Evolution of the Female
It may seem odd that, in today's modern western world, the preferred sex for many expectant parents is still a boy. Maybe it's a kind of inherent attitude that males are physically stronger, and therefore seen as better investments for their families? Or, maybe it's because egotistical males feel that unless there's a male offspring to carry on his name, his genes will be some how lost for ever? Actually, that's kind of ironic really, considering a recent report done in Australia found that as many as one in five men may not be the biological fathers of the kids they're raising.

Ah, but I digress...

So, in our new technology driven world, where brains are more important than brawn and more women are opting to be single mothers, is this attitude changing?In years gone by women were almost always financially dependent on men. He was "the man of the house"; going out each day to work as the family's sole breadwinner. Women were merely the baby makers and housekeepers whose non- domestic talents were almost always stifled by society's narrow patriarchal attitudes and traditions. How could a woman possibly achieve academically or have a success career with a tribe of kids, a mountain of laundry and other household chores, while still keeping up her 'wifely duties' to her husband? Now days with all our modern appliances housework has become far less labour intensive, the women's liberation movement is in full swing, and of course the 'the pill' has allowed more women than ever before to enter a whole a new era of independence.Of course, from a business point of view, it's really just good sense to employ women, particularly in 'white collar' positions, since studies suggest that females, generally, aren't only just as capable of the same tasks but are better at team building and communicating. Interestingly, researchers also conclude that women actually tend to make better investment decisions than men do.

A survey, by investment site "Digital Look", found that women consistently earn higher returns for their investments. So, maybe it's just a process of sound economic evolution, that as the workforce becomes less labour intensive, more women should enter it? Yes, Sir (Ma'am?), right now women are surely, economically speaking, the modern world's most under utilised resource, but is that all about to change forever, as we move further into the twenty first century and beyond? In 1950 only one-third of western women of working age had a paid job. Today two-thirds have paid jobs, making up almost half of the western workforce. More females, than ever before are enrolling in Universities. In fact, in Britain more women than men are now studying to become doctors and engineers.

By the end of the last century women hit the proverbial glass ceiling. It would seem now as if they are poised to smashed right through it leaving many a man at the bottom to sweep up the pieces, as they realise their full feminine potential.

Could the world, right now, be on the verge of an estragon powered takeover? But, realistically, how much further can the pendulum of change swing?

We've come a long way from they days when man was required to clubbed and dragged the evening meal back to the cave and fend off anything threatening with a shout and a big stick. However, while man is not longer traditionally the 'provider and protector', will many women still continue to instinctively look for those qualities in a mate?

Can a few decades of social engineering really undo millions of years of human evolution?

Footnote: Yes, I realise in some countries matriarchal tribes have and probably still do exist.