A 400m runner is superior to another 400m runner if he can run 400m faster (without banned substances). Athletics is a simple business.
A football team is superior to another football team if it scores more goals, and lets in fewer goals, against the same kind of opposition. Except that there are a few secondary considerations like playing ‘open and attractive’ football (whatever that is – i heard someone say it on the radio) and good sportsmanship, and achieving success by building something rather than simply by buying expensive players. Football is more complex than running, but far more straightforward than life.
Now here’s a sentence for you:
Men are superior to women.
What information does this statement contain? None, really – at least no information about the world as it is. That is because people are not measured by goals scored, or speed around one lap, or any identifiable, measurable criteria. So you simply can’t know what ‘superior’ might be referring to here. It just doesn’t mean anything.
Here’s another sentence:
Women are superior to men.
Equally, this tells you nothing. So what is the difference between the two?
Well, we all know already what men and Women are, or we think we do. A flat statement like those above isn’t going to convey any information to people who already have a far richer understanding of human nature than anything that can be said in a short sentence.
But these sentences do tell you something – perhaps quite a lot – about the person who is speaking, and how they prioritse the things they regard as important. You can easily imagine what kinds of evidence each of these two speakers might cite to support their case, and therefore what their priorities are.
Let’s have another go.
the world is a better place when it treats Women as superior to men.
It’s hard to point to real evidence for this because it has so rarely happened. Perhaps in certain parts of Europe, among the upper classes, from the late 11th century until the 15th century. (There are people who argue it’s also the case now, by the way). But generally, people subscribe to this statement through their own thought experiments – that is, ‘what would it be like if…’.
the world is a darker place when it treats Women as inferior to men.
Conversely, there is so much evidence that this is true that it is hard to know where to start. Perhaps the simplest thing to do is to look at the top and the bottom of the World Economic Forum Global Gender Gap report (2016) rankings:
Top: Iceland, Finland, Norway, Sweden
Bottom: Saudi Arabia, Syria, Pakistan, Yemen
Where would you rather live, even as a man? Exactly. So much for the benefits of patriarchal culture.
But i am guilty by implication of a logical fallacy here which is not uncommon among people arguing for Gynarchy. We should be aware of it, because we undermine our own case when we adopt it:
(1) treating Women as inferior is demonstrably bad news for everyone, therefore:
(2) treating Women as equal to men is better, therefore:
(3) treating Women as superior to men must be better still
No.3 is better, but not because it follows logically from (2); it doesn’t. It is better because it makes us better people. It tames the more uncivilised instincts of the male and raises Woman in Her own estimation.
The act of calling Women our superiors may not convey much real information, but doing so is good for you, and good for the world, and it has an instinctive resonance that roots you in, rather than puts you in opposition to, the planet. Keep calm, and worship Women.