Final answer:
Thomas Paine argued that the distinctions between kings and subjects are artificial and not supported by nature, unlike the inherent biological differences between men and women. He emphasized the idea that all humans share a common nature with natural rights, which are inalienable and universal, irrespective of artificial social hierarchies.
Step-by-step explanation:
When Thomas Paine stated that the difference between men and women is a distinction of nature, he was referring to the inherent biological and perhaps psychological differences that exist due to nature. On the other hand, he implied that the difference between kings and their subjects is not natural but rather a social construct, without a basis in the natural world. Therefore, all human beings, regardless of their social status or roles, share a common nature, and such distinctions as kingship are artificial and not supported by the laws of nature.
Thomas Paine and other philosophers like John Locke argued for the natural rights of individuals, which are inalienable and cannot be revoked by governments because they are not bestowed by governments. These rights, including life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, derive from our existence as human beings and are not dependent upon one's status in a social hierarchy.
In essence, Paine rejected the hereditary monarchy as it did not fulfill the idea of social contract, where individuals consent to political power. The differences between rulers and the ruled are not justified by nature, unlike the biological differences between genders. This was a fundamental idea behind the movement towards democracy and equality that took place during the Enlightenment and was an influential concept in the formation of the United States.