First Thoughts on Gender

I'm not sure I am ready to delve into this one, but I figure whatever makes me least comfortable is the most potent.  Irrelevant subjects stir nothing.
Gender inequality is very old.  Did it ever make sense for efficiency's sake?  Women are the limiting factor in human reproduction.  Males have such a high capacity that it could be mistaken for limitless.  Perhaps the domination of the man, who has "unlimited" reproductive potential, over the woman, who, individually, limits reproductive efficiency, could be an efficient method.  Efficient, how?  A man has more of a stake in (and, it follows, biologically, more of a drive to) having frequent sex.  It could follow that dominating one or more females for the purpose of demanding frequent reproductive attempts would be efficient.  Not necessarily the most efficient or the "right" way to achieve efficiency, but it is a possibility.  It would seem MORE efficient for the male to roam and spread his seed as far and wide as possible, but at some point the family became a preferred way to ensure offspring reached reproductive age.  But that doesn't mean family was the most efficient:  agriculture certainly isn't.  Hunting and gathering became, perhaps, socially inefficient, the family becoming socially efficient inside of the agricultural system.

Things to research/think about:
familial evolution in relation to agriculture
find article on the efficiency of hunting/gathering in the geographic birthplace of agriculture
various familial constructs in different culture
synonyms for "efficient" (seriously)