PATRIARCHY & SEXISM EXPLAINED

I have a theory. I have long pondered how to explain and counter the obscenely sexist cultures that claim innate superiority of males. These cultures, you know who you are, claim that males are intellectually, spiritually, physically and morally superior to females. They hold that nature or God designed the hierarchy with males at the top, as evidenced by the universal dominance of males. If women were supposed to have rights, why is patriarchal dominance the norm around the world?

Confucius is reported to have said “One hundred females are not worth one testicle." 

Different cultures act upon this belief in varying degrees by controlling, repressing, discriminating against, murdering, raping, usurping, demeaning, neglecting and generally abusing the rights of females in every imaginable way. The worst of the offenders baldly excuse these acts with a claim that this is just the way it is, women must undergo clitorectomy to be controlled, men are paid more because they are worth more, girls don’t need education, sons are more valuable so female infanticide is warranted, it’s the natural order, or maybe God’s holy mandate. Women, due to their inferior judgment, morals and intelligence, must always be ruled by men. Women exist to serve the needs of men. That’s the way it is; that’s the way it has always been, and trying to change it would be a perversion of nature. 

I don’t buy it. 

There is, however, truth to the claim that patriarchal domination is pervasive, and that it has been for a very long time. I resolutely reject, however, that it is a divine mandate, or that it will always be so. My theory to explain pervasive sexism is that humans are evolving as a species in a way that parallels the evolution of an individual. Males are mostly bigger and stronger physically than females, so males have generally used their testosterone driven size and aggressiveness to usurp whatever they can from women, and like any smart oppressor, they have used their big brains to try and rationalize it (oppression is a lot easier if you can get the oppressed to buy into the arrangement.) 

If you hand a chocolate bar to a two year old, another toddler who has none and wants it may well grab it away- if she can. Before we develop a moral sense, and compassion for those around us, “might makes right” appears to be the default paradigm. Young humans eventually learn to feel the needs of those around them. Most of us learn to share in the preschool years and we begin to grasp altruism around the age of seven. Young humans can still be selfish and inconsiderate, but most move rapidly toward being socially responsible and compassionate beings by the time they hit puberty.

While we are still a shockingly violent species (WHO Violence Report ), I see many hopeful signs of the human race approaching a new consciousness of and respect for the rights of others. The League of Nations, the United Nations, and the World Court are all examples of human attempts to replace “might makes right” with just, rational and nonviolent means of resolving conflicts. The U.S., of late, is firmly in the camp of “might makes right”- the military muscle gets to call the shots (eat the chocolate), but I see glimmers of enlightenment sprouting up all over the place. It is only a matter of time till we reach that level of maturity where threatening, brutalizing or killing people to get what we want will be looked upon as the shameful, shocking, amoral crudity that it is. I place humankind at the cusp of puberty, and I just hope I live long enough to see us move solidly into the next phase, zits, braces, painful crushes and all.