I'm reading the book SEX AT DAWN: the prehistoric origins of modern sexuality, the book suggests that in prehistoric times, when homo sapiens were just foraging on the earth, the relation between men and women was like the relation between male and female bonobos and the society was more like a matriarchy in which women had the most respectable position.
But when people learned agriculture and began to settle down and the concept of individual property formed, women's position converted to man's property and men restricted women more and more in order to be sure that their possessions will be inherited by their actual heirs.
On page 17 we read:
when people began living in settled agricultural communities, social reality shifted deeply and irrevocably. Suddenly it became crucially important to know where your field ended and your neighbor’s began. Remember the Tenth Commandment: “Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour’s house, thou shalt not covet thy neighbour’s wife, nor his manservant, nor his maidservant, nor his ox, nor his ass, nor any thing that [is] thy neighbour’s.” Clearly, the biggest loser (aside from slaves, perhaps) in the agricultural revolution was the human female, who went from occupying a central, respected role in foraging societies to becoming another possession for a man to earn and defend, along with his house, slaves, and livestock.
- My question is that why does it say clearly?
Why didn't women earn possessions like men in the agricultural revolution?
What intrinsic feature in women makes it clear that they shall lose their position in the agricultural revolution?
By high rank of female bonobos, I don't mean only sexual relationship but also the higher position in the society in which A male derives his status from the status of his mother