Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 3
No Censorship

If Women Were Bigger

60 posts in this topic

If women always were bigger and stronger than men, would the historical record be unrecognizable? Please don't tell comedy club jokes. ;) This is a serious inquiry. For the most part, men dominated women in most places throughout the known historical record. This likely was just because they had superior size and strength. Imagine that the opposite is true. Under this particular scenario, there might have been matriarchies that lasted for millennia. What do you think?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

If that was the case yes, but they would also have to be mentaly larger so to speak. Women are strong but after 2500000 yrs we are where we are. Women will kick ass but I doubt the out come will be any differint.

Edited by The Silver Thong

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If that was the case yes, but they would also have to be mentaly larger so to speak. Women are strong but after 2500000 yrs we are where we are. Women will kick ass but I doubt the out come will be any differint.

Are you actually insinuating that women have a lessor mental capacity than men?

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the fact that women carried babies and then had to care for them afterward played a big role in giving men the feeling of dominance. Women may not have necessarily been much smaller initially but were definitely more vulnerable with the babies and if men wanted their genes to live on then they had to play a part in protecting their children.

But, to answer your question, I do believe things would be very different in a matriarchal society. I think there would a bigger focus on child care. Probably same amount of political conflict but wars would be fought differently. I'm not sure how exactly but I know espionage would play a huge part.

I think the collective outlook would be quieter, more introspective.

4 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Are you actually insinuating that women have a lessor mental capacity than men?

No women are equal but yet men rule the the plant, sue me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Idon't think it was ever a matter of physical strength because physical strength didn't help the Neanderthals outlive us. It wasn't a matter of mental abilities either because we're equal in this. So what was it that made patriarchy dominant? It has to be something that hindered women from playing the same social roles as men. I agree with Lava_Lady that being the sex able to bear children was what hindred women (i mean how soon do you think our ancestors waited before becoming sexually active and thus pregnant?). Our primitive male ancestors, being unable to really bond with babies or feel they were really a part of them, didn't find it reasonable to share the responsibility of rearing them with the mothers. So while they were out living their lives to the fullest, women were stuck at home with the babies doing work around the house and allowing men to play the roles of the provider and protector. As men and women continued to not see why men had an equal responsibility in rearing babies, the tradition kept on and ended up being understood as innate or the law of nature. I'm pleased that this is changing now.

However, i think that gender stereotypes will not disappear until humans experience matriarchy (going from one extreme to the other then settling in the middle).

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No women are equal but yet men rule the the plant, sue me.

They rule through brute force/physical strength, that just means there are alot of bullies on the planet imo.

4 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If women were 'bigger' (I'll just use the same wording as in the topic.) then perhaps more aliens would want to visit and adorn all the wonderful beautiful females with intergalactic gifts and perhaps even an interstellar starship!

We have often heard, '...and they came to the Earth and thought that Human females were beautiful and so they had sex with them...' (taken from various theories from Ancient Alien to Nibru).

I would have no problem living in a matriarchal society, because I think it would be possible that having such would afford us perhaps better offerings that what we have now.

Perhaps because we do live in a male dominated society, that is one reason as to why we are still 'alone' on this planet and possibly this solar system.

What if the gender table was turned and we lived in a female dominated society...wonder how that would affect our uh...universal knowledge or encounters.

If I was an alien and saw Earth and upon closer inspection realised that in order to get to the beautiful females, I'd have to endure the bruteness of 'men' then I'd prolly just get back in my ship and leave.

Just a ponderment.

Kind Regards :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think whichever sex rules is purely fashion...Sure men seem to be in control ATM but, there have been plenty of times in the past when women have either been worshiped or been in control;

chatalhuyakearthmother.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If that was the case yes, but they would also have to be mentaly larger so to speak.

One might argue that the reason women aren't 'in control' is because we already are 'mentally larger'. All too often being 'in control' comes down to aggression, dominance, brute force, destruction of life. For most of the world the darker qualities of humanity are still what rule us.

7 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My wife's a foot shorter than I am but I'm almost never aware of the difference. And she certainly isn't!

