(October 21, 2012 at 12:34 pm)kılıç_mehmet Wrote: There is no reason. Under the great blue skies, men and women are equal. Indeed, they are not equal in their bodily prowess maybe, neither in their resilience and action under certain circumstances, but they share the same responsibilities towards society. If so, why should society treat them any different?
Why not bodily prowess? There are women who are physically stronger than men and also resiliant quick thinkers capable of action. It is just the society that makes them passive.
I suppose very wise societies treat both genders equal and simply nobody is suppressed. If a very advanced civilisation like Atlantis really existed, I suppose they were egalitarian.
(October 21, 2012 at 12:34 pm)Rhythm Wrote:Quote:Regarding kings, I read that in the ancient middle east kings wore fake boobies which seems like a relic of an era where rulers were naturally female.Why does it seem like that?
Why else would a king put on fake boobies???
(October 21, 2012 at 12:34 pm)Rhythm Wrote: None that I can see, but I don't see any reason to suppose suppression under matriarchy either. It might be useful to note that those societies which we do point at as being somewhat ambiguously matriarchal arising before say, the bronze age, don't seem to be much different from societies that were unambiguously patriarchal. They waged war, aggressively secured territory, men participated in all of this.
Having a matriarchal society does not mean that men are made to sit at home and cook dinner
Still, it is difficult to infer anything from just artifacts - imagine scientists in the distant future trying to infer anything about us just based upon a couple of broken laptops and rusty cars.
