8 Comments
User's avatar
Lorissa Rinehart's avatar

Wow. Great article and fascinating!

Expand full comment
Sean McCann's avatar

A remarkable synthesis! So many relevant factors so clearly explained. Beautifully done — and quite convincing.

Expand full comment
User's avatar
Comment removed
Jun 30
Comment removed
Expand full comment
antoinette.uiterdijk's avatar

Please do not respond to this! Scam-spam!

Expand full comment
Mitchell Bernard's avatar

Great stuff! We need this disseminated as widely now as ever!

Expand full comment
Barracuda Smith's avatar

Very interesting and thought provoking, although I’d recommend you use the word “sex”, rather than “gender”. Otherwise we get situations like this:

https://www.feministcurrent.com/2022/07/22/christina-ellingsen-is-facing-prison-time-for-saying-that-men-cant-be-women/

Expand full comment
antoinette.uiterdijk's avatar

When you write about "women" who were able to go against the rules, you describe women from the higher classes. Even while a NW European society is (kind of) equal regarding genders, it is still divided in classes.

Expand full comment
Ilse Mogensen's avatar

This rings true as an explanation of gender equality, especially from the 19th century where coed education started to take hold. Not just for the chattering classes either, at least not in Denmark.

I was recently reading an informal memoir by my great-uncle, whose parents were smallholder farmers. They met in the 1880s at Vallekilde Højskole, which must have been co-ed by then. Can’t think of anything similar elsewhere. Maybe in religious revival movements, but the “højskole” movement was secular.

Looking forward to Part 2!

Expand full comment
Paula James's avatar

Have you read Graeber/Wengrow's The Dawn of Everything? they date the emergence of patriarchy to about 5000 years ago, not 300,000.

Expand full comment