Gender Equality? Physical Strength Argument Rebuttal

 
One main reason for men's superiority over women is physical strength, which is why women are relegated to be home-makers while men go out to hunt. But this article presents an interesting case. Other than the usual scenario of men discriminating against women due to culture, the interesting thing here in this article is that the men made the women do all the heavy chores and physically-taxing manual labour, which is not befitting of someone who is deemed physically inferior.The argument goes that if men consider women to be of a lower status because they lack physial strength, (hence it should be the macho, stronger men who do the heavy labour, thus justifying their higher status), then the men should not be asking the women to do the heavy labour. This smacks of hypocrisy and irony. In a nutshell, to place the women at a lower level because of their physcial weakness, and then turn around and make them do all the heavy labour while the men themselves do nothing, flies against the face of logic, as well as refute the claim that women are physically weak. For a comparison, think of how the male lion (despite the title of the king of the beasts, hence the most powerful) makes the lionesses do the job of hunting the prey instead of doing it himself.

The above rebuttal is based on the idea that women are not necessarily physically weaker than men, as seen in the kind of hard labour they have been put through, while the so-called more physically stronger men did nothing. But do not forget the more common rebuttal of the physical strength argument, which is the advent of technology that renders this competitive edge of men (i.e. physical strength) redundant, since now technology has levelled the playing field to shift the emphasis from brawn to brain.