Examples:
Women (mothers) are generally the first choice to whom the custody of a child is passed, when being decided by courts. This is due to Society's culturally ingrained view that mothers are innately better at caring for children, (even outside of breastfeeding age).
Men generally stick to men, women generally stick to women. In the soccer yard, the boys will pick up all the athletic boys before moving to the athletic girls.
Women are well known problem solvers, yet because they're generally quite good at such problems, many times being 'too' good, they are used in the workforce as a tool, more than an employee, being brought in to 'fix' the problem, then moved on.
society views women very, very frequent as objects, or some kind of attainable asset, though this being said, women influence a majority of goods and products sold, all over the world (cars, clothing, etc), influence heavily on social change and states (think back to the 1900-50's when men would mimic whatever big name was up on stage, be it Elvis or whomever).
women mature faster, physically, emotionally, intellectually. Women are generally more motivated, and are better known for their vision/goal setting ability than men.
In addition to my last post, i'd restate that women are, in most cases, far superior to men (shit, just look at big-mama-X-chromosome lined up to mr Y.)
You could even relate human males back to the greater nature and role of males (in nature): The males are generally useless until it comes time for mating, then their role as fertilizer, defender and builder is developed. Hell, many organisms actually terminate the male, or the male terminates its self upon reproduction.
Again, to restate, i feel women and men in our society are unequal in many ways, yet the absence of any of the two would be catastrophic for the species.
Men may not actually say it, but most are in awe of how much shit a woman can take and still function. It scares us (well me at times). Why do you think the most sucessful animals on earth (noooooo not us by a long way in evolutionary terms) have hives, colonies with a QUEEN (personally I think itmay just have something to do with the success of the British Empire as well - the Victorian age. Eh? )
that's some shitty logic there, if males could reproduce (actually birth the offspring) i think you'd find males being the center of the hive? But on the subject of insects, did you know some types of parasites, namely ticks, do not require a male for reproduction? In fact, the male is literally useless (save for maybe being required every now and then to keep adding to the genepool..)
It's such a loaded question with all that it implies.
complete bull shit.
Just like race, this has been used by the establishment world wide to segregate and divide people.
Gotta be tender here, as i just came off the subject of genepool, but i'd argue that race plays a large role in survivability of an organism, with or without social constraints, when the issue of fitness of race is applied to a specific factor, or environment. To expand, there's a reason why every last person living on the base of Everest (minus tourists and researchers) are small, squat people. There's a reason why white-skinned people are quicker to gain weight than darker skinned people, and there's a reason for skin color too... Can fish travel over land? They're superior in their own kingdom, as with race and sex.