Jessica Wynn

You know, you have female figurines found at archaeological sites, goddess imagery in ancient art, burial patterns suggesting high status for some women.

That all feels really empowering.

But Eller says, look, finding a statue of a woman does not tell you women ran the government.

Finding goddess worship doesn't tell you women held political authority.

So spiritual symbolism and public governance are very different things.

And a male god is worshipped in most traditions.

And that hasn't stopped most men from being excluded from power.

Yeah.

And then Eller makes a second argument that I think is even more interesting and more genuinely feminist.

She argues the myth of matriarchal prehistory is actually bad for feminism, even though it may feel empowering.

Because of what it assumes women are, right?

In these stories of the matriarchal golden age, it always looks the same.

Peaceful, nurturing, communal, close to nature.

Women are cast as caregivers, consensus builders, and life givers.

And Eller's point is, yes, that might sound empowering, and it flips the valuation, but it keeps the stereotype.

So the same traits that have been used to exclude women from power are now being used to justify it.

Right.

And the assumption goes completely unchallenged that women are all about care and emotion and men are about reason and hierarchy.

Historically, that assumption has done a lot more harm than good because it frames women as submissive and men as dominant.

That's exactly her argument.