Primitive Male Urges Underlie Women Oppression

Abstract

This opinion article argues that men's oppression of women is a remnant of primitive 'animal behaviour' that persists despite human cognitive and technological development. The author proposes that male control over women most likely arose from differences in physical abilities, larger muscular bodies and testosterone-supported aggression, and that this discrimination was later substantiated over several millennia by strict religious rules. The article contends that such oppression is most prominent in non-developed populations and in those with extreme religious regulations, and less so in more developed Western societies or among non-religious people, and notes that many oppressed women publicly justify the disparity. To explain its persistence, the author considers its past and present benefits to both genders: the historical roles of men as hunters and warriors and of women as collectors, the family as a frame in which control over the spouse strengthened weak male personalities, and the protection and food supply that women received in return. Religious rules are presented as the main obstacle to women's efforts to gain equality. The article contrasts this with animal herds led by an alpha couple or by females. It ends by asking whether women could lead humanity toward a less aggressive and more peaceful world, and suggests that the first step would be the unification of women, nationally and then internationally.

Abstract prepared by the editorial office from the full text of the article; the authors did not supply one.