Pre-dating, Pre-history, and the Dawn of #MeToo

Last night I had an interesting conversation with someone who appeared to be a nice gentleman. He loves history and he knows (or appears to know) a lot about the revolutionary ware, the civil war, and other parts of American history. We got off the phone and I figured we’d meet for lunch later this week.

Then came the post discussion texting.

Of course sex is always a topic of discussion, but it’s more scientific and factual than it is sensual. He wants to make it sensual and calls me “hottie”. Not a true compliment, but more salesy. Of course he’s in sales, but this conversation made me realize he has nothing to sell me.

According to Phil, he’s an “open minded conservative”. He may be conservative, but if he were truly open minded, he would have been willing to listen to what I had to say.

AND OF COURSE he says to me

“Oh baby, don’t state your opinion as fact.”


“My opinion”. Never mind the thousands of papers written by researchers and Psychologists on the subject. The biggest thought leaders in the world are quoting the same research.

I hoped he was someone I could teach.

Instead of the self proclaimed “open minded conservative” he claimed to be, he was questioning the academics I have followed and learned from.

My core values exist at the base of my humanity. I’ve spent years researching and discovering myself. Yet this “man” continues to patronize me, without offering any shred of evidence.

Now, I’m not saying he didn’t have a point on natural events and disasters.

However, his indignation toward me as I point out he is questioning my CORE VALUES and isn’t even willing to have an open mind regarding my opinion.

And again….

“Baby, you don’t have a monopoly on research”


Oh Phil, of course societies evolved and adapted. That’s what humans do.

And when did I say anything about communes?

What’s really funny – See that screen capture he sent?

It backs EVERYTHING I was saying about our past. Hence my response….


“Perhaps I am right about that but societies changed because of choice.”

Prior to the cognitive revolution, the human race had no ability to think ahead. We relied on our instincts which still exist today in the hindbrain. That’s the whole fight or flight response to danger, along with all of the activities our bodies do on their own.

When man realized he could farm the land, milk the cows and goats, he needed to guarantee that his heirs inherited his possessions. This was the start of repressing women. Yes, it started 10,000 years ago.

“No, it was the rise of the woman”

I couldn’t handle it anymore. For a man who claims to love history, he was un-apologetically closed minded in his opinions. Last I checked there were two sides to every story. The more I think about it, he seems like a man closer to the opinions of Hitler, the KKK and other “supremacist” type groups.

See ya later Phil. You’re not worth my time.



1 comment on “Pre-dating, Pre-history, and the Dawn of #MeToo

  1. I am not getting “the rise of women”. I am not sure what he means, there. Early societies had to ensure the next generation, and the only place that next generation was going to come from was the wombs of women. Mathematically, a society in which each woman had two kids or less would be overrun by any society where each woman had four. Different societies had different ways of encouraging this, whether fertility rituals or strict monogamy laws with family expectations. The real rise of women, as I see it, was the result of modern medicine, both with reduced mortality rates and better forms of birth control.

    Since Godwin’s law is already in effect, let me add this bit of population trivia. Nazis had an interesting solution for their desired population. Nazis encouraged permiscuity, and pregnancy. The resulting babies were raised in orphanages, allowing the women to go back to work at whatever jobs they had.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *