In the decades-long struggle over women's "empowerment" in the public sphere, one element is deliberately left out of the equation.
That element is the simple fact that women are not female men, and men are not male women. Women are women. Men are men. These are two completely different creatures we are talking about.
Look at the physiques. Males are obviously built for combat and for hunting. Women, for bearing and nurturing babies. In addition, men's greater height, deeper voices, and stronger-jawed facial structure tend to be associated in our perception with power and authority, as opposed to women's, which we associate with other qualities – tenderness and delicate nurture spring to mind, as does a lesser degree of sternness.
From a purely genetic-evolutionary point of view, does it not make sense that these physical and outward traits are also accompanied by psychological ones? Does it not stand to reason that the same nature, the same G-d, that made men warriors and hunters physically and outwardly, would also make them fit these roles mentally and emotionally?
Since men's outward physical traits are generally perceived by members of both sexes as more authoritative – is it not reasonable to postulate that this perception reflects an internal hard-wired "programming" of our minds to expect men to fill roles of authority?
The man as governor is a logical corollary of the man as warrior: a general who conquers land administers it too, after its subjugation. Think of Julius Caesar, conquering Gaul and Britain, and returning with his troops to lead Rome. Think of Judea and Samaria: the IDF liberated the territory 44 years ago, and it administers it to this day. Military roles and leadership roles go together. The power they reflect is one and the same.
Looking at what people are known to like can give us a great clue as to their nature. Television viewing statistics show us that (on the average, and in a generalizing sense) men like to watch sports like football, basketball and soccer, much more than women do. Now, what does that tell us? That's an easy one. All sports are imitations of war and of the hunt. They involve groups of men collaborating in capturing territory (third down, 5 to go) and practicing skills of war and hunting: strength, agility, accuracy, strategic and tactical ability. Is this not simple proof that men are programmed internally for war and hunting?
Obviously, this does not make men better or worse human beings than women -- just different.
Now let us take the next logical step and talk about men's disproportionate representation in positions of political power. The fact that there are less women than men in positions of political power is interpreted only in one way by all and sundry: there must be a conspiracy, they say. It must be those evil men, all card carrying members of the Patriarchy Country Club no doubt, who band together to exclude women from their rightful 50% share in the halls of power. No one dares whisper that there is another possible explanation. Namely, that most women by nature do not aspire to these leadership roles, and that all of us – men and women alike – do not usually see women as projecting the capacity for strong-armed tactics we expect brokers of political power to project (again, we are talking about the average citizen, and in a generalizing sense. None of these statements should be seen as absolutes).
The leftist militant feminists have gone overboard with this conspiracy theory. Their entire political ideology is centered around a perceived oppression that in fact is – at least in this writer's view – largely imaginary. Nature-made, G-d made, not man-made. Tragically, many of the religious and the less leftist elements in society seem unable to state that there is a basic scientific and logical fallacy in the leftist-feminist approach. While I am told that the subject is taught well in certain more conservative religious Zionist women's places of learning and traditional Ulpana curricula, the religious Zionists' public objection to the leftist-feminist craziness appears to be little more than a product of their habits and upbringing. It seems to have few arrows of logical and scientific argument in its quiver.
People in the "family camp" need to get their logical and scientific act together. Women are not female men. Let’s start with that please.