Moral superiority: Seculars vs Religious

[Zenith]

Why compare human behavior to lions? Elephant herds are led by females. When my female dog was in heat, she would have mated with any dog that entered the yard. Male Grizzlies will eat their own young.

My idea was: this "alpha male" happens in the nature. I knew about lions, I knew about chimpanzees, and I know there are a lot more, but 2 examples should suffice.
I also know that bonobo chimpanzees are led by a female, and they are most closely related to, well... the other chimpanzees, which are lead by males.

Certainly there is a wide diversity in the animal kingdom, but seeing similar traits between different kinds of animals, and seeing a similar approach in traditional and even ancient human civilizations should make one consider the possibility that our social treatment of women might be influenced by inherited natural instincts or that those natural instincts somehow favor certain behaviors. It could be that we inherited this 'gene' from our common ancestor, possibly altered it as time passed, or that we developed it independently in our own line of species.

I believe it is virtually impossible to test whether a behavior (like how we treat women) is written in our genes or not. It would be likely, though, that stupid people and / or people who start their life outside of a culture (like a jungle boy) could show us more of what our nature actually is like. A stupid man who lives in a permissive society might beat his wife and children to show who's the authority in the house (alpha male pride / like a gorilla hitting his chest with its fists) and / or influenced by the fact that men are stronger than women and men might be more oriented towards physical fight / battle than women, so it would be only a struggle to exercise will, where nature favors men. It might not require social indoctrination / influence to make a stupid man beat his wife. The tribal societies do have a culture which could influence people against their natural behavior, while an environment in which any one member might be required to be alive and happy for the tribe to survive could teach people to treat the others in the group equally, regardless of gender.

Regardless of whether I am correct about this behavior of men towards women, that it is something in our genes or not, we have our brains developed inasmuch as to be able to restrain and train ourselves to be otherwise, because we can understand what our actions can lead to and have ideas of what could work better.

Regarding monogamy / polygamy: I believe we are social monogamous. I believe that a man and a woman can best raise their children and provide the emotional support the child needs if they are in a one-to-one relationship; and they provide stronger emotional support for one another if there's a one-to-one relationship, more than they can do if there was one-to-many or many-to-many. On the other hand, I don't think one's nature can prevent him / it from having sex with someone else, as long as there is sexual pleasure, even enhanced by physical appearance, which applies between a man and any woman and vice versa. Besides, many occurrences of cheating happen because one's partner has not been satisfying him / her emotionally and / or sexually.

The example with the "walking marriage" could hint at social monogamy.

Traditional hawaiian society: this reminds me of the early books of the Old Testament (and thus, of the jews): they did not have the term "marriage", "pre-marital sex", that which is translated as husband in the original hebrew means "man" and wife in the original hebrew means "woman", they had no ritual of marriage, the man would take / buy her from her father, and when he had enough of her he would throw her out and take another one, or more. The problem with the woman fucking with someone else might simply be a matter of "I'm not the father! I might leave my inheritance to someone else's child !" issue in a property owning mindset. Regarding polygamous societies: I wonder, how did they deal with incest? I mean, no one of sexual maturity knows his parents, so when they fuck, they fuck with all their brothers, sisters and cousins. No?

(side note)
I have recently watched this video on monogamy (nothing about men treating their women):



He's not Richard Dawkins, but I suspect he's not talking bullshit.

---

It's still not valid: the pagan gods (and thus, in pagan religions) did not give any commandments to people on how to behave and how to treat women, etc. They simply demanded offerings and that was all. It did develop later on, as ideologies started to rise and they were transposed to gods, such as some forms of Buddhism, the belief in "good gods" and "bad goods" - which was borrowed by Judaism / Christianity from the persians, etc.

The concept of worship and unjustified authority is still present.

This reminds me of Nope's link on the traditional Hawaiian society: those people were worshipping gods, those gods were "authorities", they were having a King yet they were not mistreating women. So the existence of "authority" or "religion" does not imply mistreatment of women. And the jews of the ancient times were likely not writing and teaching against women because they were worshipping a god, but because those had been their ideology before, so they would have held those views even if they had had no religion.