Wishbone Redemption
(?)Community Member
Offline
- Posted: Fri, 28 Apr 2006 01:23:18 +0000
Read the post before you comment.
[I've witnessed many threads dealing with feminism and sex lately, and have fostered a growing curiosity of gender and it's connotations. From those of you that know me from my Homosexuality and Gender thread, you've already seen my analysis on gender and how it relates to relationships, but I'll likely paraphrase from there somewhat. I hope to hold no bias against either sex.]
Females have, throughout history, been regarded as the weaker sex in most cultures. The reasons for this are likely derived from before recorded history, and have since then mutated into the gender perceptions our Western society possesses today.
The female sex, by definition, is a homo sapient possessing internal sexual organs, including a uterus capable of hosting an embryo (ideally) to term, and breasts to produce lactose for the born child. Women are, foremost different from men in that they bear children.
The male sex is likewise homo sapient with an external sexual organs. They differ from women principally in that they fertilize the egg, and otherwise bear no part in biologically sustaining the fetus. Women are known to possess less upper body strength than men, and slightly less strength overall.
Firstly, it is possible that the action of sexual intercourse in itself presents female as weak. In a hunter-gatherer or stone-age tribal group, men, with their external sexual organ, are required to insert it within the female, and to reach orgasm, grind into her somewhat, for lack of a better term. The female is in a vulnerable position- to obtain pleasure sexually, she must copulate with a male, considering the only other vaginal stimulants come in the form of her own digits, sticks, rocks, or pottery (depending upon the civilization). All of these being quite unsanitary, and her insides already susceptible to infection. A male could sexually assault a female, while she could not be a sexual aggressor in the same manner. The position of her sex organs makes her vulnerable. While it is possible for a woman to rape a man, the vast majority of sexual assault is perpetrated on a female.
The male has his own problems- competing for a females attention and thus breeding rights- but for the afformentioned reasons (and statistically spreaking) he could rape her just as easily. Expanding on that, a female must descriminate with whom she breeds- she can only bear a fairly small amount of offspring in her lifetime. Whereas a male has more sexual freedom, as he can impregnate many women within his lifetime, and not be required to suffer a physical or emotional drain from child birth and rearing.
Secondly, women bear children and go through menstruation cycles. In such a hunter-gatherer society, a pregnant woman would be incapable of hunting (probably a dominantly male job anyway) and, in the later months, gathering as well. Childbirth at the time had a high mortality rate. Menstruation is, in effect bleeding. She bleeds once a month- that is not conductive to survival.
As described, this could be the basis of this societies gender perceptions- women are supposedly to work in the kitchen, because that is the best place for a female incapacitated in an early society. Women are supposedly docile and obedient, because they could not be the aggressor- to take a leaf from Freud, much of the human's psychology (and hence sociology, what this is) is based around sex. Much of the gender perceptions are based around sex as well.
Originally, men wore pants because it allows for greater mobility in hunting large prey, running, you name it. Also, they have a dangly thing between their legs. Hence, pants. Females, having a sexual opening, and not a dangly thing, were better suited for open-cuffed or loose garments such as skirts- also, they need only to hike it up and squat for childbirth, cleaning up after menstruation, or any bathroom need. Men can urinate standing up, and do not experience menstruation or childbirth.
In an early society, yes. Women were weaker and lesser than men in terms of survival, and, for the above reasons, dominance. However, because of today's technology and learning in developed countries, most people neither hunt nor gather. For practical reasons in the wild, the human animal has slightly weaker female members- but we do not live in the wild.
Thus far, I have left out the particular stengths of women- for example, small-breasted women are reputed to be better archers (as pointed out by a fellow Gaian) and in terms of endurance in running, women have been proven to be slightly stronger, when compared with men with the same training. Males and females are different, but fairly equal. My point is this: in a pre-civilization nomadic-tribe 'society' (note, I did not include matriarchal societies in my post, as this is pre-civilization.) or possibly before that, when humans were more like the rest of the animal kingdom, females had a slight disadvantage, mostly due to sex and childbirth. This is my theory as to why specific gender connotations exist, particularly the idea that women are weaker than men.
