped and abused during war.

Women are routinely lesser than men. I don't know why. There is no reason why humans should prefer males over females. It is a cultural, learned, bias. Any ideas?

[redqueen]

1. Learned

They're scared of us because we're superior. :P

[Misunderestimator]

2. LMAO... Damn... was going to say the same thing!!

:D

[redqueen]

3. Seriously, though

We need to stop this immediately. It starts at home.

[MuseRider]

4. I would agree! n/t

[DarkPhenyx]

33. Oh please.

Superior my ass.

[redqueen]

49. lol

Wassamatta? Can't take a joke?

:*

[Forkboy]

51. Jokes like that draw a certain type out like flies to a corpse

:)

[Terran]

55. My my, first Whoopi, now this...

It's a joke. Lighten up.

[bobbieinok]

5. in 19th cent and earlier, in family males got more food than females

there are lots of reasons suggested for this

[redqueen]

9. Like... insecure assholes scared of being dominated by powerful women?

Or what?

[bobbieinok]

25. 1 suggestion ---- fathers needed strength for manual labor

part of it may have been daughters of lesser value

some relation to practice of sending sons but not daughters to school, especially for ca post 6th grade level

[TNMOM]

127. Families needed boys to care for them...

when they are old.

My Chinese mother tells me that boys were considered more valuable because custom dictated that boys take care of their elderly parents. The more successful your boys are, the more secure your future.

Girls, on the other hand, are "given away" in marriage and move in with her in-laws to help her husband care for his parents.

This cutural bias created a pragmatism -- why feed/educate your daughter or show your daughter the secrets of your family business, if the investment reaps benefits only for your in-laws? That's why boys were better fed, educated and received training to continue the family business while girls were neglected.

[Frodo]

80. In the 21st century, males get more food than fermales.

You ever seen a teenage boy eat??

[cally]

92. Interesting idea

I have seen what teen boys eat. It's a lot. So, why are they more valued? Girls/women can and do labor and help the family. I still don't get it. Why are women so devaulued.

[One_Life_To_Give]

98. Manual Labor Capability

Alot of this has to do with the capability to do manual labor. Today we are all soft compared to our ancestors. The requirement to accomplish manual labor tasks for survival caused society to favor sons.

[Yupster]

132. True One Life

I read lots of history and I'm amazed at how strong people had to be back then. They did incredible labor, and had chronic diseases at much higher rates than today.

I read a biography of Jefferson Davis recently. When he was eight, his family put him on a passing wagon train so he could go hundreds of miles away to a school. Today you'd be arrested for child neglect.

He got into college at age 13 because he could speak Greek and Latin.

We all have it so much easier today, but we don't seem to take advantage of what life offers us. I think our ancestors would be appalled.

In fact if Lincoln were alive today, he'd say ........... Woo-ey, I can't believe I'm alive. I must be near 200 years old.

[Frodo]

111. Do you really think...

that if they were left to their own devices girls would eat as much as boys (on average)?

Do you really thing that girls would grow to the same average size/strength as boys if only their diets were unrestricted?


I have new for you. "Equal" does not (in this case) mean "same".


And they aren't of more "value". In fact, they would be of LESS value, if you ladies hadn't been kind enough to step DOWN to our level instead of forcing us to take a step UP to yours.

[cally]

122. No, I didn't make my point

Women/girls do eat less. I have never argued that men and women are the same just that we are equal. Men do eat more so in a society where food is scarce, you would think that women would be more valued. But they are not.

[porphyrian]

6. But, it's in the Bible...

Sorry, I'm sick of hearing that, too.

[redqueen]

8. Woohoo! Are you a guy?

If so, thanks for taking the time to at least post SOMETHING, even if it was tired and lame. :)

[porphyrian]

34. Yeah, just don't hold it against me...;)

I'm not afraid to acknowledge our differences, which often gets me in trouble, but I certainly don't agree with treating women as second class citizens or property. Having spent some time around women in the medical profession, I am disgusted by how little womens' health has been researched to date. My current gig is as executive assistant to a woman boss, and we have a wonderful working relationship. In fact, I enjoy the roll-reversal from the stereotype.

[redqueen]

50. YAY you! Lack of research into women's health issues

is, as you can guess, a HUGE pet peeve of mine.

:toast:

[redqueen]

7. Why are there no men on this thread yet?

Hmmmmmm?

[Nederland]

10. Simple

We are scared of you :)

[redqueen]

14. Bawk bawk!

;)

[FreedomReload]

11. I Doubt Your looking For Any Male Input In This Discussion

If a guy says anything other then the pathetic "yes mistress, women should rule the world" garbage he is immediately called sexist and other unkind things.

[redqueen]

13. Oh what a copout!

Think, man, THINK!

Why?!

For all of recorded history!

WHY?!

[DarkPhenyx]

36. It isn't a cop out.

It's a little extremist, but it isn't a cop out.

[redqueen]

53. Well it sure seems like it to me

One can give serious consideration to the original reasons and the reasons it continues without getting into a mud-slinging contest.

I think we really need to have this discussion, and women discussing it amongst themselves won't be very productive. I mean, unless you want a Lysistrata kind of thing. Which I wouldn't argue with. ;)

[DarkPhenyx]

61. I agree.

It's a very important topic, however the point made previously isn't completely out to lunch. Frequently I see people who don't "tow the line" and get shouted down simply because they disagree with a suposedly "pro-woman" post or theory.

[redqueen]

68. Yeah, you both have a point.

I know... this bugs me too... any stumbling block to open communication is a real PIA.

[Arianrhod]

83. "For all of recorded history!" ... Simply not true.

Many ancient cultures held women in high esteem. My own exalted and highly enlightened ancestors, the European Celts, gave women full equality with men in many of their tribes. (There doesn't seem to have been one single people that could be called "Celts". Their culture was spread out from the Danube to Glastonbury, and their social systems varied a bit.) In some, a man could not be crowned king until the High Priestess gave him her blessing. There are graves in which honored warrior chiefs were buried, with full regalia and weapons laid out in ceremonial patterns around the bones. It wasn't until some time into the research that the archeologists discovered that these were women.

