What Male-to-female Ratio would your ideal Society for you to live in have?

BurritoisDog · 2024-08-19T20:41:46+00:00

It would be some kind of hell to end up an incel with a 2:1 ratio but it would still happen.

Rockkk333 · 2024-08-19T21:10:56+00:00

Found this interesting
Here's the information in English about times and places with the highest proportion of women in countries:

Soviet Union after World War II: After enormous losses in the male population during the war, the proportion of women in some regions exceeded 60%.
Rwanda after the 1994 genocide: The genocide led to a significant surplus of women. In the years following, the female population was around 70%.
Latvia in the present day: With about 54%, Latvia has one of the highest proportions of women in Europe.
Small island nations: Some small island nations like Martinique or Guadeloupe have a high proportion of women (over 52%) due to male labor migration.
Russia today: The female population is about 53.7%, which can be attributed to various historical and social factors.
Some African countries: Countries like South Sudan or the Central African Republic have temporarily very high proportions of women in certain regions due to conflicts and migration.

optimistic_entropi · 2024-08-19T23:55:09+00:00

There is some really interesting information on this out there. For instance we see a correlation in a rise in violent crime and a surplus of men in societies that practice infanticide of females. The opposite is not great either as a surplus of women leads to an increase in polygyny and wealthier men tend to monopolize women leaving poorer men unmarried which might increase violence rates as well. Its kind of crazy

Salt_Mathematician24 · 2024-08-19T21:52:03+00:00

50-50.

Edit: Funny how most women are saying 50/50 yet the red pill men here are saying they want to reduce the male population up to 90% just for the sake of easier sex. Thought feminists were the misandrist ones 🙄

apresonly · 2024-08-19T20:34:35+00:00

isn't it about even now? and don't we all agree it would be nice for everyone to be paired up who wants to be? so then 50/50 would be the ideal unless we know like 10% of women want to be single forever or something.

According_Second4222 · 2024-08-19T20:20:46+00:00

Yeah, that's probably about right. What's the whole thing that we have twice as many female ancestors as male ancestors? 1:2 is probably the happy place lol.

SufficientAdvantage8 · 2024-08-20T01:09:33+00:00

60:40 f:m will do the job, no need in extremes like 90:10

OtPayOkerSmay · 2024-08-20T05:27:46+00:00

In the current market? 66%F/34%M

In a market where women aren't inundated with options and crippled by the paradox of choice? 50/50

NockerJoe · 2024-08-20T06:08:22+00:00

0% male 0% female 100% hemaphrodite

I have no idea how it would work but we'd probably find whole new forms of sexism.

starksoph · 2024-08-19T20:27:57+00:00

50/50

MongoBobalossus · 2024-08-19T20:20:16+00:00

The Dr. Strangelove Ratio: 10 women to each man.

IronDBZ · 2024-08-19T22:05:16+00:00

35:65

I think you can have a balanced society like this. Most women don't want men, most men want women, more people are happy this way.

Any social consequences from this can be handled, but specifically for a dating focused question, it'd be best this way.

balhaegu · 2024-08-20T06:36:48+00:00

In the past, when men would often get killed from frequent wars, this was probably closer to the true ratio

IdiAminD · 2024-08-20T07:40:44+00:00

In my anecdotal experience - it is enough to have 45/55 to make dating easy mode for men.

Rockkk333 · 2024-08-20T10:59:35+00:00

Yea.. i guess the whole theoretical is me wanting to have easier time getting laid
And i wondered because women also complain about all the massive male thirst they encounter and don't like it. So i was thinking: everybody would like less men.

I don't buy that 'it's not about how many men are there at all, if you don't get over the women's treshhold of value women just don't choose you, no matter how little men there are', at least not 100%, i guess it's somewhere in the middle.

Out of real life: I had fuckbuddy relationships with many women in my life, and 90% they leave me only when they 'i found someone who is more serious and wants to start a relationship with me'. So if there were less men around this would happen less.

