ALL power-minorities, women, Indigenous, battered people, homeless people, autistics, the same is true.
Power-majority is self-centered, aka narcissistic.
That is the default.
"majority RULE" means minority over-ruled/bullied, inherently.
Look at how a story in the Abrahamic religions scripture, on how women ate "the fruit of the knowledge of Good & Evil" which means they ate Morality .. got turned, by the power-majority into hating-on women for their "sin".
Women ( mothering ) ate of morality & shared it with men.
Period.
Researchers studying wasps in the Americas discovered that altruism is generalized-mothering, Buddhism perceived the same underlying-principle 25 consecutive centuries ago, the correct reading of that story in Genesis stated so, but the male-supremacism deformed the meaning until bullying women became religious-law for .. millenia..
Many years ago, in the 1990's, there were the Internet FAQs.
The Feminism FAQ of that time identified that there was a category-difference between early White feminists & early Black feminists:
White feminists wanted to be included in the White privilege that males had. They wanted their half of White entitlement.
Black feminists, being bullied both for being women & for being Black, wanted something completely different: they wanted the abuse to be forced to unexist.
That is evidence ( my life corroborates it ) that our unconscious, when bullied in 1 dimension, wants to be included in the power-majority group, but when bullied in 2+ dimensions ( each individual may have a different threshold ), then the underlying problem with bullying-itself is understood by one's unconscious, and it becomes removing bullying's rule that one's unconscious understands to be the problem.
It isn't leaving women, Indiginous people, homeless people, etc, fucked-over, while fixing it for 1 subgroup, that is going to make humankind viable, it is dismantling abuse-archy for all that can.
What would really interest me is the alignment of perceived and actual threat. This is of course anecdotal and highly localized, but in my bubble men walk home carelessly, while women often express fear. At the same time I know quite a few cases of men getting into trouble, but hardly any women who had anything worse than catcalling happen to them.
Of course it's hard to operationalize mugging and rape into a point scale, but maybe there are other ways for comparison.
I've seen a few articles about this topic, including the hypothesis that menopause is caused by reproductive competition between females in a clan. It's something like this:
If you're a chimp, once you reach adulthood, you'll stay within your clan if you're male, and migrate if you're female. So the males in the clan tend to be close relatives (e.g. father and son), while the females tend to be unrelated.
Easier to explain by naming some chimps. Let's say that you got the following clan:
Alice - female, older gen
Bob - male, older gen; Alice's mate
Charlotte - female, newer gen; unrelated to the above
Dan - male, newer gen; Alice and Bob's son, Charlotte's mate.
Charlotte's brothers are living in another clan, with Charlotte's parents. Dan's sisters spread out too, they're living with their in-laws.
The offspring of any male in the clan is likely a relative of the other males:
If Bob has a new child, it'll be Dan's sibling
If Dan has a child, it'll be Bob's grandchild
So they carry at least some genes of the other males. This means that males need to ensure the survival of each other's offspring.
However, this does not apply to the females. There's an asymmetry here:
Charlotte's child is likely Dan's child too, thus Alice's grandchild
Alice's new child is not a relative of Charlotte. It's just her in-law.
So Alice has reasons to care about Charlotte's children, but Charlotte doesn't really give a fuck about Alice's new children.
Why does this matter? Because a chimp clan shares resources like food, and resources are limited. An adult can often pull their weight, but children won't, and often there's not enough food to feed a lot of children: if the clan has one child it'll likely survive, but if it has two both will likely die. So Alice is encouraged to lower her fertility to ensure the survival of Charlotte's children, but the opposite is not true. That's menopause - the older female stops reproducing, but the newer female keeps pumping out children.
Reading this text immediately reminded me the Kaingang, a local folk here in Paraná. One of their myths, about the creation of poisonous snakes, involves one of the two predecessors of humankind burning a thorn and smearing its ashes into the snake's teeth. The first thing that came to my mind: "don't throw random stuff into the fire; be mindful on what you use as lumber, it might be poisonous". I bet that a lot of other myths has this sort of built-in lesson.
Anthropology
Hot
This magazine is not receiving updates (last activity 61 day(s) ago). Subscribe to start receiving updates.