Christian society, OTOH, has always denigrated women. From the story of Adam and Eve all the way to Paul's shuddering revulsion in 1 Corinthians 7 ("It is good for a man never to touch a woman"; "It is better to marry than to burn"), the Bible is no champion of women's rights, and sees them as little more than useful for reproduction and releasing men's overwhelming needs. (Seems that even being filled with the Spirit of God cannot cool these fires!) While Christians on here may protest this interpretation, I would remind them that they are speaking from a more enlightened age, and that this is the interpretation to be found in centuries of Church writings, from Augustine to Luther. (Luther was, in fact, a notorious misogynist. His statement, "If a woman dies in childbirth, it is of no consequence; it is what she is here for" is, to me, one of the coldest pronouncements ever made by a "holy" man.) That they, personally, do not adhere to this view is more a function of their own goodness than it is a recognition of Church history.

I think women are feared because of their intense sexual power over men.

[redqueen]

103. Well is that really 'recorded'?

I've heard a lot of hullaballoo about how none of that history is really valid because ... well I guess just because some bigtime historians say so.

:shrug:

I'm aware of how much changed when Christianity / Sky Gods became the norm, but didn't know that could properly be considered 'recorded' hisotry.

Hell, is even the attempt to silence this part of history part of keeping us down?

[Snow]

117. There're many historians who have an allergy to oral tradition

and they have a point, to some degree. But there's a lot of distortion/omission to written records as well, and what the hell's wrong with oral tradition, anyway? It's an interesting argument, completely tangentianl to this whole thread, but, it's Friday afternoon, right?

Korea, by the way, has a 5,000 year written history.

[redqueen]

119. Well... not *completely* tangential

I mean... the loss of that history kind of directly contributes to many women not ever knowing about that... or at least not until they're older, and have internalized a lot of society's BS.

That's interesting about Korea... they eat live octopi, too. Now *that's* tangential.

:)

[Snow]

123. Hmmmm, hypothesis....

Literacy in Europe after the fall of Rome was the domain of the church, okay? Western history was therefore written largely by clerics - most likely, although not necessarily, males in a patriarchal organization. I wouldn't write off oral traditions as lost too quickly, though - look how Homer managed to hang on, or Beowulf. Birgitta. And there's the whole business about Sacajawea's life after Lewis & Clark - did she die on a riverboat going north (written records, sort of) or did she go live with some southwest Indians, finally moving up to Wyoming where she's buried (oral, Indian tradition).

And yes, Koreans do eat live octopus, but only after it's been cut up into bite-size pieces - even at that it can stick to the roof of your mouth if you're not careful. Goes very well with hot pepper sauce and soju.

[petronius]

133. "Hisotry"?

Was this deliberate or a typo? Because it looks like a combination of "his" and "bigotry" to me, which is either a Freudian slip or rather clever...

[Arianrhod]

135. Well, it may not be recorded,

but it isn't prehistory, either. We're talking c500 BCE to around 600CE or so. The Celts held off the Vikings for 2 years, and even sacked Rome once. Heroditus wrote of them, as did Julius. And what Julius had to say of them was very admiring of the Celtic women, whom he claimed were far more ferocious than the men. :) He said they would throw themselves into the Romans' weapons, with no concern for their own injuries.

Most of what we know about the Celts--like what we know of the early Church--comes from outside sources. The Celts themselves never had a written language. What they did eventually write down, they wrote in Greek. But most of the works we have come from the British Isles--primarily Ireland and Wales, although there were large settlements in Scotland and Cornwall as well. Eventually the Celtic stories were incorporated into Christianity and translated into Irish, Welsh and English. This is how the Celtic "gods" came to be. Although many specialists in Celtic history believe that these stories originally concerned living men and women, they were so fantastic that the Christian interpreters couldn't believe them. So they made them over into divine parables instead.

The fictional account of ancient Celtic life depicted in The Mists of Avalon is fairly accurate, IMO. Women held a tremendous amount of power in Celtic society, and the Celts worshiped more goddesses than they did gods. My online name is that of a Celtic goddess, a champion of women's rights and an enemy of the growing patriarchy that was arising at the time her stories were being told, in the first centuries of this era. But that patriarchy, of course, was being imposed by the Church.

Meanwhile, how much of history in general is "valid"? Just because someone wrote something down doesn't mean it reflects what really happened. That's why historians have to study so many different manuscripts, in order to glean the truth out of the stories. And that's why the Powers That Be always try to destroy extant copies of any work that contradicts what they want people to believe. The * administration has been engaged in rewriting history ever since they took power. This is extremely important for the continuation of their agenda--perhaps even more important than stealing all of the world's resources.

[cally]

18. You're wrong

I'm hoping for intelligent discussion. That does not exclude males.

[porphyrian]

41. Everybody's a Little Bit Sexist

You can't help it. We are biologically different, and experience life differently. That doesn't mean we can't communicate our positions or interact in a civil egalitarian manner.

[sandnsea]

45. No, but...

When he says stupid shit like you just said, he's called sexist.

[sandnsea]

52. Oops n/t

[neuvocat]

12. Depends on which culture.

In a few places, not many, there are cultures where the woman is the dominant sex. Perhaps it would be best to look at those cultures to see what can be learned in order to help improve conditions for women elsewhere.

[redqueen]

15. Now that's interesting

Females dominant? Perhaps if you would provide specifics we could go there. Unfortunately, I'm not familiary with any such cultures.

[neuvocat]

19. I'll get back to you on that one.

Its gonna take some time to find out (I just volunteered myself for that one, didn't I).

[redqueen]

20. lol... thanks! Really!

This is my FAVORITE topic, and of COURSE, they would give me an assignment today which calls me away from my PC. *pout*

But I really seriously appreciate the effort to understand this situation and improve it!

:yourock:

[neuvocat]

32. I'm looking under "matriarchies"

and came across a couple of sites. I'm also recalling the obvious like England and other countries that have queens. I'll keep this post updated. I'm also recalling the most memorable: The Amazons.

There's also the Spartans of Greece. Women weren't dominant but because they were in excellent shape for combat, they were treated as equals. That suggests a very big solution to me.

