Q4 Egalitarian minded or feminist women: If there were no men or we lived in a female-led culture, do you think you can run the society, keep the civilization alive and gather the qualifications that are expected from men (also be creative and stuff to enhance the life experience)? [There's more]

Financial_Leave4411 · 2024-08-22T12:21:42+00:00

Your post is all over they place. It’s random opinion after random option with no clear question. Are you just trying to argue that women aren’t important to society? This whole post really needs to be rewritten to be clear and concise.

yemma257 · 2024-08-22T13:49:34+00:00

Firstly, it’s just objectively false that men seem more interested in culture, art, history and politics. It’s disheartening that some men still view women as 2-dimensional beings who are only capable of “me shop 😲😲😲 me like new handbag 🤤🤤🤤”. I know men and women are interested in differing aspects of history, for example, men tend to love WWII and war history, whereas I notice many women gravitate to ancient Egypt or the American expansion westward (general trends I’ve noticed with my friends and their favorite historical time periods they love to info dump).

I personally know I have no need to be dependent on a man, as I am physically capable to perform majority of tasks to maintain my home, I know how to perform maintenance on my car, and I even know how to slaughter and process chickens, as well as processing an entire cow. Men are, on average, physically stronger than women, so perhaps for some more physically-demanding tasks it would take two of “us” (women) for one man.

I also work and have two degrees in STEM, and was already the breadwinner in my long term partnership. I work in a heavily male-dominated field, so I already do the work that was historically labeled “for men”. If the average salary in America is 45k, which means most men on the bell curve are making that, I’m already 2 standard deviations away from that group.

My parents instilled the importance of a work ethic and commitment to building long-term things in my life, so maybe this view that women do not need to be “useful” is a reflection of your own upbringing? It is very clear in my household that I must carve a path for myself and become a successful and contributing member of society/my country.

This post reads a bit poorly and I tried my best to answer your anecdotes with my own anecdotes. But overall, I have no trouble performing the same tasks that a man does. The world would suck without men though, as my dad is an awesome person and my best friend, and I have amazing friends and coworkers who are men. My brother is dope, and my partner is also the best. So yeah, I could live without men easily, but I enjoy their company and value they bring to my life.

There’s no way I’m spending time trying to convince someone I’m worthy of personhood or respect. I know the intrinsic value I hold in my community, culture, workplace, and home. It is of no concern whether red pill men/others on the internet view me as human or not, because my life has many complexities to focus on before that. I know what I am, and often, the belittling and degrading comes from a place of insecurity or hurt. I’m do not care if I’m catching strays from a poorly-regulated, insecure individual. It’s not like I’d hold their opinions in high regard anyways.

egalitarian-flan · 2024-08-22T12:21:49+00:00

Answering this as an egalitarian woman, I'm not a feminist.

Since women are looked down upon in some traditional views, i'm asking if you can be interesting, decent and capable as men are?

Yes, I can be, and already am in most ways. The only way I'm not currently is physically, but I can absolutely get better in that regard by doing much more strength training.

A lot of the dispute and confusion IMO stems from the experience and observations that women do not act the way feminism implied and how egalitarian men expect from or think of women.

I agree and believe that it's because there's so few truly egalitarian women. By that, I mean ones who acknowledge that, when we remove traditional gender roles from society or even just our relationships, it necessarily means the burdens formerly reserved for men get spread around equally and it means losing some of the privileges we have. Not many women are actually in favor of that.

TRP puts a lot of emphasis on how women must be dependent on a man, how she doesn't love the man as much and the way the man loves the woman, and how women are inferior to men in almost every important category, i'm curious about your opinions and experiences.

Yeah, those are the parts of redpill ideology I can't agree with.

For example, when i look at the families where women are the breadwinner or the guy is a stay at home dad, despite not contributing much financially, the husband possesses important skills that allows his wife to work full time and handle "manly" duties like building, repairing, technical stuff etc.

