There are a couple of points I would like to interject here. First of all, "minorities", as in minority populations of the United States of America, have not been oppressed for thousands of years. The US has only existed as an independent republic for a little over two hundred years.
If you are attempting to extend this statement backwards in time, arguing that the genetic or political predecessors of "the oppressors" have been oppressing the genetic or political predecessors of "the oppressed", then you are patently and quite totally mistaken. If you look at human history as a whole, or even fairly recent human history, what you see is a whole bunch of people oppressing a whole bunch of other people, without very much discrimination on the basis of religion, race or creed.
Or, to put it in more accurate, neutral terms, you see all sorts of vibrant personal interaction, with a great variety of power relationships between the parties involved.
As far as gender issues are concern, men have historically been affected by society-imposed gender roles just as much as have women. Men were expected to be physically brave and strong, and serve the family by hunting, building, and exploring, things which most men enjoyed. Women were expected to be nurturing and loyal, serving the family by making homes, creating families, and caring for small children-- things which most women enjoyed.
..
The real story here is that economic change always outpaces social change, thus creating imbalances. Whenever there is an imbalance there will be pressure to correct it, and history has shown us that usually this pressure wins out in the end. Economic change marches on, rinse and repeat.
Bookmarks