Anyways, other links...


http://www.warandgender.com/wgamazon.htm

http://ptgptb.org/0016/womensworld.html

http://www.geocities.com/griffinlady/papers/gender/gimbutas.html

http://eve.enviroweb.org/perspectives/issues/matriarc.html

http://www.awakenedwoman.com/les_matriarch.htm

[G_j]

57. A number of Native American tribes are matriarchal

the Navajo for instance.

Clan mothers held a lot of power in the Iroquois confederacy. I was told that although the Chiefs were male they could be dumped at any time if the clan mothers did not like the way they handled the affairs of the people.

[redqueen]

58. Thanks I'll have to look through these. n/t

[neuvocat]

82. Something else to consider

is that women themselves in the U.S. have been able to create great change (eg the women's suffrage movement) and have expanded into other areas of life such as athletics and the job market.

I've known a female police officer who was probably the toughest cop I've ever met. She was feminine enough, an attractive gal who had good manners but God forbid you should cross her up the wrong way. A number of the male officers were in fact intimidated by her because they were pretty sure she'd win a fistfight with them. In fact she was assigned to one of the toughest beats here.

[wickerwoman]

138. The Amazons were fictional.

The Greeks made them up as a kind of "Gulliver's Travels" fantasy-comedy what would happen if women ruled the world kind of thing.

[neuvocat]

142. **wiping the egg of his face**

Thanks for pointing that out.

[Snow]

87. Try China - the character for family name has "mother" as its root

from the same time period, the character for "beautiful" is comprised of "big" and "sheep". Without getting into any sheep jokes (yes, I once worked at a vet school) the combination suggests China was once a tribe of matriarchal sheep herders. Just guessing, I'd say nomadic societies tends towards matriarchy, and agricultural societies towards patriarchy ("so what about the ancient israelis," someone mutters from the back row. "they were matriarchal, but the men wrote the books later on," the professor replies facilely)

[TX-RAT]

39. Females dominant?

Damn right
You need to meet my wife,( 1/2 Mexican- 1/2 German ) She's been keeping my butt in line for over 30 yrs.

[porphyrian]

46. Does that mean she's passionately obsessive-compulsive? (/stereotype) -n/t

[G_j]

42. Many think that

in ancient times Goddess religions were prevalent, since woman gives birth which makes her a creator of life. A woman was a representative
of the great mystery. As some point men learned that they could dominate through force and violence. Most of today's major religions
are male dominated and patriarchal. I think the male religions attempted to deliberately wipe out the Goddess religions long ago. They did a pretty good job. Now we have a world where force, violence and power/over are the norm.
It would be nice to evolve into a balance someday. We can only hope.

[NewJeffCT]

43. shanghai, china

Men there are expected to do all the housework...

[cally]

48. That's interesting

but it has little to do with infanticide, sexual slavery, and abuse of women.

[NewJeffCT]

76. I was responding to the above post

About female dominated societies.

[redqueen]

60. No way!

That's new! Do you have a source? I ask because I recently heard/read (don't remember which) that the unequal sharing of duties was a global phenomenon.

[NewJeffCT]

75. way

I just have a lot of relatives in Shanghai, and I've also heard it independently from other sources.

[DarkPhenyx]

38. Also a bad idea.

You would be far better served looking at a culture where neither sex is dominant, but where people are allowed to be who they are, and where neither sex rules the other in any respect.

[rumguy]

16. The slavery thing has a lot to do with money

As for in general I don't know why it is: but why do so many women submit to men?

Is it something inherent in our biology?

[redqueen]

24. Physical strength, generally less aggressive

Yes, that could be part of it.

[rumguy]

28. Perhaps some of it is built in....

We're still hard-wired like primitives in a lot of ways. We're not so far removed from the birth of our species on the plains of Africa.

Civilization and modernization however has smoothed out some of the rougher edges of our natures.

[porphyrian]

64. What about women who choose abusive relationships?

If I can jump in here, I've always wondered about this. Why do some women seek out "bad" guys and doomed relationships? Is this the result of an earlier trauma? Self-loathing, perhaps caused by sexist patriarchal society? What gives?

[rumguy]

67. That's psychological

There's lots of research that has been done on this. There are also men who seek out these kinds of relationships.

[redqueen]

70. Once again, it's learned

Speaking from personal experience here. If you grow up in a home where Mom & Dad are fighting and yelling and Dad beats up Mom & you and your brothers & sisters, then on a subconscious level, you're learning that this is FAMILY. This is LOVE.

So, your first relationships, as a consequence (and this is of course not true if you're more self-aware that most), are usually a reflection of that experience. You end up being mysteriously drawn towards abusive people, wanting a family you look for what your subconcsious has learned is family. A bit of therapy usually does the trick, though. :)

[Nadienne]

81. Romance novels

Romance novels typically have these elements: strong-willed, admirable woman meets strong man. She pisses him off, he loses his temper, and later apologizes, awkwardly. Then, towards the end, he pisses her off, or hurts her, she runs off and - like "any stupid, emotional woman" gets herself into trouble. He realizes he hurt her, and he looks for her, and he saves her just in the nick of time.

The message conveyed - perhaps intentionally - is that if he hurts you, he didn't mean it. You should stay with him even though he hurts you. Also, there is sometimes an underlying sense that "he'll accept you, even though you're an irrational, emotional, silly woman."

Romance novels also seem to have dominance/submission issues, suggesting that good, smart women submit to their "stronger" dominating counterparts, and with this submission, man and woman can work together as a pair.

I heard from a literature teacher (and former reader of romance novels) that romance novels are marketed to and written for women who had been in abusive relationships - they keep hoping for the abuser to come back into their lives. (Or perhaps she said that women who read romance novels tend to end up in abusive relationships. I have no doubt of this.)

.....

Which is all a long way of saying that society at large seems to encourage women to submit, to "be feminine", to accept abuses...

[bobbieinok]

90. today there are lots of different types of romance novels

What you describe sounds like the early Harlequin novels.

IMO, your analysis does not apply to the Georgette Heyer novels (and lots of others)

(Romance novels might be an interesting topic for another thread.)

