In a civilization in which war is fought in hand-to-hand combat and in which considerable human strength is required to provide food, think farming and hunting larger game, a man's body is more suited. Man evolved to be physically stronger and more competitive. A division of labor is a natural evolution. Men farmed, hunted and did the "heavy" and "rugged" stuff. The women had children, tended to the young and maintained the "home". The emergence of dominant man was natural. In technology driven civilizations, men and women are on equal footing as to their ability to survive. That dominance is rightfully being challenged. In all matters of "nurturing" women will win. Governing is a form of nurturing.

Women are becoming more competitive. They approach competitiveness from a nurturing perspective while men approach it from a "whose stronger" perspective.

Somewhat humorously, consider: In the evolutionary process, a man can readily be replaced by a turkey baster!. A man can ejaculate several times a day. Harvesting semen would not seem to be a problem.

I differentiate between sex, i.e., woman, man or hermaphrodite, and gender, i.e., female, male or non-binary. I do not believe that one's gender follows from one's sex. One gender is acquired in the first few years of life, before self-recognition.

I mean asexual reproduction. Basically, long ago, before I was born, there was a life form in which new life was created, developed, birthed and nurtured without any form of copulation. I label this life form "woman". This life form evolved over time. In time, it created a version of the life forms that evolved into "man". The new life forms created by the sexual copulation of "woman" and "man" out survived the life forms birthed by asexual woman. Today's women and men are a consequence of that evolutionary path.

There are asexual life forms today. There are human life forms that are identified by their sex organ, i.e., man, woman, or hermaphrodite. A woman's body is more complex than that of a man. As such, I reasoned that it would take longer to evolve. A man's role in reproduction is very simple. He has evolved a penis with which to deposit seman to a woman's ovum.

Some believe that woman was created from man. I question that belief. I present an explanation based upon observations and inductive reasoning. History suggests that we exist to evolve. A hermaphrodite which was birthed by a woman could evolve into a man.

It all took place long before Lucy. See my response to waitingforgodo below.

Yes it does. My assertion is that at some early point in time, a "woman" was an asexual life form that reproduced. Some where along the way, it created an "hermaphrodite" who evolved into "man". History suggests that we exist to evolve. It is within a "woman" that new life is created, i.e., conceived, developed, birth and nurtured.