I admittedly don't know any families well who have a stay at home dad OR stay at home mom. Everyone I know personally has to have both parents working in order to survive or thrive. But I can say that, as the majority breadwinner of my childfree relationship, my boyfriend isn't as handy as I am. He can watch a YouTube video and follow along with instructions on how to replace a sink faucet or do minor repairs on our cars...but I do all those things too. I used to take woodshop courses, and one of my 2 jobs involves designing hunting cabins/tiny homes, so am more familiar with building things than my boyfriend. For major issues like plumbing or electrical problems, we call a contractor who does that stuff for a living.

And men seem to be more interested in general culture, art, history, politics, general situation of the world...

While this is true in some cases, there's also men who don't give a crap about these topics. Last week I had a couple conversations with men in this very sub who claimed they had absolutely no desire to discuss any deep thoughts/ideas, and that doing so with one's partner was both weird and rare. On the other end of the spectrum, although most of my friends have always been boys/men, the female friends I have had were just as interested and knowledgeable about all these things as the rest of us.

They are great fathers, nurturing as well as being rational. So it seems like with all the information and roads open to women to do whatever men does and learns, if men have disappeared, the society would fall. Do you agree with such an argument?

No. If we had a "Y The Last Man" situation, then of course the first few years would be terrible and difficult. But just like after every catastrophe or war that wipes out tons of men, we'd eventually persevere and civilization would continue, albeit changed.

Society and traditions put a lot of emphasis on sons because "sons are nations; sons mean the motherland itself"; whether it is among traditional or progressive corners, zero to none people pressures their daughters as hard to be "useful", "provide", "initiate", "get interest in important things", "build your life" etc.

Speaking from personal experience, this is incredibly far from the truth. Even growing up in a very traditional, very religious environment (one I hated because I was constantly told I was inherently inferior and lesser as a woman), there was a strong emphasis on being productive, useful around the home and property, supportive in all ways, informed on how to do many tasks simultaneously, and be intelligent enough to share my "future husband's" interests when he wanted to talk with me.

It is related to the relationship marketplace as well. Men are always must be the sexual protagonist, we say to boys that don't ever hit a girl but no such inculcations towards girls like "be caring and understanding towards boys", "you shouldn't hit boys too" etc.

I agree 100% that these need to change to become far more equal. The hitting one is particularly easy to fix, and some schools are teaching it nowadays as "keep your hands to yourself" for boys and girls.

optimistic_entropi · 2024-08-22T14:25:24+00:00

If you don’t think we live in a male centric world please read through here and see the way he views men as the very definition of everything great about humanity and how women are just….. there

No one here is going to convince you that the world of women has an existed within your world all this time. Over the loud conversations of his funniest friends women were there existing in the same public spaces. Throughout the bold and overly descriptive historical explanations of the great men of history he learned about in class, women were there too.

The great men of the world had sons yes, but they also had daughters. If you think your genetics only count when they are passed through the male line then you’ll find yourself in this guys position. Being blind to the fact that women have been working diligently, developing our industrious nature, our adaptability, our tenacity and intelligence. Just look what happened when we were allowed into the world of academia. We out number men in college even though men are actually accepted at a higher rate.

We’ve been here all along. Evolving right along side of men. Existing in the same physical world even if our cultural worlds are different. There is no way to convince you of our innate abilities but I think you should look for the women in the things to missed. Go back and see whether or not we got to the moon with just men. Please ask yourself if the efforts of our troops durning world war 2 would have been as effective without the women who play key roles throughout the conflict. Look deeper. Be a little more critical. If something seems one sided you’re probably missing some information

MyLastBestChance · 2024-08-22T12:14:07+00:00

I have absolutely no idea what you’re asking here…seriously, none.

BarPsychological904 · 2024-08-22T13:56:20+00:00

If men would disappear in one moment for some reason, the society at first would collapse, then recover in something new. The women who are hard-working and creative, or will be able to become such, will survive. The others... Not so much. Simple natural selection.

Same if the women would disappear in the same way: a loss of a half of the world economy will be devastating. But I would argue that men-only society would struggle more with violence and reproduction. For women, you need only to create sperm. For men, you need to solve the problem with pregnancy also.

What was the question, again?

Downtown_Cat_1173 · 2024-08-22T13:10:16+00:00

My experience is that men who devalue women have worse lives, because women now have the option to choose better or not at all. Spousal violence is trending down.

So if you don’t value women, women will do fine without you.