One of the most glaring relatively recent examples of what you describe is the whole mid-80s (date?) Luke and Laura story line in the ABC daytime soap General Hospital. ...... He rapes her, and then later it's all true love and they have the wedding of the century. Several of the girls in my son's junior hi watched the whole thing (mostly the wedding stuff) totally enthralled. (I heard about this from their mothers.)

[Nadienne]

120. Yeesh,

rape and then true love? Yeah, no surprise, coming from a soap opera.

You're right, though. I don't know from personal reading experience, but I have heard that not all romance novels are that way. There are even religious romance novels; I've heard they're not that way. (Though I can't get myself to read them. Maybe I should, just to see what they're like...)

[bobbieinok]

17. things that really freaked me out when I started reading about

women's history in the 60s

...in the writings of some/many? early christian church fathers, there was a serious debate over whether or not women have souls

...the resistance--on the part of the medical profession in the 19th cent--to using any form of anesthesia in childbirth because 'the bible says that women must pay for the sin of Eve by suffering in childbirth'.....this was apparently changed when Queen Victoria got/demanded ? help in childbirth

[SemperEadem]

66. she took advantage of it

in her later pregnancies, but there was still a lot of howling from the men that she shouldn't be spared any relief based upon the bible.
And all because the story put forth has been built upon the notion that it was the woman who plunged humankind into the abyss of sin by eating the apple.

What has failed to be included in this picture is the fact that Eve was not told to stay away from the tree. God said that to Adam before he made Eve. Someone forgot to pass on the memo on to her. (check out the chronology in Genesis) When the snake tempted her and she showed the fruit to Adam, at that point in time, he was supposed to remember what God told him, take the apple from Eve and bean the snake with it, demonstrating the superior intellect and memory skills succeeding generations of males have insisted they possessed and women didn't. He didn't. He failed his first big test and blamed Eve for it. He abandoned his responsibility and as such, since that point in time, life has been built around the notion that women were the evil instruments of the devil because Eve, in her ignorance of the situation, was easily enticed by the snake. She was framed.

Look at all the negative press Mary Magdelen has gotten... she has been called a 'whore' for 2,000 years and there is no evidence to support that charge. Peter couldn't stand that Jesus took a woman into his confidence and revealed information to her and not to a man. His intolerance was based upon the misinformation/misinterpretation that was used to inculcate the masses since history was recorded. He was the first pope, so if the first pope was that mysogynistic, then you can see just why modern day Christians are so deeply programmed to consider women with such a slur.

[Misunderestimator]

77. I like your interpretation... very well said.

:thumbsup:

[Karenina]

93. Maria, a friend from Croatia

stated her case to me that Mary Magdelene and the "Virgin" Mary were one and the same person. She offered to document, but as I am not a Christian, I declined as I was MUCH MORE interested in HER narrative and understanding. She laid out her case and I was MIGHTILY impressed. Simple, succinct and Occam's Razor's edge. Things that make you go Hmmmmm... :wow:

[Nobody]

141. Another interpretation of the apple

The apple was the fruit of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil. What is knowledge of good and evil? Morality. The idea that you know right from wrong is what separates us from the animals. You do the right thing not because someone told you what to do, but because you know what the right thing is.

Thus, we're all being punished for being sentient, moral beings who think for ourselves and act on the evidence provided.

In the story, God told Adam that if he ate of the tree he would die. He and Eve both ate a bite from the apple and neither one dropped dead. The serpent was right, God lied to Adam and Eve and they caught him in a lie. And we've been paying for it ever since.

The moral of the story: If those who rule over you are caught in a lie, look the other way. This might explain why Bush gets away with everything he's done since stealing office.

[rene moon]

21. I've always believed

that men are scared of women for one reason: we give birth. We bring forth life and they are jealous of that. My husband admitted to me that he is jealous that women get that experience.

Just my 2 cents!

[Nederland]

Ok, here's my best shot

I think is biological.

In primitive cultures physical strength matters more than it does in modern cultures. The fact that on average women are physically weaker than men means that they will be valued less. As a result, get abused and discriminated against on multiple levels.

[Nederland]

26. Damn

That the second time in two days that my post didn't get a #. DU software hates me. It must be biological :)

[Nadienne]

29. I think it depends on the culture.

I recall a mythology class that talked about cultures that credited "mother earth" with the birth of all life. Since babies come from women and not men, women were regarded as closer to mother earth...

These primitive cultures also worshipped snakes, for their closeness to the earth.

And according to that mythology class, the Biblical story of Adam and Eve, tempted by the snake, was an attempt to discredit earlier traditions and religions. The root of sexism and discrimination (according to that teacher) was from the story of Adam and Eve...

[toddzilla]

22. i think before society was developed..

And man was primarily a hunter/gatherer, women may have been viewed as the weaker sex due to obvious physical differences. As society became more complicated and brute physical strength no longer determined your success in life, the old feelings may have transferred over..

who knows, but it's so deeply ingrained i find it hard to believe it will ever go away.

[cally]

27. When you look at those cultures,

the gathering part provides most of the food. Physical strength helps, but endurance matters also. I just don't get that argument.

[Bettie]

37. Actually, hunter/gatherer societies

Tend toward being more egalitarian, some even skew toward being female dominated. (Would have to pull out my old Anthro textbooks to give specifics though).

[Mandate My Ass]

23. So that men can retain power

Law, religion, politics are dominated by males and they make rules that benefit themselves and justify inequalities.

[iconoclastic cat]

30. My theory: A psychological fear and jealousy of those who can crate life

Of course, I'm an idiot, so never mind.

[Forkboy]

56. I think you're on to something

[Terran]

69. A slight disagreement with you

I think male awe at female reproductive powers probably meant greater equality and safety for women, not less. Jealousy, I tend to doubt as a factor. Men are generally happy with their own apparent 'powers', as centered in their penises. On the side, I've always wondered how long it took humanity to figure out that men actually contributed something to reproduction.

My theory is that the rise of cities and the destruction of women-valuing pagan religions by Christianity contributed to creating the current paradigm. Cities meant that a lot of unattached males were gathering in one place, and that's never a good idea. =] When all we had were tribes and villages, there was more opportunity to make sure that those social units fulfilled everyone's "needs," so to speak.