In conclusion: most 'feminine' or 'masculine' traits are mere gender conceptions, originally born of sexual function.
[I've witnessed many threads dealing with feminism and sex lately, and have fostered a growing curiosity of gender and it's connotations. From those of you that know me from my Homosexuality and Gender thread, you've already seen my analysis on gender and how it relates to relationships, but I'll likely paraphrase from there somewhat. I hope to hold no bias against either sex.]
Females have, throughout history, been regarded as the weaker sex in most cultures. The reasons for this are likely derived from before recorded history, and have since then mutated into the gender perceptions our Western society possesses today.
The female sex, by definition, is a homo sapient possessing internal sexual organs, including a uterus capable of hosting an embryo (ideally) to term, and breasts to produce lactose for the born child. Women are, foremost different from men in that they bear children.
The male sex is likewise homo sapient with an external sexual organs. They differ from women principally in that they fertilize the egg, and otherwise bear no part in biologically sustaining the fetus. Women are known to possess less upper body strength than men, and slightly less strength overall.
Firstly, it is possible that the action of sexual intercourse in itself presents female as weak. In a hunter-gatherer or stone-age tribal group, men, with their external sexual organ, are required to insert it within the female, and to reach orgasm, grind into her somewhat, for lack of a better term. The female is in a vulnerable position- to obtain pleasure sexually, she must copulate with a male, considering the only other vaginal stimulants come in the form of her own digits, sticks, rocks, or pottery (depending upon the civilization). All of these being quite unsanitary, and her insides already susceptible to infection. A male could sexually assault a female, while she could not be a sexual aggressor in the same manner. The position of her sex organs makes her vulnerable. While it is possible for a woman to rape a man, the vast majority of sexual assault is perpetrated on a female.
The male has his own problems- competing for a females attention and thus breeding rights- but for the afformentioned reasons (and statistically spreaking) he could rape her just as easily. Expanding on that, a female must descriminate with whom she breeds- she can only bear a fairly small amount of offspring in her lifetime. Whereas a male has more sexual freedom, as he can impregnate many women within his lifetime, and not be required to suffer a physical or emotional drain from child birth and rearing.
Secondly, women bear children and go through menstruation cycles. In such a hunter-gatherer society, a pregnant woman would be incapable of hunting (probably a dominantly male job anyway) and, in the later months, gathering as well. Childbirth at the time had a high mortality rate. Menstruation is, in effect bleeding. She bleeds once a month- that is not conductive to survival.
As described, this could be the basis of this societies gender perceptions- women are supposedly to work in the kitchen, because that is the best place for a female incapacitated in an early society. Women are supposedly docile and obedient, because they could not be the aggressor- to take a leaf from Freud, much of the human's psychology (and hence sociology, what this is) is based around sex. Much of the gender perceptions are based around sex as well.
Originally, men wore pants because it allows for greater mobility in hunting large prey, running, you name it. Also, they have a dangly thing between their legs. Hence, pants. Females, having a sexual opening, and not a dangly thing, were better suited for open-cuffed or loose garments such as skirts- also, they need only to hike it up and squat for childbirth, cleaning up after menstruation, or any bathroom need. Men can urinate standing up, and do not experience menstruation or childbirth.
In an early society, yes. Women were weaker and lesser than men in terms of survival, and, for the above reasons, dominance. However, because of today's technology and learning in developed countries, most people neither hunt nor gather. For practical reasons in the wild, the human animal has slightly weaker female members- but we do not live in the wild.
Thus far, I have left out the particular stengths of women- for example, small-breasted women are reputed to be better archers (as pointed out by a fellow Gaian) and in terms of endurance in running, women have been proven to be slightly stronger, when compared with men with the same training. Males and females are different, but fairly equal. My point is this: in a pre-civilization nomadic-tribe 'society' (note, I did not include matriarchal societies in my post, as this is pre-civilization.) or possibly before that, when humans were more like the rest of the animal kingdom, females had a slight disadvantage, mostly due to sex and childbirth. This is my theory as to why specific gender connotations exist, particularly the idea that women are weaker than men.
In conclusion: most 'feminine' or 'masculine' traits are mere gender conceptions, originally born of sexual function.