Professional_Chair28 · 2024-08-22T12:37:58+00:00

Yes. Women are as capable/creative/decent/interesting as men.

TL;DR: How do you counter negative approaches about female nature and can women be as good as men?

You can’t convince people that don’t value you that you have value. So I fill my life with people not like that . . obviously

Novadina · 2024-08-22T15:45:15+00:00

Q4 Egalitarian minded or feminist women: If there were no men or we lived in a female-led culture, do you think you can run the society, keep the civilization alive and gather the qualifications that are expected from men (also be creative and stuff to enhance the life experience)?

Sure, I think women can be creative, and can learn anything men can.

Since women are looked down upon in some traditional views, i'm asking if you can be interesting, decent and capable as men are?

Yes as far as I can tell. Of course with the word “capable” we probably have to mention physical differences - women might not be able to get as much upper body strength as men, but we have technology that enables all humans to be much stronger than any human could be (ie a crane).

A lot of the dispute and confusion seem to be stemming from the people's experiences and observations that women do not act the way feminism implied and how egalitarian men expect from or think of women. There would be no kitty-moms, birth-rate/ marraige decline, no distortion among opposite-sex relationships, no this and that, whatever problem we discuss and encounter. Right(??)

I’m not sure what the question is here, my man is egalitarian and doesn’t seem to think I didn’t act how he expected. Not sure why there wouldn’t be a birth rate decline with egalitarianism or feminism?? My man is more child free than me.

For example, when i look at the families where women are the breadwinner or the guy is a stay at home dad, despite not contributing much financially, the husband possesses important skills that allows his wife to work full time and handle "manly" duties like building, repairing, technical stuff etc.

I’m the breadwinner, but my husband works, he just didn’t make much. Currently he is running a business we own together, but it’s not making money yet (when it does we are not expecting to make what I do in my day job, we’d be stoked if we got 50%, and are expecting at least 25%). It doesn’t involve any “manly duties”, and since you listed “technical stuff” in there I will mention that I am the tech expert between us and do all the programming. Now, he does like to do repairs himself (both for the business and our home) rather than pay for it, as he is handy. However that is not gendered… his mom is the same way and does all the repairs in her house. I once had a roommate who was the same way and she did all the repairs in our place. Some people are into it and some aren’t. I’m more of a software person, so I handle that.

We don’t see this in a gendered way - we are taking advantage of our skillset, as individuals. We don’t care about the gender of the person doing it.

And men seem to be more interested in general culture, art, history, politics, general situation of the world...

I just completely disagree that men are somehow more interested in these topics. I discuss these things with people of both genders all the time. I would need some serious evidence to believe this claim!

They are great fathers, nurturing as well as being rational.

Not all of them. Men and women can both be bad or good parents.

So it seems like with all the information and roads open to women to do whatever men does and learns, if men have disappeared, the society would fall. Do you agree with such an argument?

Of course it would fall if we suddenly lost half the population?! And weren’t able to reproduce anymore? Duh? Same goes for if women disappeared! In fact it would technically fare a better chance with all women, as at least it’s possible to reproduce with only women with artificial insemination. We don’t have artificial uteruses yet so men would have no way to reproduce without women even if we had their eggs stored.

Society and traditions put a lot of emphasis on sons because "sons are nations; sons mean the motherland itself"; whether it is among traditional or progressive corners, zero to none people pressures their daughters as hard to be "useful", "provide", "initiate", "get interest in important things", "build your life" etc. There is a saying in where i'm from; "you couldn't manage to be a handle to an axe" if you are a useless or jobless guy or who is broke or has some problems.

Yes, societies have undervalued women’s contributions for a long time. How useful would men be considered if they had to take their babies to work with them?

From my experience though, many progressive families do encourage their daughters to be useful. I know mine did! They wanted both me and my brother to get a PhD, for example, and encouraged us both to work starting as a kid. Also some cultures might be different - my female Chinese coworkers have had much more pressure from their family to succeed in their career than I have seen from Americans (maybe due to the one child policy that was in place when they were born).

It is related to the relationship marketplace as well. Men are always must be the sexual protagonist, we say to boys that don't ever hit a girl but no such inculcations towards girls like "be caring and understanding towards boys", "you shouldn't hit boys too" etc.