A more realistic social model that actually acknowledged what men and women need to do for and with each other, and that was not anti-homosexual, would contribute a lot, I think, toward restoring balance.

[Arianrhod]

88. Homophobia

IMO, is just another form of misogyny.

[porphyrian]

97. Hmm...fascinating theory...

I wonder what the data would be, if it were collectable, on the occurance of homophobia and misogyny within a population, and the relationship between the two. It's certainly a similar form of behavior. Interesting observation.

[redqueen]

104. Agreed n/t

[DarkPhenyx]

31. Doweries and Inheritance.

Those are the primary two.

[MsUnderstood]

35. It is bred into every culture because it dates back so far in HIStory

Let me explain my theory

Prior to the three versions of Monotheism, before Humans had learned communication, the Female was the goddess of choice because it was recognized only birth of a child would continue the species.

Women were revered because through them, life continued even after death. The Goddess was shown with full bosom and belly to indicate positive aspects of a woman.

During this time, men had the dangerous job of hunting because they were more expendable than women while women learned to be the domesticated ones, staying at the cave to perform small agricultural tasks and continue the proliferation of the species.

Eventually, man changes from nomadic hunter to stationary farmer, expanding on the agricultural knowledge women had developed. Women continue to farm so man has time on his hands and begins to develop religion, law, culture. Women, however, have not lost their role as the birther or their roles as farmers so they continue in the same fashion.

With these items also come power, greed, corruption, jealousy. Men learn to possess and women fall into place as a possession. Eventually the role of possessed instead of blessed is codified into the culture, religion, society and women have worked ever since to be recognized again as a necessity instead of a curse.

[lukasahero]

79. You disprove your own conclusion

I agree with your thesis but the conclusion you come to (i.e. - it dates back so far) is the opposite of what your thesis reveals. The lengthier history is the one where woman was revered.

I don't have an answer to the original question but I can note that not all cultures are/were patriarchal (that's not to say they were specifically matriarchal either - some are more matrilineal/matrifocal and others are simply more equitable). Most notably several Native American cultures including the Pueblo, Cherokee, Iroquois, Huron, Hopi, Zuni, Navaho as well as indigenous peoples in North Africa (the Tuareg), Crete, Minoa, Somoa, Tonga, Mexico (the Zapotek), and Canada (the Innu) are non-patriarchal.

For the record, Judaism is matrilineal.

[bobbieinok]

94. Isn't part of this the male need to be sure that what he's

acquired will be inherited by 'his own' children? Therefore his wife must be a virgin and have no opportunity to have intercourse with any other man.

[Mari333]

40. Been studying and researching this all my life, all my life

since I was a child..when I was 8, and my mother and father told me, via their Catholicism, that women were "evil"...as a young girl, I never bought any of it. Study mythology, study matrilineal societies, read Barbara Walker's book Women's Encyclopedia of Myths and Secrets
read Maritas Gimbutas book Goddesses and Gods of Neolithic Europe
read Joseph Campbell's studies on human mythology
I have always been infuriated by the fact that as a woman, I was delegated to second class personhood..anger motivated me to find out why
From childhood to my age now, at 52, I have studied..the research is incredible, once you begin looking at it..the archaic bullshit patterns of misogyny towards women that start early on in many patriarchal religions , the hatred of women in writings by St Paul, St Augustine, and the burning times when women were murdered for nothing...read the Malleus Mallefecorum, otherwise known as The Witches Hammer, where women , wise older women, are scapegoated for everything in there...religious men used this book to kill women..
And when I had sons, I realized how men are also relegated to archaic and stupid roles, and taught to hate women as young boys.
The worst thing you can call another boy is a "woman"..I cut that bullshit out right away with my own sons and let them know how wrong it was..they are decent human beings now.
In a sense, I appreciate the fact that my parents told me women were evil...it was a blessing in disguise..it made me search for the truth as to why any human being would tell a little girl she was evil, and sent me on a journey thru life to prove them wrong, and find out why...Now I know being a woman is the best and greatest gender I could ever be. I love being a woman.
anyway, good luck..theres a LOT of research out there with answers.

[G_j]

47. great post

I hadn't read this when I posted my more simplisitic version above.
I watched a wonderful film recently about Maritas Gimbutas, very eye opening. Joseph Campbell was the first person who got me thinking about this. good stuff..

[redqueen]

65. Thanks for the references!

I agree it starts in the home, with both men and women. And your reference to the biggest insult for a male is key.

I still wonder... many are comfortable with their daughters wearing workboots and jeans, joining the military, etc.... but these same people will gasp at the suggestion that their boys wearing pink sandals.

Long way to go...

[Mari333]

I think the USA is sickenly obnoxiously adolescent right now

and in one of the worst times in History for women. Chest thumping, adolescent, and angry little boys running the show. C students like Bush and Cheney...idiots.
Any woman with any sense of intelligence and any woman who owns her own soul knows this. Thats why its so difficult for me to live here, and watch the US bully the rest of the world, destroy the earth, and murder innocent human beings, and destroy families.
It makes me physically ill. It has hurt my sons as I watch them struggle with what being a "man" is, in a society that is this warped.
It makes me very angry, and when I was in Ireland, I noticed it was no where near as macho and adolescent as it was when I returned to the states.
Its so childish here. Yet, the largest demographic group in the USA is women, baby boomer women.
Cherokee say that nurturing energy coming back to take over the world is like watching the grass grow.
Nurturing energy comes from men, and from women. Decent men and decent women. Doesnt matter if its a male or female body, its the spirit of the person thats the nurturer.
Someone like Condi Rice is a monster...someone like Ghandi isnt.'
The nurturer will come back, and it better happen soon because this world is going to hell in a handbasket.

[redqueen]

105. Yes it is

And it makes me nuts, because as you say the largest demographic group is women. As you say it is not one's sex that determines if you're decent. This is obvious in the values / choices of many women. I've had the 'pink sandals for your son' conversation with many women, and despite their willingness to encourage their daughters to be whatever they want to be, they still insist on a stranglehold on their sons. It makes me sad.

