You know, I hate the Female Supremacists. I mean, I really, really hate them. Like many other types of conspiracy theorists, they make wild claims, and back them with nothing more than circumstantial (if that!) evidence, and like other conspiracy theorists, aver that the only reason more people don’t know about it is that “the man” (i.e., the patriarchy) keeps the real evidence suppressed.
For those of you who haven’t run across the FemSupremists, here’s a quick rundown:
- Women are superior to men.
- If women ran the world, there would be universal peace.
- At one time, women did run the world, and it was only the warring men who ruined the Eden-like environment.
- All evidence of this has been erased from history by the men who are in charge.
Got that? On the surface, it’s not much different than the people who believe that humans were created by a superior alien race, or those who believe that the government is suppressing evidence of UFOs. Generally, when I run across those who claim this, I try to ignore them until I can’t stand anymore, and call them on the inconsistencies.
So, what happened this week? Here’s an article making the rounds.
From the UK MailOnline:
‘Alpha cavewomen’ roamed the plains while slothful menfolk stayed at home, according to a study.
A study has found evidence of ‘alpha cavewomen’ roaming the plains and calling the shots while the menfolk slobbed at home.
Alpha cavewoman appears to have travelled far wider than her male counterpart, the research showed. She might even have been the one who went out clubbing, so to speak – reversing the popular conception that it was the bloke who bashed the girl on the head and dragged her home by the hair.
But something seems to have happened to the evolution of the species after those times between 1.7million and 2.4million years ago.
Obviously they did not find evidence of prehistoric chastity devices.
The findings, detailed in the journal Nature, were made by Oxford University researchers and an international team of scientists.
Using lasers and advanced technology, they analysed enamel from fossilised teeth found in cave systems a mile apart in South Africa.
Oxford professor Julia Lee-Thorp said the difference between males and females was ‘completely unexpected’.
Her team measured the strontium isotope ratios in canine and third molar teeth — which are formed by about the age of eight — in 11 Paranthropus robustus individuals from the Swartkrans cave, as well as in teeth from eight Australopithecus africanus individuals from the nearby Sterkfontein cave, about 50 kilometres north-west of Johannesburg.
The researchers also measured the strontium in 170 plants and animals currently living near the caves to get a sense of the different strontium signatures of the region, including the thin Malmani dolomite formation that includes both caves.
Analysis of their teeth showed whether or not individuals were local or had arrived from another area.
More than half the female teeth were from outside the region, compared to about 10 per cent of the male teeth, the international team of researchers found.
The experts concluded that most males lived and died in their birthplaces, while females were more likely to find new homes.
So, wait – what does this mean?
The shape of ancient human families has been the subject of much speculation, based mainly on differences in the relative size of male and female fossils, and the behavioural patterns of our primate relatives.
Female chimpanzees, for instance, typically leave their social group once they hit maturity. Among gorilla groups, which are dominated by one large male ‘silverback’, both males and females tend to strike out.
Modern humans, who are influenced by relatively recent cultural practices such as marriage and property ownership, are difficult to compare to our early ancestors, Professor Copeland added.
So if I understand this correctly, it seems that some groups of prehistoric women traveled over a wider area than the men. However, there really doesn’t seem to be any reason other than sheer conjecture as to why this should be. In other words, the headline has absolutely nothing to do with the article, itself.
Did I mention that I hate FemSpremists? Sometimes I hate newswriters, too.