Girls are told how boys will be fragile to accept bad behavior from them, like “boys will be boys” and “teasing you means he likes you!” Also we are told we should make ourselves be pretty and feminine or no man will like us, and a lot of time is spent in how to present in a way men like - like how to maintain beautiful hair, how to put makeup on, how to wear a dress, how to wear high heels, how to walk, how to sit.

The rest of your post seemed to be rambling about TRP but I couldn’t make out the points well or find any more questions in it.

Old_Luck285 · 2024-08-22T15:46:53+00:00

What I find most fascinating about the "men built society"-guys is that they themselves usually don't work in one of the very (mentally or physically) demanding jobs (oil rig, miner, atomic physicist etc.). Instead, they work in rather avarage jobs, like most people. And since these jobs are avarage, they could be done by quite a lot of people, man or woman.

So, the "men built society"-guys want to reap the benefits other men worked for. They demand respect/privileges because they belong to a certain group of people (men), not due to their own merit. That's patriarchy thinking 101. It's just as absurd as being proud of being white because a white person discovered/developed X. As if that accomplishment rubbed off on you.

Of course, women would fill men's jobs, just as they did in the past. E.g. in the early decades of the GDR, people didn’t have a lot of choice in which job they picked. The government screened for different talents, then you were assigned a job. If you wanted to study (a huge privilege) and the state needed physicists, you could study physics or not study at all. I got to known a few women who, because of this system, went into "male" jobs. And once the GDR was history, they switched to more "female" professions.

ConanTheCybrarian · 2024-08-22T16:41:29+00:00

Is this a joke?

Yes, women are already as "interesting, decent, and capable as men are."

I don't advocate for a world with no men but were it to happen, women would be more than capable of moving forward. I think men like you know that, and that's what bothers you.

EulenWatcher · 2024-08-22T17:23:12+00:00

If women had to, women could live on their own.

Let's take a look at the USSR as an example. The first World War and then the Revolution killed lots of men and then pretty much all working age and capable men were drafted to the WWII. Women were left to tend to pretty much everything. They were growing food, working on factories, producing everything necessary for the war. They were doing it while lots of them were starving and taking care of their starving kids. If it wasn't for the war and a lack of resources due to it, women could just continue living how they used to with men just with different distribution of labor.

apresonly · 2024-08-22T17:36:55+00:00

uh yes? we did that during wwII.

there's also plenty of female innovators whose work was stolen or credit claimed by men.

and then there are men who actively try to keep women out of the workforce: harrison butker for instance, or the fact that medicine was mostly practiced by women until men invented medical school, made it a requirement for practicing medicine and then banned women from attending.

but i also think women would be less focused on competition/innovation and more focused on ensuring everyone's needs are met. which is better and more moral imo.

Lysa_Bell · 2024-08-22T16:07:46+00:00

Ignoring all the other random stuff you put in your post and answering the actual question:

No. Society can not just be run by women. I read the other day that it take only like 10-20% of people in a society to vanish for a collapse. You can't just take away a big chunk of people and expect everything to stay the same. That's not how a society works. So no matter how much people might hate it - in a society everyone is relying on everyone else.

Werevulvi · 2024-08-22T16:30:09+00:00

If men would disappear, I think women would struggle to get society functional again, but I'm sure they would eventually. They'd just need some time to adjust. Yes, some specific tasks would be more challenging for women to do, like heavy lifting. But cranes, fork lifts, wheelbarrows, and all sorts of machinery already exists, and women can get heavy lifting done with the help of such tools.

Like for ex I drag home some 20kg of groceries once or twice a week just fine by foot... using the help of a shopping bag on wheels. And I can open tight jars just fine by either hitting the lid with the handle of a knife, or getting the air compression out of the jar by carefully sticking the knife in under the lid. Because as soon as the air compression inside releases, the jar is easy to open. Women are nifty that way because we have to if we wanna manage on our own. So you don't actually need brute strength to do a lot of different actions that on surface level do require it. Not in a modern society. There are plenty of tools and tricks available.

As for pretty much anything else, women have the same mental capacity/brain power as men, even though we're less likely to be either extremely intelligent or extremely... lacking in that division.

