I think you like naming fallacies without knowing what they are. That is a common tactic among Flat Earthers (oh I'm sure I'll be hit with another charge here). It is is not "No True Scotsman" to say that it is hyperbolic to suggest that say that statement was Christian nationalism.
You asked for an example, and then when presented with one, said, no, that’s not really an example.
Your argument to antiquity: “that's what all of the world thought for thousands of years”
Your argument to popularity: “probably 99% or more of people in the world think today”
Not that you’re trying to use those points in a cogent way. You heard “christian nationalist” and proceeded to attack a strawman of gender advantage, which has nothing to do with it. I gave you a salient example, and you went off with a half cocked opinion, conveniently sidestepping any further discussion of the actual implications.