It makes me realize the reality behind Lysistrata, you assume your sisters will listen, but that is not always the case.

[Mari333]

114. True.....!

I have always told my sons they can be whatever they want..and if they are gay, thats fine..even when they were little..They are all hetero, but they have met and know many gay folks and families, and they know a lot because I wanted to expose them to everyone in society..they are white males, and heterosexual...therefore I KNEW I was in for the fight of my life making sure they didnt turn into asshole republicans.
They didnt....woohoooo

[bobbieinok]

96. I remember how shocked I was when my son was in 5-6th

grade and some of the boys in his classes constantly called the other boys 'you girl.'

[Mari333]

99. amazingly sad isnt it..the worst thing a boy can call another boy

and as a mother, it used to hurt terribly that they were taught by this society that I, as a woman, was the lowest thing on earth..
I made sure they heard me when I sat down to talk with them about that...and they listened..hard work to fight the "system" but it can be done.

[redqueen]

108. Bless you for taking the time

Too many don't realize the insidious nature of these kinds of insults, and just accept it.

[Mari333]

112. well I figured if I was going to be a mom

I was going to attempt to do it right. I have never worked that hard at any other job..dayum! its hard work!
I cant wait til I have grandkids so I can watch my sons all go thru having "teenagers"
hahahahahahahahahaha I will gloat.

[ilovenicepeople]

134. That's so true

I was just thinking back to my child hood while reading this discussion(a good one I must say:"A GOOD ONE!")And by coincidence I was just thinking of the name calling: "Girlie boy" that I received and dished out while in elementary school, and the fact that the demeaning of the female(my favorite type of male by the way) didn't even strike me as being wrong. So YES "too many don't realize the insidious nature of the insults,and I did just accept it" :hi:

[redqueen]

106. Same as when men call each other "bitch" as an insult

or "pantywaist", or "pussy", or any other of the dozens of insults that are centered around femininity.

[AmyDeLune]

124. One of my male friends

who, at 6'4" with a full beard, is one of the most uneffemenant men I know, and he often wears skirts (not kilts) saying that he finds them far more convenient and comfortable to wear than slacks. He also gets insulted for it quite a bit.

[AG78]

44. As Homer Simpson might say

It's because we're stupid. That's why everyone does everything.

But aside from that, it's about power. Whether it be material, political, monetary, sexual, it doesn't matter. Existence is a struggle against itself, and we humans probably won't ever escape that.

[sandnsea]

54. Protection from attack

Survival probably, orginally. If one tribe is starving, desperation will lead them to attack another. The strongest have to do the fighting. Nothing else would matter because each tribe would send their strongest, which are men. Women also have to be with the children because women have the babies and the breasts for feeding. It's a natural order.

Whether it's cultural or biological or both, it's turned into an engrained need for men to be the heroes and women to worship them.

My 2.

[pnb]

59. This might be overly simplistic...

...but because of the fact that men are more often than not physically stronger than women, men have often done things simply because we could. I really believe that if the positions were reversed and women were able to physically dominate men for the most part, we'd see a role reversal to what we have scene through history.

We do it because we can. It wasn't until more and more laws started appearing saying that we couldn't anymore that things began evening out.

[Nadienne]

62. Women are treated badly

because men can get away with it. And while some "decent" men may frown upon the abuse of women (because women are things to protect), others who really are decent frown on the abuse of women because we are people, just like they are.

[truthspeaker]

63. Power. Men have more physical power, so historically they subjugated women

It's not about value or reason.

[shance]

71. Jane Goodall might throw in her experience with the Chimpanzees as well

I think it is a more primitive response to physical power.

From my own perspective as a woman, I think that patriarchy has a lot to do with it as well.

If there was a solution to the oppression and cruelty towards women, one thing that would certainly make a dent in the problem would be for women to pool our energy together as more a family of females. I believe weve lost that through the years.

Its not about the exclusion of men, its more about women re-connecting, finding our footing as a species and learning to value who we are as a gender.

Women throughout the centuries have been dominated by men and I think as a result have been conditioned, and have learned to defer to men primarily as a means of survival . Prior to the religious wars, history seems to indicate women had much more power and were deified. It was also an imbalance of power where women primarily ruled, but at least it was better for women way back when. (A good book is When God Was a Woman)

I think America and other European countries have a great opportunity to use our power and independence as women to help balance out the domination over women that is ocurring in other countries, and lets not kid ourselves, it is here in the states too, although to a lesser degree, I believe largely due to our economy and standard of living. If that crumbles I worry that the status of women could very negatively be affected.

However, here in America I think the responsibility lies largely in the hands of us as women, who have become rather complacent and take for granted the rights our mothers and grandmothers, and great grandmothers (and fathers and grandfathers and great-grandfathers) worked hard to attain. Most women dont know that Elizabeth Cady Stanton and Susan B. Anthony worked most of their lives, (risked their lives on ocassion) on womens suffrage and never lived to see their right to vote. But who do we think of when we think of womens suffrage? *If we think about it.*

Our history and contribution to the world as women has been largely ignored and disregarded through history. Until we see our power, value and tremendous importance in re-balancing the energy of the planet, it seems to me that men wont be able to fully appreciate it either. How can men value us if we dont? Thats simplistic but I think we have to curtail the looking outward for approval. I think more often than not, tend to hold ourselves back by not realizing our capabilities and also coming together more as groups and tribes*.

I think it would help too if women need see our value as a whole, and less as an individual. I think the same could be said for men and humanity in general.

This is probably more of a problem here in the USA and other European countries. I think women in other countries definitely realize the power in women working together. Perhaps we have lost alot of that in the states because we havent had to come together in the past thirty or so years.

Its the feminine energy that will save this planet if we as men and women will utilize it, value it and respect it. I think our cultures must learn to respect and value the feminine energy in males as well. Thats very important.

