And you'll have better luck if you educate yourself on and refer to the latest in what various branches of science have to say rather than just relying on how you are pretty sure things are and voicing an opinion based in that...
"Christopher Boehm is an anthropologist and primatologist who is currently the Director of the Jane Goodall Research Center at the University of Southern California. He believes that suppressing our primate ancestors’ dominance hierarchies by enforcing these egalitarian norms was a central adaptation of human evolution. Enhanced cooperation lowered the risks of Paleolithic life for small, isolated bands of humans and was likely crucial to our survival and evolutionary success."
"Bonobo muscles have changed the least [from our common ancestor], which means they are the closest we can get to having a ‘living’ ancestor,” according to the research head of the George Washington University Center for the Advanced Study of Human Paleobiology."
"Bonobos don’t just reduce tension with sex. Females are grinding and G-to-G-ing their way to establishing goodwill and connectedness, or reinforcing goodwill and connectedness already in place, using sex to build a sisterhood of sorts. And bonobo sisterhood is powerful. “We don’t see infanticide or females being sexually coerced, and we don’t see males being aggressive to females in any way,” (primatologist Amy) Parish explained."
"This is not necessarily the case in many other cultures around the world despite the fact that the Standard Narrative of evolution says that men have a vested genetic interest in not supporting the offspring of other men. And yet, partible paternity, where several men have sex with a woman and are considered the father of her child is a long-standing practice in many parts of the world and a far from rare dynamic.
Polyandry was normal in pre-contact Polynesia, particularly for high caste women and still takes place in the Indian Himalayas and in parts of Tibet. In Lowland South America, and in Africa partible paternity, where two or more men mate with a woman for the purposes of producing a child, is common in many cultures. Spreading fatherly feelings throughout the group helps to maintain solidarity and cohesion as well as promotes the wellbeing of a greater number of children. Reproductive fitness (the chance that offspring will, in turn, produce their own offspring) is enhanced by cooperative alloparenting of this kind where several adults take an active interest in the lives of children."
"The three African great apes, with whom we share this rather recent Common Ancestor, are notably hierarchical. Reproductively fortunate are the high-ranking males or females, while those relegated to the bottom of the hierarchy fare less well. The same can be said of most human political societies in the world today, starting about five thousand years ago. At that time, people were beginning to increasingly live in chiefdoms, societies with highly privileged individuals who occupied hereditary positions of political leadership and social paramountcy. From certain well-developed chiefdoms came the six early civilizations, with their powerful and often despotic leaders. But before twelve-thousand years ago, humans basically were egalitarian (Knauft 1991). They lived in what might be called societies of equals, with minimal political centralization, and no social classes."
"As Saint Louis University associate professor of anthropology Katherine C. MacKinnon told me, “We had predators. And we didn’t have claws or long, sharp teeth. But we had each other. Social cooperation, including cooperative breeding, was a social and reproductive strategy that served us well.”
“To prevent the killing of their offspring, female baboons employ copulatory calls in order to attract other males, allowing multiple mating acts and creating parental confusion among the males involved. The resulting uncertainty of who the father is hence reduces the occurrence of attacks, given the newly incited risk of potentially harming their own offspring. Additionally, mating in rapid successions also entails sperm competition, and therefore fulfills the additional function of obtaining high quality sperm.”
"For the human female cervix, like that of a promiscuous macaque who may breed with ten males or more in rapid succession, actually serves not so much to block sperm, as was previously believed, as to busily filter and assess it, ideally several different types of it from several different males, simultaneously. It evolved not as a simple barrier but to sort the weak and bad and incompatible sperm from the good, suggesting by its very presence that there was a need to do such a thing — i.e., that females were mating multiply."
So yes, we are in many ways like some of our primate cousins, but not all of them have the exact same social structure or mating habits. And on top of that, humans have we’ve evolved in several ways that distinguish us from other non-human primates. The social system of patriarchy is only between 6–9 thousand years old. That’s a pretty well established anthropological fact.
“Today, most anthropologists would agree, regardless of their stance on issues such as the universality of male dominance, that an entirely different order of male dominance became associated with the rise of the large and populous agricultural states organized in terms of classes. The patriarchal systems that emerged brought women for the first time under the direct control of fathers and husbands with few cross-cutting sources of support. Women as wives under this system were not social adults, and women’s lives were defined in terms of being a wife. Women’s mothering and women’s sexuality came to be seen as requiring protection by fathers and husbands. Protecting unmarried women’s virginity appears to go along with the idea of the domestication of women and an emphasis on a radical dichotomy between the public and the private sphere.”
The Trope of The Farmer’s Daughter
How gender inequality was cemented by plowed agriculture
medium.com
“In 2013, a group of Harvard and UCLA economists did a unique study that established that the plow has had a great impact on our beliefs about men and women and about female freedom and autonomy. This is not only true in places that currently have plowed agriculture, but is still true in urban centers that once had it. Societies with a connection to plowed agriculture, as distinct from land worked with hoes or sticks, generations later still have markedly lower levels of female participation in politics and the labor force, and they rank high on the embrace of markedly gender-biased attitudes.”
“Sociologist Rae Blumberg has pointed out that it is only for less than 3% of human history and in this one type of agrarian society, that women have become fundamentally dependent on men. Plowed agriculture turned on its head the prior dynamic of women as competent, self-sufficient primary producers who make their own decisions relatively autonomously.”
So you see, I’ve actually researched my opinions before making them, and can support them with myriad sources from multiple scientific disciplines. I highly recommend it!
