The Norse always thought so 😄. Women ran the homes (read: farms full of servants and free employees) and directed the men into battle with each other. Though to the best of my knowledge all of the sagas revolved around the men either in title or at least as primary characters. Though in fairness the sagas were written by Christians as almost no one was literate during the Viking Age. What I think modern women miss about this era of power though is that women wielded this power not by emasculating their men. That's like maintaining power over your car by putting a weaker engine in it. A strong leader maintains the strength and capabilities of their resources; only an insecure one is threatened enough by them to knock them down. The irony is that the insecure leader instills resentment and hostility, while the strong one cultivates loyalty. But that's clown world for ya.

Couldn’t agree more… recently saw Szabo post something along the lines of “too many Samson’s with Delilah’s who force them to cut their hair” and that really resonated with me

A man with a woman who supports and compliments his strength can do anything and vice versa.

It's a sign of an insecure woman threatened by her man's strength. If you can't trust him to be strong, either he's not the one, or you have some trust issues to work on, or both. Either way leaving that unresolved is a recipe for a toxic relationship of resentment and ineffectiveness.

True both ways, but best not to conflate being demanding with being strong. Any hungry baby can be demanding. Strength enables magnanimity.