[HallowsEve]

72. I personally believe

There are WAY more complicated reasons than just "blaming men"

The yin and yang are fluid. There are times of balance and imbalance. We exist in a time of great imbalance, and it manifests itself in strange ways. The yin (sacred female energy) is rising and we can see through threads like this that times are changing. Soon the sacred female will once again reign alongside in balance with the sacred male...from there we descend back into imbalance little by little until we live in a yin dominated world that may likely abuse the yang. 10~31 ~O~

[cally]

73. This drives me crazy

I don't think there is one post on this thread that blames men. Why bring that tired old RW argument up????

[HEyHEY]

84. Mine blames men

[seabeyond]

116. hallows i dont often here other talk this on this board

and yes i believe this is ultimately what is happening and why even though we have evolved so women are being attacked the hardest right now. i believe it is the old male energy holding on as tight as it can out of fear if they were to just let go and embrace, oh that would be so much easier. and that is what is happening world wide with the wars and the government that has been implemented. this is why i feel sometimes that we may need another year of bushco to really be able to fart this out of life, i dont hink we have come around yet.

but i agree, equally the female can abuse theirs. i see it much in female, and seeing that is my gender, i dont allow, as i feel it is the male to bring their brothers into embracing, instead of allowing the abusive behavior through keeping mouth shut or cheering on

interesting and agree

and blame creates battle, takes away power from woman, i like to keep my own power and allow others to do their own. i dont have an issue with male making me less, the male in my life dont do this

[CrispyQ]

74. I belive some the root problem lies in religion.

I don't believe in god. One of the key issues I have with Christianity is god the FATHER, god the SON . . .

Where the fuck are the women in this religion? And if god has no gender - like I was told as a young girl, then why do we continue to refer to god in the masculine? Why don't religions come up with a genderless pronoun to refer to god?

[Nikia]

101. There is also misogyny in non Christian areas

Famale genital mutilation isn't a Christian institution. What about female infanticide in Asia? What about there being predominantly male leaders throughout recorded history reagrdless of religion?

[tritsofme]

136. Ever hear of the Virgin Mary, Mother of God?

Where the fuck are the women in this religion?

Pretty important woman in that religion if you ask me.

[HEyHEY]

78. Nature

The physical dominant presence of men combined with their lust for sex causes a snowballing affect that keeps women "in control" basically so men can have sex whenever they want.

Although, it sure hasn't worked for me.

[Mari333]

85. Nature also relegates human beings should be pooping their pants

But we learn to use the toilet.
Its more complicated then that. Its about control, and power.
Unfortunately, the patriarchal hiearchy that exists in the 3 main social contructs of the 3 major religions has just about destroyed the earth.
That has to change. fast.
And yes, there are women who belong to that patriarchal hiearchy, like Condi Rice, who are major sell outs.
and there are decent, humane, wonderful men who dont buy into that dominating shite, like my husband , who is a wonderful and gentle man.

[DrWeird]

86. Do men really fare any better?

Aren't men far more likely to be the victims of violent crime?

[Mari333]

95. Men , imho, are also relegated to stupid archaic roles

as a mother of 3 sons I found that out also...watching them grow up in a society that demanded certain behaviours from that that were absolutely ridiculous..I fought that as a mother with society all my life, and it was hard work..I won...cruel patriarchy didnt..they turned out to be good men with huge loving hearts.

[redqueen]

109. Only somewhat

Not as likely to be raped, unless they're in prison, or abducted for sex slavery (it happens to males too).

And other than that, they are also (in this country) culturally shamed for showing emotion. They're shamed into acting 'macho' (often sexist). I'm sure there's more but my brain's fried from work. aaargh.

[formernaderite]

89. In tribal/family centered societies...the individual has little role...

...within the group "some" have more worth based on how much of a perceived burden they are. So although women can rightly perform at the same level as men in western societies, in a tribal based system new information or experience does not merit the same weight as ancestral memory or tradition. The individual is also not as important except in the context of the collective.
I always chuckle under my breathe when wealthy westerners yearn to go back to nature and a tribal society. While those societies do have inherent bonuses for the clans survival...they just don't hold the individual in high regard. Women in society gained prominence when society began to revere the individual.

[jpgray]

91. It's a two way street

If women totally refused to contribute to society without an equal share, men would have to capitulate. But so many women settle for less, and men are so happy to give them less, that it becomes self-perpetuating.

[redqueen]

110. Hey you sound like Dr. Laura!!!

kidding, of course... you have a point, but one that's not usually well-received!

[jpgray]

115. I hope I don't :-)

There is a lot of social inertia that serves to keep things the way they were, and that's a big source of the trouble, but if women become complacent and settle, we will not get any closer to equality. Men will always be happy to keep women down so long as we can get away with it--when women refuse to let us, there is progress. :)

Now that survival depends more and more on smarts and social skills as opposed to physical ability or gender-based instincts, there is no real value to separating the sexes or valuing one to the exclusion of the other. Since this is the case, I think as long as women keep pushing, the obstacles will fall away one by one--they don't have much purpose anymore and in nature what's purposeless generally becomes atrophied and all but disappears given time. Hopefully that is what will happen with sexism, and gender inequality. We have differences, but our potential to contribute to a modern society is identical in nearly all cases.

[Cleita]

100. I think back when war was face to face hacking, men had

the bully advantage on account of strength and size. Not only that, women who were pregnant or with small children were even more at a disadvantage. Although, legends do hint at warrior women, their role was more in defending the homestead behind the men in the forefront. In the Bronze Age when war became a fact of life the men on the losing side were slain and the women and children taken into slavery.

Imagine if you have large populations of slave women, who are treated as inferiors, I think over the ages it becomes institutionalized. I don't think we need to tolerate this today, because war technology makes everyone pretty equal in the combat zone. I think it's time to start raising a new generation of women to stand their ground, not only on the battlefield but at work and at home as well.

[Nikia]

107. Women were preganant or had young children most of their life

Well once they reached maturity, they tended to get pregnant. There is some evidence that they might not have been fertile as soon after birth as modern Western women, but they were often pregnant again by the time their child reached 4 or 5. Since they didn't practice modern birth control (some cultures may have had some forms of birth control), they were often having children until menopause. If they survived that long, they were no longer a strong young adult by the time their youngest child was a teenager. Most women were either children, pregnant or with small children, or elderly women, unsuited for being warriors or defending themselves as effectively as men.
Although propegating the species and caring for small children is still important, women can delay or limit their families. We can have several years where we are strong adults without having to worry about taking care of babies or being pregnant. For that matter, men or other women can help us raise babies too. I think that birth control and family planning can help improve the status of women in the devloping world.

