Women: What is your take on this?

Question

Not really much of a sexist person, but some people rant about feminism and it's kind of annoying/amusing.

So:

In a primal, uncivilized environment, who would rule, men or women? Would it not be the compassion of a man that would save you from any kind of harm or slavery? What would you do and why?

Answer 1

In a primal, uncivilised society, the rulers are decided according to physical strength - it links back to survival of the fittest. So, of course it would be men.

What would I do? If I was treated well and free from harm, I wouldn't do anything.

Answer 2

I do not trust that the man that would rule would ensure me from harm or slavery as history has truly dictated other wise.  I would do what I have to do to have control over my own life and a say in the world around me.  I like where we are and I feel that we only need to straighten out the kinks.

Answer 3

Okay first, feminism is NOT amusing. You shoudn't find it funny that for centuries women have been second. Slaves to men. Lower life-forms and now women are finally becoming more.

Well, you just have to look at when it WAS a primal enviroment to work out the answer. Obviously men would rule. Actually, primal men are not compassionate. They are pigs who did treat women like dirt; only alive to cook, clean, breed and look after children. Also, the fact you said women need saving from slavery and harm is dispicable. In primal enviroment women would only need saving from men.

I suggest (though this isn't quite primal it still is not a civilized enviroment) you look up boudicca.

Very few men understand feminism and you certainly don't!

Answer 4

A primal, uncivilized environment quickly becomes civilized.

The problem with anarchists is they think there's some magical, natural force that preserves anarchy once it's started.  Anarchy is a power vacuum - the person or entity who 'rules' is simply the winner of the resulting power struggle.

The end result of this competition of the 'primal, uncivilized environment' is the modern world.  Look around, and judge for yourself who "rules."

Answer 5

"Would it not be the compassion of a man that would save you from any kind of harm or slavery?"

Possibly, but then who would I have to be saved from?

Answer 6

As in early primate societies (in the beginning when god created the earth) the male's (as far as we know) where the leaders. But no matter how many males beat their chest and claim to be "dominate" there always was, always has, and always will be alpha female’s in every group. There will always be that group of females (women) who're just as strong (if not stronger) then some of the males (men) with in the social group, structure, or society.  Which is the reason why we as people go back and forward on this "feminist" issue that folks refuse to let die. There will be some who're weak, and some who're strong in both the sexes. And there's nothing that anyone can do about it but suck it up and deal with it.

Answer 7

"Would it not be the compassion of a man that would save you from any kind of harm or slavery?"

Maybe. Maybe not. But presumably it would also be the men committing the harm and the slavery.