Every man has a small boy in his past with a mother who's nine feet tall and furious. If we weren't bigger than them we'd never overcome that; as it is, we barely stay even.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Im 5'10

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

I also dont think its about size but mentality. Men in general have a farther way to go in this area. They appear to be the bigger ones but that is only an illusion.

The meek shall inherit the earth.

The least is the greatest.

Etc.

;)

Edit: actually women have a ways to go as well.. mental compacity should always win over brute strength, but unfortunately brute strength can still be psychologically intimidating. Whatever doesn't kill us should make us stronger but that isnt the usual case.

Edited by SpiritWriter

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If that was the case yes, but they would also have to be mentaly larger so to speak. Women are strong but after 2500000 yrs we are where we are. Women will kick ass but I doubt the out come will be any differint.

I bet that they would have ruled the world if the roles/traits had been reversed. Their brains would have been different too in that they would have had more exposure to male-dominated fields.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think child rearing and the need for breastfeeding played a big part in how this societal relationship began. ie hunting vs gathering. ie farming vs cooking/homemaking. In the modern age this symbiotic relationship is not as needed which may be a good thing or a bad thing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the fact that women carried babies and then had to care for them afterward played a big role in giving men the feeling of dominance. Women may not have necessarily been much smaller initially but were definitely more vulnerable with the babies and if men wanted their genes to live on then they had to play a part in protecting their children.

But, to answer your question, I do believe things would be very different in a matriarchal society. I think there would a bigger focus on child care. Probably same amount of political conflict but wars would be fought differently. I'm not sure how exactly but I know espionage would play a huge part.

I think the collective outlook would be quieter, more introspective.

I think that size and strength are genetic, so we probably disagree on the origins of these specific disparate traits. Your theory makes sense, though. It's similar to several out there. One of them claims that the genders have more disparities now. Ancient women preferred men who had the size and strength to protect the tribe. Ancient men preferred smaller women because they seemed more youthful. This kind of selection accounted for the difference that we see now. Of course, this is just a very basic explanation that leaves out many other factors that come into play.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Idon't think it was ever a matter of physical strength because physical strength didn't help the Neanderthals outlive us. It wasn't a matter of mental abilities either because we're equal in this. So what was it that made patriarchy dominant? It has to be something that hindered women from playing the same social roles as men. I agree with Lava_Lady that being the sex able to bear children was what hindred women (i mean how soon do you think our ancestors waited before becoming sexually active and thus pregnant?). Our primitive male ancestors, being unable to really bond with babies or feel they were really a part of them, didn't find it reasonable to share the responsibility of rearing them with the mothers. So while they were out living their lives to the fullest, women were stuck at home with the babies doing work around the house and allowing men to play the roles of the provider and protector. As men and women continued to not see why men had an equal responsibility in rearing babies, the tradition kept on and ended up being understood as innate or the law of nature. I'm pleased that this is changing now.

However, i think that gender stereotypes will not disappear until humans experience matriarchy (going from one extreme to the other then settling in the middle).

There's no doubt that pregnancies and child-rearing are extremely important parts of the equation. They might be secondary explanations, though. It could be that they played roles in determining certain traits, like size, over the years. Lady Lava touched on this. Still, I think that superior size and strength were the main determining factors. They probably were the primary deciding characteristics. Without the gender disparities, it's doubtful that patriarchy would be the norm. Ancient women weren't always pregnant. Bigger and stronger women would have been able to resist subjugation. They wouldn't have allowed it to happen. For this basic reason, they likely would have shared power with the men. Due to the reasons you mentioned, it's somewhat doubtful that they would have ruled the roost.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I always get a real good laugh out of this topic whenever it comes up,we are all equal in the sense of being able to rule or the ones in charge.When i see or hear women getting all "well things would be much better,less wars,less bullying,less everything evil" seriously ladies get over that silly little thought!Women can be more cruel and vindictive than men,your abilities for reasoning can be just as bad as ours and with some worse.We may be a bit more in your face with our approach of dominance,women just sit around and think and think till what they do can turn out to be twice as bad as what we would have done.Because we will just go ahead and get it over with instead of plotting and just letting it eat away at us for awhile then doing a well thought out stupid act :lol: Seriously the world would be exactly the same,slight differences but not some amazing wonder world :P

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If women were 'bigger' (I'll just use the same wording as in the topic.) then perhaps more aliens would want to visit and adorn all the wonderful beautiful females with intergalactic gifts and perhaps even an interstellar starship!

