Never more quickly have I realized that there is no point in discussion. There are too many things I'd need to explain to make this anywhere near worthwhile.
I'll just point out a few things and then I'll be on my way. This is nowhere near enough to explain everything to you, but I feel the need to give you a few more pointers.
First of all, it would be common courtesy in any fruitful discussion that if you require me to provide evidence or some sort of logical construct supporting my theory, that you would do the same for yours first.
Secondly, you make the mistake of thinking life is easy. It's a really healthy attitude, and it is certainly born out of real life experiences, but the unfortunate truth is, that it's not easy. It's terribly complicated, and everything has so many reasons that it makes it pointless to try to enumerate them. I only ask that you don't restrict yourself to a single reason, like you did in your post. I only ask that you recognise that life is not easy, and that discussions are not easy and that you can't possibly ever understand a problem fully.
Your simple request for evidence to reject equality of gender as a requirement for peaceful societies is not simple to answer. This question is really a symptom of what I pointed out before. Your question would require extensive research into gender history, statistical analysis of marriage data, sexual encounters, the change of laws over history, how governments evolved under different societies, how governments treated genders, how that affected them, and many more personal assessments like how equality is historically always fought for and therefore it would be a pointless battle to reject it in the long run, ...the list is endless.
I hope you can now see that discussion is pointless. What we are all left with is the belief that we can achieve stable peace, that we can achieve gender equality and at the same time maintain a thriving society. This is what I want, and therefore I try to find theories to support that. Do not take that as naivety. Many will, but only people who have thought this through will agree that all their facts are in essence belief. You are doing the same thing, but labeling it differently. It's like the chicken or egg problem. What came first, your belief or the fact? In order to form any sort of belief, you need facts. In order to find facts, you need some beliefs first.
I deleted my comment before I knew you were writing a reply.
My comment originally said that I think there's two ways of exploring the world.
1. Start with a conclusion you want to be true and looking for evidence that supports your view, or
2. Start by gathering facts and trying to find conclusions in them.
You write:
> This is what I want, and therefore I try to find theories to support that.
Right. I think that view fundamentally leads to disastrously bad places. It leads to assuming you're correct and looking for confirmation instead of truth.
Truth is often unpleasant. Confirmation is easily found, even for the stupidest and craziest arguments - look at some of the clearly insane views that people hold with no backing.
Why do they think that way? Because they start with the idea that they're right and look to prove that. It's easy to prove you're right, especially if your views are the norm in your community.
It's much harder to say, "What if I'm wrong?" and to constantly seek out counter-arguments and test your views.
Everyone has views that are wrong, mistaken, poorly informed, and counter-productive. The challenge of becoming an informed person is challenging your views constantly - even your sacred ones - looking for smarter arguments.
It's difficult and stressful. I can't even recommend it if your goal in life is happiness, because if you succeed then everyone in your social circle starts to think you're nuts. But ideally, you become gradually less wrong over time and can do a lot of good for the world, even when your views look crazy to people who never stopped and asked, "What if the world isn't the way I thought it was...?"
3. Look for multiple often contradictory world views and evaluate them over time.
Most people try and create a world view where they have the 'facts' and there may be a few unimportant things they don't know and a few things they are wrong about but they got the big picture. Unfortunately, it's easy to answer 'What is the best car company?' with Ford and then always buying that. Even if sometimes Honda might be a better option.
>This is what I want, and therefore I try to find theories to support that.
It is easy to find theories to support anything you want, look at all religions and other pre-scientific belief systems. It is facing reality, whether or not it supports your beliefs, that is hard. And that is something only modern, Western-derived civilizations have ever even come close to achieving.
