Sarah comments: I think women would ruin the world (in other ways) if they were the only ones to rule it. For example, the world would probably already be globalist/one world, thievery would flourish (esp. governmental kind), as well as psych problems would cause a quick halt to any further development. There would hardly be a philosophical movement and the sciences would progress slower…
I’d add my own thoughts, except that the invaluable expatriate and aspiring dead white male, Fred Reed, has already addressed the matter in a comprehensively conclusive manner:
For one thing, I think we are a splendid lot. For another, I notice that most of the yapping comes from life’s camp-followers—from those who didn’t and can’t and aren’t likely to. Yet they seem perfectly willing to live in a world that white European males built. It is not a dignified performance….Now, I suspect that these uprooters of white maledom don’t appreciate their blessings because they don’t understand them. Familiarity breeds a sense of understanding, but not understanding itself. If miraculous things are always there, it’s easy to regard them as just part of the world, like bananas in the tropics. Consider. If you showed a television set to a bushman in New Guinea, and asked him how it worked, he would say, “Hoo! Bad juju, boss. Heap spirits dey in it, talk talk.” He would have the judgement to be astonished by what is, after all, astonishing.
Now imagine asking the same question of Al Sharpton, or Gloria Steinem or, let us say, the head of Harvard’s Department of Micronesian Lesbian Studies, Carnita Tlacuache-Lombriz…. You would find that she knew as much as the bushman. She knows the same amount about her watch, refrigerator, automobile, microwave oven, and stereo. They are, to her, low-hanging fruit, or what money is to Democrats: something that is just there.