Theory: Also i make a cracy speculation that women care a lot about what other women think (eg i think women dress greatly not so much for men but for other women), once a man becomes more a 'rarity', it would become a status symbol for women

Stacie_Sophia199 · 2024-08-20T12:20:14+00:00

Its interesting to see how a lot of guys want a surplus of women, while women themselves prefer a 50/50 ratio. Kinda sweet that men want women to outnumber them and for women to rule the earth (insert devilish laugh).

Feisty_Response_9401 · 2024-08-20T13:34:37+00:00

Although sexually it would probably be a benefit for men, I don't see any country in which a higher female population would prosper, since men do the essential work that would keep those women in a safe and stable environment.

Sure, fewer sexual abuse and so on, but also more power imbalance in relationships that would benefit the minority of men.

DoinIt989 · 2024-08-20T14:51:14+00:00

10:1 Female:Male.

Hot-Corgi-2457 · 2024-08-20T17:35:06+00:00

Nah, it’s got to be at least 8 women to 1 man. Probably, more like 10, really.

sprckets21 · 2024-08-19T20:39:11+00:00

In this world of twice as many women you’d just open up polygamy. You’re not going to get women to stop keep chasing the top, the guys at the top are just going to be getting even more of the resource of casual attention from women.

If we’re talking 80/20 rule, what would result from twice as many women is only 70/30. To satisfy the casual market it would just mean more casual dating/sex and action for a slightly larger percentage of males.

YveisGrey · 2024-08-20T04:10:27+00:00

None of this makes sense (and perhaps it’s not supposed to) but the whole point of males is the competition otherwise they are just a sunk cost. Males are expensive to raise but can’t reproduce like females so why have males at all and not just females or why have so many males? Competition the competition protects the species and increases survival. But also if the sex ratio is skewed and there are more females than males, males would have more mating opportunities and thus having males would be advantageous and become more common the same works vice versa so an equilibrium is reached via natural selection. I know this is supposed to be a hypothetical but like I said the whole point of sex is the competition so it doesn’t make sense to theorize that sex could still be sex but without the competitive aspect. Also if it were easier for men to mate because of a skewed ratio the drive to mate would probably be lower so it wouldn’t even matter. Again the competitive aspect is why the drive is there to begin with it. All this to say you can’t have your cake and eat it.

silverhippo15 · 2024-08-19T22:12:42+00:00

Give me 7 girls for each day of the week

dailydose20 · 2024-08-19T22:27:06+00:00

I have actually written multiple posts about this same exact question but never actually posted them because I didn't want to put in the effort of making it fluid and coherent lol

My answer is that if 100males are born then 110-120 females should be born, so about 115. This is already quite a big change considering males are naturally born more often 105m/100f, then add in many societies are much more likely to abort female babies.

Any gender ratio too extreme is just going to fuck up society for both genders, economically and socially. A society with 66% women would suck, can you imagine the nagging with that many women? (Kidding😉). Even if a society with twice the number of women than men can function it wouldn't be society as we know it, it would basically be an alternate reality that wouldn't be as good as some may think it sounds.

When you consider that women have higher standards than men, are more likely to be content being single, more likely to be okay with sharing a partner if his value is high enough. I think a slight female surplus would generally improve men's quality of life by a good amount and not hurt women's quality of life by much. Oh and still have the world function.

I think my math might be not correct cuz I'm tired but basically women shouldn't outnumber men by more than 10%

Brilliant-Witness449 · 2024-08-20T02:09:01+00:00

1:1000 - it’s literally what’s required for far too many men to have the same number of options women have with a roughly 1:1 ratio

DaddyStone13 · 2024-08-20T02:39:33+00:00

it doesn't matter what the ratio is as the women will just chase the top tier of men.

MaxDureza · 2024-08-20T06:17:56+00:00

40/60 (men/women) is not that unusual when you consider that it is what most college campuses are these days and even then it still feels like lots of guys are struggling to get a date and unwanted celibacy.

qwertyuduyu321 · 2024-08-19T20:32:14+00:00

In a dating economy where there are 100 men and 200 women, men would still face immense scarcity by design of nature.

Women in relatively wealthy and free societies only fancy about the top 20-5% of men. Let's meet in between, and say it's top 12.5%.

That's 200 women competing for 13 males. Sure, some will settle but most won't. Let's say another 7 will settle and go lower than they'd like or think they deserve.

