3.7 KiB
Executable file
| title | description | type | draft |
|---|---|---|---|
| Evolutionary leftovers | A thesis on the societal role of men and women. | delosis | true |
It makes intuitive sense to consider an evolutionary process for society alongside the evolution of the human race and so, in order to figure out how the modern societal roles came to be, one must look at the societal roles of the past and move forwards in time to the present day.
The earliest one can go is around the birth of the anatomically modern humans, and the great migration out of Africa and into the rest of Afroeurasia, Oceania and the American continent.
From even back then, the societal roles were defined. In hunter-gatherer societies such as the ones of early humans, the male would traditionally go on long expeditions to hunt for meat, while the female would stay around a safe area, gathering herbs and tending to the young. The biology was also already emphasized at the time, with males already showing human male characteristics such as increased bone and muscle density. This means that one must explore even before that, and probably reach the time when the first social groups were formed with the intent of raising the young as tightly knit communities.
In such a scenario, the idea of a role distinction between biological genders starts to make sense.
Imagine a small group of ten males and ten females, living together and fending for themselves in a hostile environment. Now assume that all males but one die, leaving eleven members to the group, one male and ten females. Assuming a human gestation period of nine months, a year after the social group will have twenty one members, one male, ten female, and ten children.
Were the opposite to happen, one female left with ten males, a year after the group would have twelve members, ten male, one female, and one child.
From a biological and evolutionary standpoint therefore, there is a glaring distinction between the genders. Males are expendable, whilst females are not.
It makes sense in this situation to send the expendable males to hunt for food in a hostile environment, as their deaths are not as significant for the well being of the group as the death of a single female.
This however brought the caveat that women became indispencible to the group, meaning that the males, becoming stronger and more aggressive in time, could deprive females from their liberties, with the pretext of defending them from dangers, seen and unseen.
Once more complex societies started forming, and different smaller groups started to form bigger ones, this notion of protection then transformed from protecting the females from a hostile environment, to safeguarding the females from other members of other groups/tribes, since the hostile environment had been conquered. Around this idea we see the exact behaviour of cities being formed, which would frequently go to war with each other, with males being the warrior caste and the females being forced to stay at home, with strict societal rules and an expectation to care for the children. Once again, the same biological idea presents itself. Males are expendable, so females must sacrifice their liberties for the greater good.
Looking at the modern age, we see the same patterns emerge. In societies where life is still harsh and survival is not guaranteed, we still see harsh and strict codes of behaviour for women, under the pretext of protection, whilst for men we see their expendability.
In societies where the effort to fulfill basic needs becomes trivial, we see a more egalitarian approach. Since there is no seen or unseen threat to the well being of the group, males have less of a biological excuse to force their ideals on females, who in turn strive and demand the same liberties as males.