Asking if one gender is superior to another, is like asking whether the color blue is better than the color green. 

They are both completely appropriate colors, depending upon context. Blue seems to work best for the sky, although skies often show other facets of color. Green is best, most of the time, for plants. Both are good for everyday use. It is impossible for green to be superior to blue, or vice versa. It is impossible for men to be superior to women.

Men, only by average, are bigger, tougher, and less communicative. Women, only by averaging again, are smaller, more tender, and more communicative. As there are exceptions to most rules of nature, this is one of those areas that only unnaturally bent animals, called humans, dare to venture.

Why should this be? The answer is in humans newness to the planet, and the long road ahead; insofar as man needs to learn to find common ground and not squabble over superficial differences.

The reason why any human looks upon another as inferior is always based in insecurity.

No one would call an African American, Indian, or homosexual inferior, UNLESS he or she feels somehow threatened by the differences, and/or the competency of the other.

Those who historically wanted to oppress others are historically revealed to be not superior, but more than a little concerned that those “others” are somehow out to get them, win power, or corrupt their “way of life.”

Hitler did this with the Jews, Gypsies, and homosexuals of Europe. The Spanish Inquisition did this to repress knowledge, paganism, and to promote the patriarchy of a powerful Church.

Almost all “civilizations” did this in the form of enslaving others, or taking their lands and property. It continues today in the form of racism, sexism, ageism, and to some degree, nationalism.

One form of fixation on gender differences happens when a powerful form of institution or authority attacks, or blames, a sub culture, such as feminism, for destruction of the family. Never mind that before man even discovered fire, men and women hunted, gathered, (often side by side) yet our ancestors also learned to divide these tasks to some degree so that resource gathering was optimized, serial monogamy became a winning strategy for child rearing, and imperfect systems of control were devised. 

Men, being physically stronger than women as they often are, took control of women when they still felt the insecure need to possess, rather than cooperate with them. They set up iron-clad religions based on the superiority of Male-ness, assuming God to be exclusively male. They systematically stamped out ancient views that equally worshiped the female aspects of strength and creation.

In the modern world, traces of this still linger. People will point to scripture, or long tradition, or anything they can find really, to support this unbalanced position.

A person is not a possession. Any ancient tradition that teaches such, will come into first conflict, then struggle, and eventually reform sooner or later.

In fact, for some, the entire idea of any hierarchy is ludicrous. Even in the rest of the natural world we find much more complexity, inter –dependence and cooperation, than we find a chain of command. There is more value, and essential diversity, in a food web, than in a food chain.

When we do note our unique gifts, we will celebrate them rather than tolerate them. When we as humans, embrace our co-evolution with other life forms, much as when we see our planet from space, we recognize instantly our belonging to this web, our connection to all things, and not just our differences.