General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: White knights set back equality for the genders [View all]Harmony Blue
(3,978 posts)but in the context of the present day it is difficult for some men to let go of the idea that they must treat women like they are on a pedestal.
Your argument that smaller is weaker and more vulnerable is true in some aspects yes, but in others no. Yes, women are vulnerable when pregnant so it made sense for men to protect pregnant women when our ancestors had to live in caves and avoid sabretooth tigers for example, that could snatch you by your skull within seconds killing you (two puncture wounds at the top of the cranium is often the way big cats kill and sabretooth is no exception we have evidence and death traps).
But we as mammals started off small and vulnerable but the dinosaurs were big and large and they ruled till the KT extinction event. Anything weighing over 50 KG though perished so being small at that point in geologic time was advantageous from an evolutionary point of view. As the dinosaurs perished we as mammals took over all their niches in the ecosystems. Also animals tend to be larger in colder climate while near the tropics they tend to be slimmer so you have to consider environment as well. Don't think of it as bigger/stronger = "better" think of it from the point of view of positive and negative aspects associated with such traits.