@Atheosis That's nothing but baseless nonsense and historical revisionism conconcted for the political benefit of disingenuous interest groups. If women were assets, then they were some pretty strange assets: the kind of assets that live longer, safer lives than their owners; the kind of assets whose owner must risk their own lives to protect; the kind of assets which impose a legal responsibility on the owner as to their welfare; the kind of assets which cannot be sold or mistreated without legal consequence. In other words: assets which bear little or no resemblance to any other form of asset. The facts of history say very different than this sort of one-sided drivel which is virtually always given without any form of citation or shred of legitimate evidence backing it up.