Current Events > How did men end up dominating the world until recently?

(+) Yeah! (+)

Men and women both existed at the same time. Why didnt the women just say no when the men decided they wanted to be the only ones allowed to rule the land and stuff?

---

Oh this will be fun

---

until recently

Men summon snek. Women summon slug. Men win

---

Men won the Super Bowl for 50+ years and then we have been winning for 2015 years straight

Thats 2070 wins TOTAL, boy we really are good at this


---

Because the world was more violent and physical

---

Its called physical prowess. From the dawn of existence, males were the ones who hunted for food. Once the shift to agriculture happened, males were doing all of the labor intensive work. Homes were passed down to the next of kin which was a male. Then once religion came into the picture, it was used to discriminate women.

Sexual Dimorphism.

---

Me see Jane

---

Probably all started with men generally being more physically imposing, then snowballed from there

---

BlG DICK POWER

---

Uh, don't they still do? I mean yeah socially females have a lot of power in the west. But the type of people in charge haven't changed at all worldwide.

---

SpiritSephiroth posted...

Uh, don't they still do? I mean yeah socially females have a lot of power in the west. But the type of people in charge haven't changed at all worldwide.

They kind of have though. I'm sure there are many women who could take on Joe Biden in a fight.

---

Mostly due to the change in our society the past century. Otherwise take away all of modern days advantages and the goverment and things would return to that status quo in very little time.

---

Mostly intrinsic differences between men and women and the harsh realities of an uncaring world. I think the technological advancements of the 20th century did more for the expansion of women's roles in the world than nearly all of the feminist activism and rhetoric.

You can read some interesting articles on the pre-Kurgan invasion/migration into Europe. A popular hypothesis was in Europe, prior to the Kurgans, the cultures of Europe were matriarchal.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kurgan_hypothesis#Kurgan_culture

For emphasis

Gimbutas believed that the expansions of the Kurgan culture were a series of essentially hostile military incursions where a new warrior culture imposed itself on the peaceful, matrilinear (hereditary through the female line), matrifocal, though egalitarian cultures of "Old Europe", replacing it with a patriarchal warrior society,[26] a process visible in the appearance of fortified settlements and hillforts and the graves of warrior-chieftains:

The process of Indo-Europeanization was a cultural, not a physical, transformation. It must be understood as a military victory in terms of successfully imposing a new administrative system, language, and religion upon the indigenous groups.[27]

In her later life, Gimbutas increasingly emphasized the authoritarian nature of this transition from the egalitarian process of the nature/earth mother goddess (Gaia) to a patriarchal society and the worship of the father/sun/weather god (Zeus, Dyaus). This supposed egalitarian, mother-goddess-worshipping society is not the same as a matriarchy in Gimbutas's view. Matriarchal hierarchy structures in Gimbutas's opinion are the same as a patriarchal society, not the actual opposite: an egalitarian society without hierarchy.

---

Should be obvious. Men are bigger and stronger. Also more naturally driven to dominate. In reality women only have as much power as men allow them to have.

---

For most of human history beating someone to death with a club and taking all their things was considered acceptable behavior. Things haven't really changed that much outside we usually try to punish people in some circumstances when they attack others, reducing violence to an all time low. But in the state of nature violence is king.

---

Low quality bait.

---