Women and societies

WOMEN AND SOCIETIES

LARISSA BERTO DOS SANTOS

RIBEIRÃO PRETO/SP

2026

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. Brief Contextualisation

2. Introduction

3. 3.0 Development: Biology

4. 3.1 When did misogyny/chauvinism emerge, and who created it?

5. Women at the Dawn of Humanity

6. Women and Religions

7. Women in Africa

8. Women in Asia

9. Women in the Americas

10. Women in Europe

11. Women in the Middle East

12. Women in Oceania

13. Feminism and Misogyny

14. Anti-feminism

15. Current Affairs

16. Conclusion

1. CONTEXTUALISATION

“Girls who love too much always end up with a tragic fate—or rather, having their lives cut short in some way, whether by having their wings clipped or by committing suicide.”

This sentence carries a heavy, impactful emotional weight; but why reflect upon it? We can begin to ponder by considering the everyday stories and reactions that occur around us, and the burden they place on women in society.

For instance, the 2002 film Irreversible deals with a revenge exacted by the husband and ex-boyfriend of a woman who was brutally assaulted and raped. Notice that the narrative is not about the victim, but rather about the revenge.

Why did they seek revenge? Because they loved the woman? Or because they felt their honor had been stolen? Is it about the victim, or are the men seeking revenge the true victims? Furthermore, the public reaction to this film included comments such as: "Her outfit was too short and tight," or "She was walking in a dark, deserted place."

As the Franco-Argentine filmmaker Gaspar Noé himself put it: “The film is testosterone-phobic. It shows men as beasts.” This demonstrates that when reality is portrayed, it shocks people and is not viewed as something genuinely capable of happening. One can observe that the term "testosterone-phobic" is used to refer to men as though women did not also have testosterone—as if this hormone were exclusive to males (a claim that is, in fact, widely made).

Now, we must consider why this happens. It illustrates the normalisation that patriarchy shapes by constructing relationships around men's expectations, thereby normalising various forms of violence against women.

This may sound exaggerated, but the way women are violated by society—or more precisely, by patriarchy, and specifically by men—begins while they are still young girls. In fact, it begins in the womb, starting with patriarchy itself.

Patriarchy is the system of male domination that began with the division of labour (a point we will address when looking at the origins of violence against women), where tasks were divided to shape modes of control for different genders, restricting their roles.

Patriarchy gained strength primarily through capitalism and religion. Religion contributed to the idealisation of a distorted image of women, judging them to be fragile and submissive. We can see this in Christian traditions, for example, through the assertion that Eve was created from Adam's rib to keep him company and remain submissive to him:

“Then the Lord God formed man from the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living being.”

“The Lord God said: ‘It is not good for the man to be alone. I will make a helper suitable for him.’”

“So the Lord God caused the man to fall into a deep sleep; and while he was sleeping, he took one of the man’s ribs and then closed up the place with flesh. Then the Lord God made a woman from the rib he had taken out of the man, and he brought her to the man.”

Through these words written by men in the Bible—which already carry an interpretation of submissiveness—increasingly misogynistic readings emerged.

"Using religion as a form of control does not hide the real intention of those who wish to control colonised bodies and territories." — Jônatas Campos

With the advent of capitalism, these ideas were rapidly disseminated throughout social structures, such as the family, and were fostered by commerce (prostitution being one example).

All of this is rooted in how society in general reacts to the female figure. To begin with, we have a father’s expectations. If he is an entrepreneur or a wealthy man, his expectation will almost certainly be to have a son who will be deemed capable of fulfilling his father's role and carrying on his legacy.

Now, if we look at how society reacts, there are two distinct paths. On the first path, a male child is hoped for so that he may fulfil his duties as a citizen (once again, roles attributed primarily to men due to their perceived capability, as women are often not viewed as capable or even rational beings by patriarchy, which is fueled by capitalism—especially through ideas of individualism and meritocracy).

On the second path, the birth of a female child is welcomed so that she may serve "society" (men)—whether by providing heirs while simultaneously serving as a fetish, a sexual object, or part of the proletariat (as female labour is predominant and drives much of the economy, particularly through mothers who are heads of households), among other "uses" for patriarchy and capitalism.

Now, let us examine some data: there are 40 million informal workers in Brazil, 37.5% of whom are women; of that 37.5%, 41% are Black women (IBGE data). When discussing female-headed households, the figures vary; in the North-East region, for example, they account for 50% of families.

When discussing Black and Latina women, objectification turns into hypersexualisation, fostered by media and cinematic portrayals. This leads directly to rape culture, of which capitalism is the primary propagator.

Regarding how women are indoctrinated and violated even as young girls, religion plays a fundamental role in mass indoctrination and manipulation. It continues to be used by patriarchy and capitalism as a means of social and cultural structuring, as well as a form of violence—often targeted exclusively at women. It is important to emphasise that I am referring specifically to Christian, Jewish, and Islamic traditions, with a focus on Christianity, as there are religions and cultures that do not follow a patriarchal model and are therefore not applicable to this study.

