reply to post by Aeons
I actually sat down once, and tried to figure out why it is that WOMEN are often strong supporters of policies that are horribly anti female, (genital
mutilation, murder of unfaithful wives, etc) and what it came down to was, their sons.
Especially in cultures where there is a lot of warfare, and keeping population high is important for survival, like the "cradle of civilization"
the Mediterranean and mid eastern region.
Anyway, it boils down to this. A woman has two children, a son and a daughter. No matter what, her daughter is likely to produce no more than one
child a year. But a son with many wives can produce many more children a year. If he has ten wives, or one wife and 9 concubines, he can have if all
goes well ten children a year. Its the selfish gene. A mother is better served by a roguish son that a loyal daughter in terms of spreading those
And the more oppressive the culture to women, the less likely her son will be supporting children (and genes) that arent his.
Anyway, it may not make you feel better about this woman and what she says, but there is biology that helps to explain it. If your goal is to have
"as many offspring as possible" oppressing women is the thing to do. If your population is stable or even too high, women having freedom works in
favor of the culture/society. As Edward O Wilson pointed out, women everywhere they can have spontaneously lowered their birthrate to 2.1 children per
A female, since birth and rearing a child is more costly to her, tends to prefer fewer children, with a higher quality mate, rather than many children
from a mate she has no say over choosing.
As long as there is rampant war in that region, and there is no consequence for overbreeding, cultural practices that favor the intense pumping out of
babies will prevail. And many of them will be female unfriendly of necessity.