On Mar 6, 1:24 pm, Day Brown <daybr...@hughes.net> wrote:



lorad...@cs.com wrote:
Your ability to gloss over and conflate disparate facts in arriving at
a novel response is impressive.
I am hard pressed to choose where to even start.. and believe I'll let
it slide this time.

Your position is that the warrior class ran virtually every culture
all thru history because you have not researched looking for any
exceptions. Given the vast number of examples that fit within your
point of view, reasonable.

But if you search, or even surf, you can find some few cultures that
were, and in fact still are, run by women. They are less than one in a
million, but they are here now, and always have been. The
domestication of the horse, the cart, the wheel, bronze, writing, and
stock breeding all emerged in SE Europe within a thousand years or so
of each other beginning in the 6th mil, and then spread across the
Steppe. That revolution changed cultures and values.

I have not argued that all Scythians, Sarmatians, Sakyas, Sogdians, et
al, were matriarchic, but among them are some few who had an economic
and cultural impact way beyond their numbers. Kucha, for instance,
never had more than 30,000- the same size as classic Athens. And
likewise, every literate scholar in China in the 1st mil AD knew about
it. Kucha was where the translations of Western texts came from.

The fact that 99.99% of Asia and Europe were run by the warrior class
does not detract from the lessons we can learn from these obscure
places run by women. And since women are obviously taking over, They
are researching these few examples of matriarchy. If you want to know
what the female leadership thinks, then take the time to find out for
yourself. You wont be able to stop what is coming down, but you can
get out of the way.

My position is not as polarized as you would have it.
I am quite convinced that the late mesolithic period extending to
Starchevo, and Vinca were all periods in which women generally had
more influential societal roles than women subsequently did until,
say, the mid 1900s.

Relics of this influence can even be seen in the fusion of
matriarchical and patriarchical power figures in european mythology.

My oblique objections involved perceived historical imprecisions..
and not any imagined slights to male-oriented sensibilities.
And regarding that.. a small sampling of your other posts shows that
this seems to be a oft chosen topic...

Myself, I don't care that much about it... other than to note that
womens' growing positions of importance in western society is a
product of advancing technology and is thereby artificially
supported.

Should societal dependence upon technology regress... so would also
the social position of women regress in comparison with men.