Sometimes the truth is right in front of you

We all know about Nature’s “ruthless ways.”  The physically bigger fish is almost always in charge of the littlest fish, like it or not.

We also know that the smaller fish, with its sly cunning and/or many evolutionary years of adaptation, can “outwit” the larger fish (by way of protective camouflaging; by hanging around with a protective “muscle fish”, like a shark; by having a horrible taste about itself, like with monarch vs. viceroy butterflies; or whatever it takes to live another day).  Yes, “living another day” is the name of the existence game.

So where am I going with this?  “Brawn” may normally rule the day, but “brains” have their moment in the sun as well.  You’ve heard the saying, “Brains over brawn.”  Yes, it can and does happen.

Now I’m gonna make it more personal. 😁

Generally speaking, men may have the brawn, but women have most of the brains.  (Hey, I heard that collective groan from the men here.)  Hear me out.  If the female brain is superior, it could be from years of sitting back and observing.  It could be due to our nurturing nature that the female brain sees the bigger picture.  Or maybe the female brain accumulated more education, while the males were busy fighting with each other.  Could be a lot of reasons.

Conversely, maybe men just developed too much testosterone over the eons of time for their own good.  Maybe they are a victim of “testosterone overload,” and we see where it’s gotten us; a world in disarray, to quote the title of the Richard Haass book.

Anyway, here comes the punchline (question):

Should women rule the world?

What do you think?  Or would destiny take a hand and the women would eventually become like the bigger fish, the men, and mess everything up? 

How do you see a world ruled by women playing out?  Discuss pros/cons.

(by PrimalSoup)

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

That Uplifting Tweet You Just Shared? A Russian Troll Sent It

Image
Here’s what Russia’s 2020 disinformation operations look like, according to two experts on social media and propaganda. By   DARREN LINVILL   &   PATRICK WARREN Internet trolls don’t troll. Not the professionals at least. Professional trolls don’t go on social media to antagonize liberals or belittle conservatives. They are not narrow minded, drunk or angry. They don’t lack basic English language skills. They certainly aren’t  “somebody sitting on their bed that weighs 400 pounds,”  as the president once put it. Your stereotypical trolls do exist on social media, but the amateurs aren’t a threat to Western democracy. Professional trolls, on the other hand, are the tip of the spear in the new digital, ideological battleground. To combat the threat they pose, we must first understand them — and take them seriously. MORE: https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-features/russia-troll-2020-election-interference-twitter-916482/ Posted by Jamie B.
Read more

The Nightmare Scenario That Keeps Election Lawyers Up At Night -- And Could Hand Trump A Second Term

Image
The Nightmare Scenario That Keeps Election Lawyers Up At Night -- And Could Hand Trump A Second Term   (Photo: Photos: Getty Images) Americans will almost certainly go to bed on Nov. 3 without knowing who won the presidential election. Since millions of people will vote by mail, constraints on time and resources will slow ballot counting into potentially a weeks-long process. Voting patterns suggest it’s likely that President  Donald Trump  could end Election Day in the lead in certain key states, only to be overtaken by Democratic opponent  Joe Biden  when more votes are tallied.  This could create a nightmare scenario during the three months stretching from Election Day to the Jan. 20 inauguration: a battle on the state and congressional level over who is the legitimate winner. This could include Congress reconvening on Jan. 6, presided over by Vice President  Mike Pence , with no consensus over its potential role in choosing the next president. This is arguably the most likely of th
Read more

Philosophical Question #14 – Lifestyle Choices

Image
Here is an interesting question in my list of philosophical questions: 1.) Should governments have penalties for those who live unhealthy lifestyles? A list of unhealthy lifestyles would include things like smoking, drinking, illegal drugs, prostitution, and other “vice” type activities. I guess the “government penalties” would be referring to monetary punishments, withholding medical treatments (insurance companies would love that), possibly imposing/regulating very high (exorbitant) prices on things considered unhealthy in order to cut down on their use, and other possibilities. 2.) Or, would you say that living an unhealthy lifestyle, likely resulting in a LOT of eventual personal pain and suffering, should be punishment enough for unhealthy lifestyles? When people make bad choices in life, often in their youth where ignorance and immediate gratification takes them over,  3.) Should a society be obligated to help "fix" them, by way of tax money?   Is that part of
Read more