This still leaves roughly 4/5 men "unsatisfied" as far as dating/sex-life/family is concerned.

The truth is that if women live in a society that has a certain threshold of both wealth and freedom (which I absolutely endorse), then most men are just irrelevant romantically/sexually. 2:1 is not nearly enough to make that go away. You do the Math.

A ratio that makes up for women's innate disinterest in most men woulnd't make up for all the adverse effects you mentioned and there are many more of similar severity.

Most men slave away in hope's of locking down a somewhat pretty and nice women, and that's exactly the economic fuel men thrive on and always have. Needless to say, for a good amount of men this motivation is nothing but the "carrot on the stick" situtation but luckily they don't know it otherwise they would stop producing which would be an ENORMOUS tax on goods and services (that is wealth).

attendquoi · 2024-08-19T20:54:29+00:00

I'm cool with the way it is now. Not everyone wants to pair up, nor are they entitled to find someone to pair with.

Bekiala · 2024-08-19T21:08:06+00:00

Interesting idea. I'm in the US and I believe we have slightly more women than men.

I understand Nepal and Russia have significantly more women while India and China have more men.

I tend to want things to be the natural 50/50 although with medicine has changed nature in the way that more boys survive which seems good.

BetterString9306 · 2024-08-19T21:13:34+00:00

1 men to 3 women.

Thats the best one.

linthetrashbin · 2024-08-19T23:20:05+00:00

10 men for every one woman. This way, women can be even more selective with their partners and will hopefully stop choosing assholes. /s

unbannableBob · 2024-08-20T03:14:59+00:00

I think 1 male to 8-12 females would be optimal for a happiness point of view.

But game theory shows 50/50 from a competition point of view.

Only_Calligrapher839 · 2024-08-20T03:26:05+00:00

1 man for 6 women, I’m a dreamer 🤩

Professional_Chair28 · 2024-08-19T20:22:02+00:00

I’m honestly fine with the current ratio.

DJ_Dialga · 2024-08-19T20:48:01+00:00

Ideal is 50% or whatever it ends up being naturally. Anything else is just wishing that millions of people of one gender would die or be aborted before birth. And usually the result of that is too many men because cultures as a whole teach people that sons are worth more than daughters, so the dating situation for men would be even more dire (a top scientist in China proposed at one point to make polyandry legal so men would stop joining gangs and committing crimes)

AutoModerator · 2024-08-19T20:29:49+00:00

Attention!

You can post off topic/jokes/puns as a comment to this Automoderator message.
For "Debate" and "Question for X" Threads: Parent comments that aren't from the target group will be removed, along with their child replies.
If you want to agree with OP instead of challenging their view or if the question is not targeted at you, post it as an answer to this comment.
OP you can choose your own flair according to these guidelines., just press Flair under your post!

Thanks for your cooperation and enjoy the discussion!

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

Main_Following1881 · 2024-08-20T11:14:23+00:00

I had this thought once but then i realized its not that theres too many men, the issue is woman generally arent as horny as dudes.

Fun_Push7168 · 2024-08-20T15:22:03+00:00

If we were talking strictly for sexual selection about 3:1 makes nothing sides happy.

However every scenario I've been in with a surplus of women saw an unsustainable workload on men without bringing in other men to handle that.

Without analysing every detail 50/50 is probably best when considering the balance of all things.

MaterialOk6309 · 2024-08-20T21:49:33+00:00

Mine is 47% male, 53% female. İdeally i'm looking for monogamous, healthy heterosexual relatipnships. But we need more baby girls. Girls need to be little more present and boys should be little scarce so that it is felt, despite being close to 1:1 ratio. To balance the sexual marketplace a little and make men little more valuable.

Difficult_Falcon1022 · 2024-08-21T03:15:41+00:00

The one thing we can all agree on is that the world would be better with less men in it.

Freethinker312 · 2024-08-19T20:21:35+00:00

50% men, 50% women.

RavenWolf1 · 2024-08-20T05:09:10+00:00

100% women. World would be better place for sure.