Discussing this might sound exaggerated or like a sweeping generalisation; therefore, it is vital to note that data and facts will be presented throughout the study to explain each point introduced here.

Some statistics on violence against women:

• In 2022, 46.7% of Brazilian women experienced sexual harassment, an increase of nearly 9 percentage points compared to 2021.

• In 2022, approximately 50,000 women suffered some form of violence daily in Brazil.

• One-third of Brazilian women have experienced physical or sexual violence at least once in their lives.

• 85% of women treated for domestic violence are Black.

• 62% of femicide victims are Black.

• 73% of Brazilian women believe that fear of the aggressor is the main reason for not reporting abuse.

• 61% of Brazilian women believe that a lack of punishment and financial dependence are the main reasons for not reporting abuse.

  (Official data from the Brazilian Senate)

In an article by Unicamp, "The rise in violence against women is linked to the advance of conservatism", it is shown that there is an epidemic of violence against women in the country, highlighting that "one of the reasons for this rise in violence is the emergence of ultra-conservative groups in Brazilian politics and society."

What does ultra-conservatism have to do with the rise in violence against women? Ultra-conservatism operates on the premise that moral principles and values should be the main factors dictating societal behaviour. These values and principles are governed by religion.

Today, Christian values are rising once again, with major tenets drawn from the Bible—specifically the Old Testament. Given that the Bible was written predominantly by men within a patriarchal framework, it can be understood as patriarchal and misogynistic in nature.

The idea that a woman is submissive to a man and serves as his helper positions her as inferior—at least, that is how it is interpreted by ultra-conservatism. This becomes an absolute truth that must be respected in the name of "faith".

2. INTRODUCTION

With the progress of humanity across various domains, much chaos and confusion have arisen. While this is not new, many people struggle to digest key concepts as new developments hit humanity like avalanches in recent times.

Despite the convenience and technological advancements of the modern age—which theoretically make acquiring legitimate information easier—false information circulates at an increasing rate. Human beings readily manipulate and construct information to serve their own ends, a phenomenon evident throughout history.

According to a detailed 2025 study by Justin Jackson entitled "How transmission changed over 3.3 million years of human evolution", various stages and methods of instruction emerged to meet population needs across different eras and contexts. This was also demonstrated in the empirical paper:

Smith K, Kalish ML, Griffiths TL, Lewandowsky S. Introduction. Cultural transmission and the evolution of human behaviour. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 2008 Nov 12;363(1509):3469-76.

Furthermore, as noted by Seiffert-Brockmann, J. (2018) in Evolutionary Psychology: A Framework for Strategic Communication Research (International Journal of Strategic Communication):

“Some of these modules incorporate fundamental human motivations that can be triggered by strategic communication. By tapping into core motivations such as the desire for status, affiliation, and kin care, strategic communication is able to exploit ancestral triggers within today's information society.”

All of this indicates that throughout our history, we have devised ways to transmit information—and manipulate it—to shape a reality that serves our individual interests.

Therefore, when we speak of manipulation, we refer to a complex network of information that can be molded to suit the goals of those who control it. This has been a powerful weapon across time, ever since the rift between the sexes emerged—a rift that persists to this day.

The rivalry between the sexes did not stem from a purely biological premise, but to clarify this, let us first examine the biology.

3. DEVELOPMENT: BIOLOGY

For a clearer understanding, let us break this down into categories, the first being hormones. Consider this statement from the article "The Biology of Human Sex Differences" written by Daniel D. Federman, MD, from Harvard Medical School in Boston:

“The fact that both sexes produce the same steroid hormones means that physiological differences are necessarily quantitative. In other words, differences in sex steroids between men and women reflect two regulatory decisions: the amount of androgen produced and the percentage of that amount converted to oestrogen. If we focus on testosterone and oestradiol, the two most potent representatives of their classes and the primary hormones synthesised in the gonads, two striking differences become evident. The testes produce approximately 7,000 μg of testosterone per day and convert a quarter of 1% into oestradiol. Under basal conditions, the ovaries produce only 300 μg of testosterone per day, but convert half of that amount into oestradiol.”

In other words, both men and women produce the same hormones, albeit in different quantities; delving deeper into the research, hormonal imbalances are what cause disease. A hormonal imbalance does not make you "more of a man" or "more of a woman".

Hormones, in their respective quantities, act in distinct ways across different biological sexes, but all hormones are balanced and necessary for functions such as the development and maintenance of the reproductive system and physiological characteristics. For example:

“There are oestrogen receptors in bones, specifically in osteoblasts. Under normal circumstances, bone formation and resorption are coupled, maintaining constant bone density. After menopause, however, bone formation fails to keep pace with resorption, resulting in a continuous and progressive loss of bone mineral density—particularly rapid during the first five years post-menopause. The resulting osteoporosis, which increases the risk of hip and spinal fractures, is a well-known consequence of menopause.”

Genetics: