Mid Life Days

They say I'm a thoughtful fellow - they say. And I do try but my thoughts only go so far, know what I mean? Besides, intelligence or the rate of it is relative. I mean, to my offspring I am an "intellectual" as my daughter recently described me to a friend of hers. My lovely daughter (and she is lovely) possesses many outstanding qualities I wish I possessed including a brilliant parent, a quick learning ability, and stunning figure, and beautiful face (oh, I could go on), however, though not a great intellect. You may think this is a cruel thing to say of someone I love to my last breath  but then, I hasten to add, I know my intellect is of no great shakes either in spite of her description of me. 

I have a member of my family who rates being "intelligent" assumes the quality of a human being which is a shame - for that member. He or she will often refer to work colleagues or relatives or acquaintances as "not being very intelligent" or "not that bright", implying, of course, her or his intelligence is the greater, which is what I mean by a shame. It is only a label after all, though it is a label bursting with value judgement and, as such, can be very damaging to the person so labelled or, even the one making the label.

Thinking of labels as such for a couple of decades now I have been thinking and studying one that has flummoxed humankind ever since humans stood erect and that is "male" and "female" or, in another label, genderism. The questions that have so focussed my mind is "Why is there such a huge gap between the genders?" and "What makes one gender more dominant?" with its co-question, "Who or what gave it that position over the over?" and the greatest question of them all when considering this polemical conundrum, and being of member of the gender in question I can pose it, "Why is it that the clearly stupidest gender proclaim its place as the dominant one?" This latter question is the one that has puzzled and often frustrated me but mostly angered me the most.

The only reason I think of why us males have continued to claim, or more honestly impose our our dominance over the "weaker sex" which is factually inaccurate, is of our physical dominance. However, in just about every other human attribute females have shown if not an advantage, then equality. 

Take politics for example. Politics is fundamentally about communication and and human relationships, and yet it is recognised that females have greater development in their attributes than males and yet males dominate and it has been ever thus. Why? Is it because males a better strategical thinkers than females? If so, how can that be proved when it is only males who've developed this strand of thinking since the dawn of humanity? The question of how would have cultures developed had females been the dominant gender can never been proved because it simply has not been allowed to develop. And similar question is how would cultures have fared if gender was not the question but humanity was. In other words, it wasn't your gender that qualified you for power but your abilities.