Financial_Leave4411 · 2024-08-19T20:43:50+00:00

1 woman per 10 men. That way all women could get a top 10% man and every man would be working to make society better in an attempt to get themselves into the top 10%.

GonnaGetBumpy · 2024-08-19T21:15:17+00:00

45% dudes. I am not sure what the minimum a highly functioning modern society needs, but unless women are going to start doing the really dangerous and physical jobs, we need a lot of men. At 55% women, there is a decent enough chance for each man to find a mate, even though hypergamy will always be a thing in any distribution. Anything more than that divide and women will vote destructively (like any permanent majority), creating intractable conflict. I feel like a 10% difference doesn’t automatically set each group into hard political factions.

kongeriket · 2024-08-19T22:54:19+00:00

I'm very much fine with the current ratio.

Study Rwanda to see what happens when the ratio gets close to 3 women per man. It's not as simple as people think.

Similarly, study Qatar to see what happens when the ratio gets close to 3 men per woman. It's also not fun.

Crimson-Pilled · 2024-08-19T23:25:24+00:00

Using Dunbar's number, 1:150

AutoModerator · 2024-08-19T19:15:54+00:00

Attention!

You can post off topic/jokes/puns as a comment to this Automoderator message.
For "Debate" and "Question for X" Threads: Parent comments that aren't from the target group will be removed, along with their child replies.
If you want to agree with OP instead of challenging their view or if the question is not targeted at you, post it as an answer to this comment.
OP you can choose your own flair according to these guidelines., just press Flair under your post!

Thanks for your cooperation and enjoy the discussion!

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

MDF87 · 2024-08-19T22:00:01+00:00

50/50... I'm bisexual.

GloeSticc · 2024-08-20T01:35:47+00:00

50/50. It's best for both parties.

Hoopy223 · 2024-08-20T02:25:00+00:00

I’d say 1:10000 but then that 1 guy would be overwhelmed trying to squish all the bugs, unclog all the sinks, move all the furniture, grab stuff off the top shelves and opening all the jars.

IlIIlIIIlIl · 2024-08-20T02:49:54+00:00

Men will always want sex much more than women on average, so I would add enough women to balance the scales so everyone is satisfied.

Innocent_boi_77 · 2024-08-20T07:29:04+00:00

[permanently deleted]

ThienBao1107 · 2024-08-20T08:34:09+00:00

50/50 is best

HODL_monk · 2024-08-20T09:54:19+00:00

66 % female world would be a woke dystopia of the worst kind of welfare nanny state. Deficits everywhere, moneyprinter go BRRRRR everywhere. Inflation gone wild. Free college, free houses (except there won't be any built), free healthcare, green new deal everywhere, 100% solar and wind power, but it suddenly kicks off when a bunch of clouds comes by, or its a hot day and the wind stops. Alcohol would still be illegal in the constitution. Jack booted thugs would hunt down the last remaining men and suck them dry for child support, they might even legally require ALL men to pay child support as a bonus 'male tax', whether they have a biological child or not. Its not about just sex, its also about what kind of Hellscape Barbie World we would actually have to live in, if EVERY election went to the female candidate, and a far left Bernie/AOC/Warren government was always in power.

I personally think a 66% male world would be a FAR better place, even if inceldom was the majority situation, and it was pure Chad gone wild with the remaining women. Every woman could vote for whatever feel good socialist spendthrift candidate they wanted, but none of them would ever win. There probably wouldn't be an income tax, or we would have gotten rid of it like the 18th amendment, once we saw that it WASN'T for the Rockefellers and the Carnegies, as the corrupt politicians promised, but to massively grow government, on the backs of the middle class. Ponzi Schemes like Social Security would either never exist, or would have been done away with, when the real cost overruns started showing up. This would be a society that just worked, government would provide physical security for our bodies and our stuff, and little else. Things that are clearly unsustainable would be shut down relatively quickly, and world-changing technologies like Bitcoin would have been adopted almost as soon as they were invented. There would be less caution, and more spirit of innovation. Everyone could afford a house and would have one, because the population of the world would be much smaller, and there would be plenty of blue collar workers to build whatever was needed.

