>>43261868It's not that women can't plant and harvest crops. It's that they can't do it well enough, fast enough, or long enough. Farming is backbreaking, women have weak backs. They'd probably manage eventually, but a female only workforce simply could not perform on par with a the previous mostly (not all, but mostly) male workforce. Not in something like farming. And if you want to argue that women are as big and strong and biologically well engineered for hard labor men then you're wrong. It's not a matter of whether or not women ever HELPED with farmwork. Of course they helped, everyone did, there were no idle hands on a farm. But the men did the most work, the hardest work, and a female only farm would be much smaller and less productive than a traditional one.
>>43252294>4 years of fertility>2 children maximumSo apparently women take two straight years to give birth? How fucking stupid are you? Because last I checked it takes 9 months to have a baby, meaning it's technically possible (though unlikely)that a woman could have FIVE babies with one boy from 12-16. Furthermore, if it was necessary to increase population, the males would be impregnating multiple partners.
>They would not start reproducing around this age in the Middle Ages as they would not have the resources to provide for their wivesYou know absolutely nothing, including having the faintest idea of how much you don't know. Slapping "the patriarchy" sarcastically on something doesn't make you right.
