Are women equal to men today? If this question were to be asked of any of my friends they would undoubtedly say: Yes! Women (at least in the Western cultures), are finally equal to men in their freedom to choose, to attend the schools they want, to participate in sports, to vote and to pursue many more forms of independent living. And yet, if we look carefully, we can see how our gender is still considered secondary to that of men.
Jean Baker Miller, a famous psychiatrist, and Riane Eisler, author of "The Chalice and The Blade, tells us that "in society as presently constituted, only women are geared to be carriers of the basic necessity for human communion, and to in fact, value their affiliations with others more highly than even themselves. In contrast to men, who are generally socialized to pursue their own ends, even at the expense of others, women are socialized to see themselves primarily as responsible for the welfare of others, even at the expense of their own well-being." These traits is what does us in, so to speak, because even though we will all attest that what we do, i.e. weaving the structure of society's foundations through the creation and the maintaining of strong families, communities and healthy relationships, it is still not regarded as important as what men do, i.e. pursue careers and making money.
To understand why this is, we must learn of how the ruling and governing of society shifted millennia ago from the point of view of partnership to that of dominator (we must thank the invasions of the Kurgans and Dorian tribes followed by the Greek/Roman empires). Western civilization history as we learn it in school focuses largely on winners and losers, conflicts and peace, but it is always based on one class dominating another, not how the relation between the two genders interact and work with each other. And to borrow again from Eisler, "the way a society structures the most fundamental of human relations profoundly affects all aspects of living and thinking." For instance in Crete, prior to the barbaric ascendence, power was primarily equated with the responsibility of motherhood rather than with the exaction of obedience to a male-dominant elite through force or the fear of force. This is the definition of power where women and traits associated with women are not systematically devalued.
To change the paragdime and embrace a system-a thinking and decision-making system, that is-based on the two halves working together (Gylanic) as opposed to Androcentric, i.e. "men's centered," a process of remolding and replication has to occur. Just as we forgot that at some point in history peoples, lands and societies were governed peacefully together, we must remember that we have been conditioned to think in a certain way, i.e. dominator vs. subjugator, conquest vs. loss, etc... and that we must strive to re-establish a society based on the relation between the two halves in synchrony with Nature and in the full respect of other species.
PS All the material and social technologies fundamental to civilization were developed before the imposition of a dominator society and the principle of food growing, as well as construction, container and clothing technology were all already known by the Goddess-worshipping peoples of the Neolithic. Pottery was also invented by women and the cultivation of the soil is to this day primarily in the hands of women. (The Chalice and The Blade, pp. 66-69)
My attention was caught by an article that appeared on the current issue of MS magazine; in it, the author, Carmen D. Siering, describes Bella, the protagonist of the much acclaimed movie Twilight, as “a blank slate, with few thoughts or actions that don’t center on Edward.” She continues by saying that, where Bella is “infantilized,” Edward is “condescending” and the only one allowed to “initiate intimacy.” 