Of course, the reality is, we have a 50/50 ratio because that is what we need to thrive on the planet. No non-advanced creature could survive with a lopsided sex ratio, as the long-lived sea turtle is discovering, as all their new turtles are being born mostly female, and the species is dying out as a result. The Earth will only be habitable for a certain amount of time, and we used up like 80 + percent of that time just evolving to our current state. I doubt we would even make it to our current state, if we had a 66 % ratio, in either direction. As to humanity's future, I think social media might be the Great Filter, the thing that prevents any advanced society from spreading across the galaxy, and brings on the Rat Utopia that ends us all.

Adject_Ive · 2024-08-20T12:09:46+00:00

It won't matter because women will still go for the top 20%.

Innocent_boi_77 · 2024-08-20T08:40:21+00:00

50-50. But I wish 25 were gay, and all 50 women were straight.

Lift_and_Lurk · 2024-08-19T20:36:47+00:00

I like the current ratio. Dudes can either get themselves where they need to be or fall off and jerk off to Onlyfans.

abaxeron · 2024-08-19T21:28:18+00:00

Several scenarios.

One: we stay biologically the same as we are now, and tweaking to the lifestyle is minimal: ~103-108 men per 100 women; sex ratio among population matches natural sex ratio at birth (which varies by the source and probably by region). No sex is selectively aborted, no sex is dying excessively. I believe the vast majority of men with IQ above room temperature will accept being alive as more important than having sexual abundance. [sarcasm] Men with below room temperature IQ probably should shut up; they don't have any problem with attracting women anyway[/sarcasm]

Two: we are allowed to tweak societal order a lot. In this scenario, 100% men. And 100% women. And a moat between them with occasional trade. And a distant plot of land where each generation, weirdos go to try out living together before they inevitably return disappointed within a year or two. "But what about libido" - Libido is surprisingly easy to forget about when it doesn't get tickled and massaged every second, with thousands of women on radio, TV, and in real life trying to out-sexy each other before your sensations. "But prisons" - A lot of men who are put in prisons are low-impulse-control to the point of crazy anyway. Our brain is very good at suppressing cravings when there's no temptation. In this scenario, it does not really matter how many men and women are on the different sides of the moat, but my investigation into connection between food security and farmland ownership by gender shows that beyond certain point, things will balance themselves through famines.

Three: labor is automated, biology is conquered, reproduction is done within gestation pods. The answer depends on wether or not both sexes are equally capable of maintaining and operating the machinery. But in short, the ratio should be optimized from utilitarian perspective. If we have 10 types of equally-distributed machines to produce everything we need (type 1 - gestation pods; type 2 - hydroponics; type 3 -... etc etc etc), and men are better at operating 6 of them, while women are better at operating 4, 60/40 is the way. Keep the productivity at maximum, this is the only way anyone gets to have free time. Craft yourself a sex bot if you want to spend this free time on stupid monkey things and can't find a willing partner, you lazy animal.

Mindless-Ad-57 · 2024-08-20T07:17:31+00:00

60/40 (men/women).

BananaB0yy · 2024-08-19T22:44:33+00:00

whoever says anythibg else then 50/50 is not in a healthy headspace

SaBahRub · 2024-08-19T21:18:27+00:00

50:50

Just have men be better

fucksiclepizza · 2024-08-19T22:59:19+00:00

50-50. Not everyone is meant to reproduce. And even if it was heavily skewed with a lot more women, those women still just wouldn't want any old loser. You'd just be rejected by even more women.

-Kalos · 2024-08-20T00:54:27+00:00

Incels would still exist lmao. And most of those women would probably prefer to be alone or with each other than they would share. What a fucking dystopia

operajunkie · 2024-08-20T01:50:44+00:00

It seems to me a hugely lopsided ratio of women to men would result in more sexual violence, no? That seems to me it would cancel out any other perceived benefits. I’d like it to stay 50/50 ish.

Melodic_Structure928 · 2024-08-20T06:12:54+00:00

If the population as a whole being around 50/50ish (I believe it's close to this) leads to most women still chasing a small percentage of men. Then the ratio of men to women will still not affect there mating strategies.

plenty of women would rather be single then date someone that don't like, and yes often times that's anyone who isn't Chad.

