Male domination is necessary for a society to have net gender equality.

Thanks for agreeing to this debate. While I am not sure where you got your opening quote, note the fact I say “net gender equality” by which I mean “the same influence over society”. Granted, you add the caveat “unless there is a sound biological reason for different treatment”. I contend a certain amount of bias in favor of men must exist in order to “compensate” men for the fact, all else being equal, women tend to exert greater influence over society thru the role of “gatekeeper” to reproduction which would qualify as “a sound biological reason for different treatment”. Consequently, this influence inherent to women and the stated goal of “the same influence over society” does not necessarily mean equal opportunity. The goal is what we might call “output based equality” in the face of the the inherent different influence we might call “input based inequality”. By acting as reproductive gatekeepers, women indeed have a real influence over society. As gatekeepers, women regulate which men engage in reproductive activities, when they get to do so, in what fashion they get to do so, and under what circumstances just to name a few ways. [Note: I presume an absence of rape for this analysis.] As a result, women get to determine who is conceived, who gestates, and ultimately who gets to exist and have the same legal right to live and thrive and eventually take places in society as potentially productive members. To say reproductive gatekeeping does not accord women “any real influence” in society would suggest the mothers of Einstein, Jonas Salk, Washington, Ghandi, and Moses were all insignificant in the course of society and history. Yet, without these women, their respective children would not be at the particular points in history at which they each proved quite pivotal. You assert, “According to your line of thought the only thing women can influence is the population, which we already have enough” is erroneous. At no point did I say women’s only influence was thru the population. Even if I had, the fact you think “we already have enough” of the population is irrelevant as to whether women influence society thru reproduction. You also point out “Gender equality is not limited to reproduction. It has a much broader sense and significance” as if I said otherwise; I did not. I said, however I suppose I might not have made it clear, reproductive gatekeeping is one factor in favor of a woman’s influence on society to “balance” when measuring gender equality. You close with two paragraphs which might be relevant had I claimed, for example, women should be slaves. Again, I said no such thing. I said, “some male dominance is required for a truly gender equal society.” The degree and form of such male dominance remains an open question. Nor does a male dominated society have to be authoritarian. Imagine a society where, as a general cultural rule, the primary male of each household makes the decisions for said household with the right of refusal reserved to the primary female (assuming a mixed male-female household) for cases such as the safety, stability, and the prevention of abuse. Further suppose legal rights are structured so as to prevent abuse and to maintain safety and stability of the household, so as to help bolster this cultural rule and the influence of women should such influence otherwise wane unnecessarily. Nothing in this description requires such a society to be “authoritarian”.