back to basics

Writing a blog like this, you get to meet some interesting people with some interestingly different ideas. It’s all very enlightening i’m sure. But can we just nail a couple of basic points?

YES I KNOW MEN ARE BIGGER (etc etc) THAN WOMEN. That doesn’t ‘disprove’ Gynarchy (as if there were something to prove). But thank you for your feedback.

Gynarchy doesn’t need proof because it isn’t claiming anything. It is neither a religion nor a reasoned position constructed on an evidence base. It is a proposal, based on the experience of human nature, of an attractive alternative model.

Secondly, for the benefit of any readers who are not already on side, it is worth making one other observation: perhaps the size (etc) of men is just the point. Wouldn’t it actually be a rather good idea, given the finite supply of human talent and energy, to have the gender that is best suited to lifting and building and killing things to do just that? The consequence of which is that thinking and leading and education would fall more heavily to the other gender, who, as it happens, clearly outperform their male contemporaries at the start of the educational road anyway.

i’m not trying to tell anyone what to do. i’m just saying that if you’re going to keep banging on about natural advantages, it’s worth noting that the consequences cut both ways.

There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio,
Than are dreamt of in your philosophy.


One thought on “back to basics

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s