We have often heard, '...and they came to the Earth and thought that Human females were beautiful and so they had sex with them...' (taken from various theories from Ancient Alien to Nibru).

I would have no problem living in a matriarchal society, because I think it would be possible that having such would afford us perhaps better offerings that what we have now.

Perhaps because we do live in a male dominated society, that is one reason as to why we are still 'alone' on this planet and possibly this solar system.

What if the gender table was turned and we lived in a female dominated society...wonder how that would affect our uh...universal knowledge or encounters.

If I was an alien and saw Earth and upon closer inspection realised that in order to get to the beautiful females, I'd have to endure the bruteness of 'men' then I'd prolly just get back in my ship and leave.

Just a ponderment.

Kind Regards :)

It's hard to say if things would be better if the roles were reversed. Both men and women share many of the same human failings and foibles. Look at some of the female villains in the historical record. It's clear that neither gender has a monopoly on morality. That said, I think that things might be a little better with more of a woman's touch. There aren't many historical models from which to draw to make a definitive statement. It could be that both matriarchies and patriarchies mostly depend on the places and times in which they exist. They depend on shared philosophies.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think whichever sex rules is purely fashion...Sure men seem to be in control ATM but, there have been plenty of times in the past when women have either been worshiped or been in control;

chatalhuyakearthmother.jpg

When have women been in control? I mean other than in some very tiny regions in the world.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My wife's a foot shorter than I am but I'm almost never aware of the difference. And she certainly isn't!

Every man has a small boy in his past with a mother who's nine feet tall and furious. If we weren't bigger than them we'd never overcome that; as it is, we barely stay even.

The hand that rocks the cradle rules the world. I think that your post belongs in the thread about Sigmund Freud. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I also dont think its about size but mentality. Men in general have a farther way to go in this area. They appear to be the bigger ones but that is only an illusion.

The meek shall inherit the earth.

The least is the greatest.

Etc.

;)

Edit: actually women have a ways to go as well.. mental compacity should always win over brute strength, but unfortunately brute strength can still be psychologically intimidating. Whatever doesn't kill us should make us stronger but that isnt the usual case.

I don't think that way. Some huge and powerful men are meek and mild. Some tiny women are verbal bullies. There are *many* variations within each gender. There are general truths that seem specific to each sex, but there is a lot of individuality too. All men certainly aren't unthinking brutes. Many women definitely aren't kind and warm. Intelligence is independent of gender too.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think child rearing and the need for breastfeeding played a big part in how this societal relationship began. ie hunting vs gathering. ie farming vs cooking/homemaking. In the modern age this symbiotic relationship is not as needed which may be a good thing or a bad thing.

Most posters agree with you. I just wonder if that was secondary, though. Women could have battled and hunted if they would have had the size and strength for it. Those traits were the primary deciders in the origins of the hierarchy IMO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I always get a real good laugh out of this topic whenever it comes up,we are all equal in the sense of being able to rule or the ones in charge.When i see or hear women getting all "well things would be much better,less wars,less bullying,less everything evil" seriously ladies get over that silly little thought!Women can be more cruel and vindictive than men,your abilities for reasoning can be just as bad as ours and with some worse.We may be a bit more in your face with our approach of dominance,women just sit around and think and think till what they do can turn out to be twice as bad as what we would have done.Because we will just go ahead and get it over with instead of plotting and just letting it eat away at us for awhile then doing a well thought out stupid act :lol: Seriously the world would be exactly the same,slight differences but not some amazing wonder world :P

You probably are right. Both Adolf Hitler and Albert Schweitzer were men. Bloody Mary was the same gender as Clara Barton. Evil doesn't discriminate based on gender. That said, I still think that size and strength played huge roles in determining the makeup of rulers, although women definitely were influential behind the public scenes of power. They just didn't have the access. To me, the worst related tragedy was their exclusion from the arts and sciences. Many women had brilliant minds and could have contributed to the evolution of society.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 3

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.