Thus this scenario would mostly serve to make Chad's harems bigger. A few more men (well percentage wise) would get mates too.

we could talk about how this is bad for women who want LTR with top tier men or men who want well... mostly anyone at this point. But I guess those ppl will most likely end up alone.

I don't find it to be a bad thing as you can't force attraction and I guess it is what it is.

Old_Luck285 · 2024-08-20T07:59:39+00:00

Uh, I love hypotheticals. I think a surplus of women would lead to: - polygamy being legalised - very attractive and healthy men are actively encouraged to donate sperm and receive financial rewards - raising kids alone or with another woman is normalised and incentived - more leftist social politics - more women pick up "manly" jobs - but likely not enough (at least at first), so there's a drop in productivity - attractive men still fuck around (and are even less incentived to settle down because now there's no child support due to a more socialist approach) - unattractive men are still ignored by women

If the sex imbalance becomes extreme (20-25% men or less): - women now rule society - boys are being discriminated against ("he always needs special treatment. Why can't he just be like us?") - increased sexual abuse of men (grooming, prostitution) - some men live like "kings": they don't work but regularly "serve" their woman. While this lifestyle sounds like hitting the jackpot, they soon realise it's a golden cage (dependent on her, no means to support himself, existence as a "trophy partner" to show off).

Flightlessbirbz · 2024-08-20T14:37:26+00:00

I don’t think having a lot more women than men would have exactly the effect men here are thinking. There would be more of a gynocentric society, more cat ladies, and more women in relationships with women. Men would be in slightly higher demand, but women still wouldn’t want guys who don’t enhance their lives in any way since women don’t prioritize sex as much.

The natural ~50/50 ratio is probably best. Slightly more women also works. More men would not be good.

LordShadows · 2024-08-20T12:37:29+00:00

50-50 with a culture encouraging polyamoury, open relationships, and sexual positivity.

Scarcity of relationships in our equal rights society is created by the fact that mono relationship represents a high risk and high personal investment with no real interest anymore as division of tasks and roles in a home isn't a thing anymore.

Women don't need a man to work and bring back ressources home, and men don't get someone to take care of the home and raise children in their place.

Yet, mono relationships still mean high emotional responsibility toward ones partner and to give up experiences with others.

If you choose wrong, it can get pretty ugly.

Open and poly relationships, while still demanding, give contingencies. It opens the possibility of having other emotional support and keeps the possibility of having new experiences. In a way, they aren't as risky long term as mono relationships.

However, poly means division of attention, which means the difficult reality that one might not give you as much love, attention, and support to you as someone else. But is it better for people to give you some love and attention that they want to give you or them not giving you any even if they want to because they're in a mono relationship with someone else?

To be clear, I don't think non-monogamy is inherently better than monogamy, but it seems better adapted to the challenges of our modern society.

There are also roots in evolutionary psychology that tend to say that, too, from my understanding.

But, in the end, it's highly theoretical and just my personal opinion.

gloomett3 · 2024-08-20T15:36:52+00:00

Something like China where there’s more men than women, enough for there to be a noticeable difference but nothing overboard. Why? Every woman naturally gets more and theoretically better options, with the added benefit of men working harder to reach said standard. There’s enough woman that a relationship is realistically attainable, enough to keep men hopeful while facilitating healthy competition.

Fine_Video7691 · 2024-08-19T20:47:38+00:00

If one thinks the OPs ratio is favorable, you can experience it at many institutes of higher education. But is it really that great? Or does it leave people with either personal debt, society with government debt and credentials that lack economic value?

Dr2Nobody · 2024-08-19T20:50:57+00:00

Talking about MTF ratios XD

Try a different wording so you don't overlap existing terms, lmao

Title	What Male-to-female Ratio would your ideal Society for you to live in have?
Author	Rockkk333
Upvotes	12
Comments	407
Date	August 19, 2024 7:15 PM UTC (1 year ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/PurplePillDebate
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/PurplePillDebate/comments/1ewaeba/what_maletofemale_ratio_would_your_ideal_society/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/PurplePillDebate/what-male-to-female-ratio-would-your-ideal-society.1527740 https://theredarchive.com/post/1527740

Comments