Yeah that makes sense. You should first make it crystal clear though that it's a misconception that the term 'natural' should always be associated with 'good' or 'right'. And point out that there's many bad things that are natural, like rape and murder, that we now know are wrong. And so there's nothing sexist in saying that the stronger sex will naturally become the dominant ruling sex in any society that isn't enlightened enough to realise that the sexes are equal in terms of intelligence, or any society that isn't just enough to have equal rights.
Exactly. I'm not saying that this is any good, despite being natural, because it obviously isn't. In a perfect world, physical differences between the genders wouldn't be a thing, but our world isn't perfect.
Ever heard of geography determines destiny? It's a concept of a region holding more or less value over other regions.
If you restarted human history and came back to Earth 2.0 in their version of 2021 you will see basically the same world powers in their respective regions.
The native americans were never going to be able to beat the old world. Why? There was no native animals that could be domesticated to pull a plow. Without relying on animal power they could only rely on human power (slavery being the most efficent use with lack of technology) thus technolgy would be stunted vs the old world that had centuries of living with animals giving them a boon of a greater immunity as well as the freeing up of people to do other things like invent better math and invent simple machines to make things easier (wheels and pulleys). The Aztecs were advanced (didnt have wheels nor pulleys 100% raw human power) but they were never going to achieve even the bronze age (if that was even possible given the ore depth) by the time the old world came knocking. For the simple fact that europeans who had an exorbitantly large tolerance to disease vs the incredibly weak tolerance the natives had. Given the tech difference victory was assured. Life isn't fair for countries neither.
iin That I think patriarchy is the natural social order?
← View full post
Yeah that makes sense. You should first make it crystal clear though that it's a misconception that the term 'natural' should always be associated with 'good' or 'right'. And point out that there's many bad things that are natural, like rape and murder, that we now know are wrong. And so there's nothing sexist in saying that the stronger sex will naturally become the dominant ruling sex in any society that isn't enlightened enough to realise that the sexes are equal in terms of intelligence, or any society that isn't just enough to have equal rights.
--
Anonymous Post Author
2 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
2
2
Exactly. I'm not saying that this is any good, despite being natural, because it obviously isn't. In a perfect world, physical differences between the genders wouldn't be a thing, but our world isn't perfect.
--
LloydAsher
2 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
Ever heard of geography determines destiny? It's a concept of a region holding more or less value over other regions.
If you restarted human history and came back to Earth 2.0 in their version of 2021 you will see basically the same world powers in their respective regions.
The native americans were never going to be able to beat the old world. Why? There was no native animals that could be domesticated to pull a plow. Without relying on animal power they could only rely on human power (slavery being the most efficent use with lack of technology) thus technolgy would be stunted vs the old world that had centuries of living with animals giving them a boon of a greater immunity as well as the freeing up of people to do other things like invent better math and invent simple machines to make things easier (wheels and pulleys). The Aztecs were advanced (didnt have wheels nor pulleys 100% raw human power) but they were never going to achieve even the bronze age (if that was even possible given the ore depth) by the time the old world came knocking. For the simple fact that europeans who had an exorbitantly large tolerance to disease vs the incredibly weak tolerance the natives had. Given the tech difference victory was assured. Life isn't fair for countries neither.