[Cleita]

113. Contrary to popular perception, women had a variety of

birth control methods available to them in the ancient world including abortion, which mid-wives were also trained to do. There was the herb Sylphium, now extinct, that was very popular because it acted like a birth control pill.

Often big families were desired as well because of the high infant mortality rate. Not that many babies survived into adulthood. So marrying at a young age, a girl might be pregnant many times but only raise two or three children to adulthood.

There are also the Saromation women, Herodotus wrote about. Believed to be decendents of Amazons and Scythians, the Saromation women fought with the men in battle usually as archers on horseback. The young girls were not allowed to take a mate until they had taken their first head in battle. This no doubt ensured enough warrior maidens per generation, who wouldn't be pregnant or saddled down with small children.

Eventually, even these independent barbarian women were exterminated by the more advanced Greeks and Macedonians.

[Mari333]

102. If you possibly can, SEE THIS MOVIE

It will blow your mind.


http://www.moviemail-online.co.uk/films/5662

[Bunny]

118. I'm kinda burnt out on this issue lately, so I

don't have much to contribute, other than to THANK everyone for a civilized discussion. I knew it could be done, and I feel much better seeing it in action. :pals:

[Kanary]

121. With so much of it right here at DU, how can we expect any different

in the rest of the world.

Equality and support starts at home.

Kanary

[noiretextatique]

125. the downfall of woman conincided with the rise of patriarchy

and partriarchial religions. maly daly's "gynecolgy" lays it all out.
i'm too tired to write anymore write now...what a killer week!!!
thanks for a timely thread, cally :hi:

[DaveSZ]

126. Conservatives/Fundies want women to be subservient to men.

I think this is why so many redneck hick freepers hate Hillary; they can't stand a successful woman because they feel it's a threat.

That's also why they want to overturn Roe V Wade and Title IX.

[noiretextatique]

140. indeed....woman hatred is the father of all hatred, imho eom

[qwlauren35]

128. I think it's biological...

When I think about the animal kingdom, group mobility is largely dictated by whether or not it is mating season. The world STOPS for mating season. And once a female mates, if she has to do ANYTHING for her young, her mobility is reduced until the job is done. The males then are required to defend the females and their young. For the good of the group, they are effectively pinned down as well.

With this said, if the number of females gets too large, the community is at risk, because they cannot defend themselves. If the number gets too small, the community dies out. So, there has to be a balance...

Nature has decided as a result to make females more populous in many species. In the human species, more women are born and more women survive, both at birth and through old age. Because of the long gestation and care-taking periods for human infants, at some point, mothers are relatively helpless. Additionally, the elderly are relatively helpless, and more of them are women. And the young are relatively helpless... and more of them are women.

I think with humans, it is an odd catch-22. For all of the endeavors, that require strength and mobility, hunting, exploring, construction projects, defense, etc., there is strength in numbers. So men are more valued... ironically, it is the nature of such endeavors that some men will die. Balance...

In the beginning of time, when a community only survived if ALL members actively participated in obtaining food and water, I think there probably was less tendency to devalue women. But as we became "civilized", and we expanded our repetoire beyond obtaining nutrients and reproducing, the things that got added were primarily things that MEN valued. And reproduction was taken for granted.

I do not think that there is a single culture on this earth today where women hold a HIGHER position than men. So while it may seem to be "cultural", it is not isolated. Its simply a relative thing from culture to culture. ALL cultures in some way elevate men over women.

[Piperay]

129. Original sin...

Eve, a woman is responsible for man and woman both being cast out of the Garden of Eden, so women are weaker and not as smart as men.(anyway that's fundie belief) BWAHAHAHAHAHA. :puke:

[WilliamPitt]

130. Physical weakness + testosterone = slavery

An average woman - given enough time, physical training, mass and lethal skill - could be more than a match for an average man. Nature in the raw, however, made men bigger and stronger...and hostile. That's the testosterone, a drug women are not addicted to.

The solution? A moral code, taught by generations, that speaks the truth of equality beyond physicality.

[bloom]

131. NPR had a segment on HIV in India, today

Mentioned poor women in India being sold as sex slaves. Truck driver men picking up HIV on the road - passing it around - and to their wives....

Reading some of the posts made me think about respect of women as a societal phenomena. Taxing adequately to provide social supports to women - could prevent a lot of abuse. But in the case of women who have no choice but to be prostitutes - it is men at all levels of society who might see this as a "benefit". So why would they change it? (India not, of course being alone in this. The History channel had an interesting show about sex and the Vietnam War and how there were whorehouses on base at one point - so they could supposed regulate them, hmmmm.)

I see the US as empire-builder because we can - with women going along that have bought into the need for secuity... as similar to men abusing women because they can. And there are women who abuse men because THEY can... but as a society - I think to be a strong and good civilization - women need to be protected. (And maybe men need more protection, as well). As someone suggested, without laws, society can pretty much go to hell - with wartime situations seeming like a lawless hell with rapes, torture and murder.

I also think that while Christianity is patriarchal and a pain in the neck - encouraging men to be monogamous and faithful seems like a good thing for women to me. Women as something to have sex with, perhaps a child or two with one or more - is not in the best interests of women, IMO. While sexual freedom - might seem like a great thing. I'm not convinced.

I think the conservatives are really blowing it with the FMA thing they are trying to stir up. I think the more people who marry - the better. Of course, as far as HIV goes - if people aren't monogamous while married - it can be worse than not being married at all.


IOW - sex, power, morality, respect and the lack thereof.

[Rex]

137. It's because men are kinda insane and love to make war.

Women are usually just collateral damage, but they shouldn't take it personally - a man values other lifeforms (almost any thing living) far less than a woman does. IMNSHO.

[greymattermom]

139. why?

Jealousy. In the US women are taking over the major professions such as medicine and law. Guys are not getting college degrees. It will be interesting in a few years.