With regard to marked nouns, I recall from studies in linguistics and semiotics that unmarked generally psychologically preferred, although there are exceptions. Stable is preferable to unstable, sane to insane, free to unfree, kind to unkind, man to woman. The use of unmarked above is one such exception -- unmarked or unblemished is preferable to marked or blemished. There are also some marked anomalies that are true anomalies, but I don't recall any at the moment.
Also from what I recall from the courses is that wo-man means a man that is missing something, and it has certainly developed that women are often perceived as lacking features attributed to men, and not just a penis -- reason, strength, even value.
And yet...and this relates to Act II...it is posited in some academic circles that marriage developed as a bartering system to strengthen social ties among groups. Women were literally given in marriage, just as a father gives his daughter to her groom in contemporary wedding ceremonies. Women have been collected as concubines, and as odalisques in harems. Almost no societies exist now where women have multiple husbands, and throughout history they, as well as matriarchies, have been rare. But societies still exist where women are bartered by their own families as chattel and not humans.
Even Gautama Buddha said that it is suffering to be a woman, and that it is better to have rebirth as a male. There is much I have enjoyed about being a female (marked word), but if I had to experience rebirth, I would far prefer to come back with a well-functioning penis and be strong and tall enough that I could go most anywhere unmolested (mark of preference). Of course, that's just what Gautama said, based on his training and background, not because of his enlightenment but instead reinforced by it. He also didn't think women could become a Buddha, that only men could, and so not only was rebirth as a man more favorable, but also more conducive to the ultimate outcome.
