Why men rule?

I think it's just that women are generally either too nice or too harsh. I don't mean that as a slight, its just that rulers sometimes have to be cruel and brutal and make the hard choice. But at the same time, a good ruler couldn't just be that, he had to be accessible too. Alot of women can be hard but in general, I find most women are either hard or soft, most seem to have trouble with that middle ground.

A very few women have it in spades though, and in all ages you do see a few women rulers - even in the most patriarchal of eras sometimes. Even all the way back at the dawn of civilization you have women like, uhm, Kubaba the tavern-keeper (no I'm not joking!) who somehow defeated Sharrum-Iter and took the crown of Sumeria from the city of Mari, bringing it to Kish and founding the Third Dynasty of Kish. In the medieval era there are a few queens but also female figures in other positions of power - the women who dominated the papacy during the Pornocracy, abbesses who controlled vast wealth and huge holdings, and so on.

I don't think gender has ever really been as important as other factors in any society - whether Rome, or feudal Europe, or the Renaissance monarchies, a woman of high social status was always the social superior of a male plebe or peasant.

Nice debate on womens rights on Fri at the Lincoln's Inn dining session, someone (a woman!) railed against the ideal of the 1950's housewife who took her husbands name.

You're lucky they don't have polygamy in Chile ....