...genera... - Tradução em português

Por favor, poderiam me explicar todo esse trecho abaixo?

“Consequently, the new civilization is to be a petticoat civilization, in which we must include the human race in those genera which are named after the female, as cows, geese, ducks, hens, &c.”

Embora tenha entendido a tradução, não consegui entender o sentido do parágrafo.

TESTE DE NÍVEL Faça um teste de inglês e descubra seu nível em 10 minutos! Este teste foi desenvolvido por professores experientes. O resultado sai na hora e com gabarito. INICIAR TESTE
6 respostas
Ricardo F. Bernardi 2 25 393
(Latin word)
- Plural of genus
>> géneros (PT) / gêneros (PT-BR) [Biology]

Consequently, the new civilization is to be a petticoat civilization, in which we must include the human race in those genera which are named after the female, as cows, geese, ducks, hens, and etc.

>> Consequentemente, a nova civilização deve ser uma civilização de anágua, na qual devemos incluir a humanidade naqueles gêneros que são nomeados a partir de fêmeas, como vacas, gansas, patas, galinhas, e por aí vai.

>> A consequência é uma nova civilização, que em sua fragilidade deve incluir gêneros que recebem nomes de fêmeas tais como vacas, gansas, patas, galinhas, e assim por diante.

REFERENCE: BROWNSON, Orestes Augustus. Selected Political Essays. Transaction Publishers. New Jersey (USA), 1990.
PPAULO 6 48 1.1k
It could also be "Consequentemente, a nova civilização deve ser uma civilização de saiotes... (para exemplificar, os escoceses usam saiotes).

On the context it could also be "de saias" (ou que vestirá saias).

I made this comment, for some of us might not be acquainted with the word "anágua", a very current word at the time of my grandmas. Anyway, women and those into fashion, the bookworms, etc, might be acquainted for sure.
PPAULO 6 48 1.1k
Plus, the small passage could lead to the reader to think wrongly what the essay is about. That is, to think a bit out of context as if it was a writing of our days in some respects. The text, first appeared into Brownson's Quarterly Review, January, 1849.

The previous paragraph reads:
The old civilization, now effete, committed the capital error of recognizing religion,   in the language of the authoress, superstition, - government, property, and "the ascendency of the male sex, " or family,   for the family cannot subsist without that ascendency ;  the new civilization will correct this error, and for religion substitute science ; for government, federation ; for law, instinct; for property, communal wealth ; for family, love ; and for the ascendency of the male sex, the administration of women.

And the subsequent goes like this:

...we need not enter. Some things may be assumed to be settled ; if not, the human race can settle nothing, and it is idle to examine the claims of a new theory. If any thing can be settled, it is that the man is the head of the woman,   that she is for him, not he for her ; and that religion, government, family, property, are essential elements of all civilization. Without them man must sink below the savage, for in the lowest savage state we find, at least, some reminiscences of them. Any system which proposes their abolition or essential modification is by that fact alone condemned, and proved to deserve no examination.

Just pointing that out, because one could think the author had a modern thinking by other century standards. Indeed the text isn't about women having prevalence (ascendency), but that they would be administrators and the society as a whole would have values, strategies, behavioral style and way of life. Take the subject of infidelity - one point that the author is against and something that he warns against, and certainly it made some impact on the U.S. Society, politics, what you have. Among other matters, the essay is prolific (or verbose if you wish).

But, certainly a bit on the liberal/progressive side, considering his statement (referring to other periodical) in which he maintained "The North American Review for last July, the most conservative periodical, except our own, in the country...

Ref. orestesbrownson
Ricardo F. Bernardi 2 25 393
PPAULO 6 48 1.1k
Thanks for sharing, Ricardo. It helps a lot.
Indeed as per video #1 it goes back to the piece being thought as an external one, then it´s explained as used as some undergarment. Whereas video #2 and 3 are more on the skirt side, or a piece skirt-ish that is part of a dress.
Indeed, as Wikipedia explains, the precise meaning varies over the centuries. It´s fashion in play.
What I referred to was the "anágua" as per Aurelio and Aulete definition: Vestuário -saia us. Sob vestido ou sob outra saia; saia de baixo.
The word meaning developed into the meaning of "only to a garment hanging from the waist, a half slip." as per video # 1 (the woman even mentioned lingerie in passing).

The author of the text, used the term metaphorically, of course. Because men and women have different styles of solving things and finding more subtle tactful, and skillful ways to deal with difficulties. Or at least he might have thought.
Breckenfeld 3 15 127

Petticoat além de denotar uma parte de vestiário feminino, serve para denotar uma área de atuação da mulher onde os homens são maioria.

Até mais.