Originally Posted by OPVerma
IN THE BEGINNING THERE WERE no women population on earth perhaps until 1000 million years. Airy human males begot male offsprings by biological fission. In some kind of mutation, the first Airy Woman known as Satrupa came into existence from the airy Swyambhu Manu. It was during 700 - 400 million years when male gave up and women took the exclusive responsibility of procreation by laying eggs ( in their hydromorphic and amphibian bodies).
It was only after 99.3 m yrs. when women started menstruating and started delivering gross bodied 1 human beings regularly. ( Details 'The Real History of the Ancient World ISBN 9788190950268
Well that's quite an effort on the part of the males in order to keep the early women-folk at bay. "Airy human males begot male offsprings by biological fission".. doesn't sound very sexy to me.. :)
When the change came about it must have worked so wonderfully well that in the present day we "all" now start-out as female in the womb. It isn't until around week 8, when the triggering of the Y chromosome takes place and testosterone is released, bathing the fetus in this hormone, that the embryo shifts gears into becoming male. So technically everyone you know-of is essentially female at the onset with the males being a subset of this feminine paradigm.
But my favorite thing in what you said was this: "when male gave up"! Firstly, Do you really think that's how evolution works? And secondly, if men reproduced by "biological fission" did they then have a penis? If we moved away from a fission based form of "male" reproduction toward a sex coupling dynamic then a huge series of steps would have had to occur in order for this new process to eventually emerge. And nature would have had to find favor in such a move. If something doesn't work within nature it doesn't survive. So the choice in this case (should we take for a moment your proposition as presented) must have met with the approval of natures demand for persistent survival.
Your statement suggest that you generally assume that the male of the species was propitiatory, then prominent/dominate, then eventually supplanted but the lesser quality of female intervention. Does this suggest that you unconsciously miss the days of male dominance and are currently looking for a way to now devalue the feminine say and their presence? lf you were honest you'd just come out and say it. By reaching for this fission thing you are likely obscuring your own inner dialogue and not viewing directly what your insecure assumptions are generally telling you. And lastly, how does your wife feel about all of this, or are you currently involved in a fission-based relationship with another historically more superior-aligned male? :)