So yeah, society would undoubtedly change. We'd need to use more tools to get heavy tasks done, and there would be significantly fewer high rank scientists, but there would still be skilled women in every field. Because there... already is.

Obviously, the whole of humanity would die out within a generation or two anyway, as the sperm banks would eventually run empty, and then there's no more reproduction.

Fyi I don't think women and men are exactly the same physically or even mentally. But what I do think is that male and female bodies and brains are similar enough that if you take a whole population of women, there's gonna be enough variety that all skills seen in men will exist, because they are human skills. Even if majority of men are better at doing certain stuff than majority of women, that doesn't mean the average woman can't do a decent job at it. And most female athletes are stronger or at least equally strong as, the average man. It really depends on what kinda standards we are setting here. Because if half the population disappeared, the demand would also drastically decrease.

The way I see it though, I don't think men are useless or that their work isn't valuable just because women can do it too. My view point is that whether male or female, we're all humans first and foremost. And as humans, we have very similarly functioning bodies. And I think sex differences are negligable in most skills that are not to do with reproduction.

Also, I would not want a female led society, and I absolutely don't wish men would disappear. That would be horrible. It's also really not what egalitarianism is about. What I want, is simply for men and women to work together to reduce both misogyny and misandry. Like, actual gender equality, which goes both ways. Men will not stop being nasty towards women if men's needs aren't being met, and women won't stop being nasty towards men if women's needs aren't being met.

Basically your prompt doesn't really apply to egalitarians, as we really do not value either gender above the other. But I did answer it as best as I could from my egalitarian view.

attendquoi · 2024-08-22T16:36:57+00:00

Men disappearing would be damaging simply because that's half-ish of the population. But we also wouldn't need the same type of society, and I think women would do just fine.

MiddleZealousideal89 · 2024-08-22T17:15:42+00:00

Since women are looked down upon in some traditional views, i'm asking if you can be interesting, decent and capable as men are?

This would imply that these qualities are somehow inherently male. There are plenty of dull, shitty, and incompetent men out there. I'm not sure if anything I write really matters if you're not sure whether women can be interesting, decent, and capable and you're above the age of, let's say, 15. Don't think little old me can change your mind.

the husband possesses important skills that allows his wife to work full time and handle "manly" duties like building, repairing, technical stuff etc.

I know very few men who can do those "manly" things any better than I could do them. Can I do minor repairs around the house? Sure. Can I fix a toaster? No but neither can most men I know, unless they're working as a repair guy or have a background as an electrician or something.

And men seem to be more interested in general culture, art, history, politics, general situation of the world.They are great fathers, nurturing as well as being rational. So it seems like with all the information and roads open to women to do whatever men does and learns, if men have disappeared, the society would fall. Do you agree with such an argument?

It seems to me like you're taking the best examples of awesome, competent men, and assuming that's somehow the norm. It very much isn't. Most men aren't paragons of rationality, most men aren't SAHP, and most men (and women, let's be real) have a very shallow understanding of history, politics, art, and culture. Now, these wonderful, supportive husbands and fathers are incredibly valuable to their families and their communities, and the world would be poorer without them. But society hasn't collapsed despite most men not living up to this standard.

Society and traditions put a lot of emphasis on sons because "sons are nations; sons mean the motherland itself"; whether it is among traditional or progressive corners, zero to none people pressures their daughters as hard to be "useful", "provide", "initiate", "get interest in important things", "build your life" etc. There is a saying in where i'm from; "you couldn't manage to be a handle to an axe" if you are a useless or jobless guy or who is broke or has some problems.

I don't think sons are more valuable than daughters. And what do you mean that nobody pressures their daughters to be "useful"? Most parents in our societies tell their kids, male and female, to get an education, and have solid careers, women are being encouraged to be doctors, scientists, to build a life for themselves that doesn't require another person to provide for them. And even in more traditional societies, I'd argue that daughters being pressured to be the one who raises the children, who cooks, cleans, and generally manages the household, is them being pressured to be "useful". That is unless you don't see those things as useful, and that's a "you" problem.

SwimmingTheme3736 · 2024-08-22T12:50:58+00:00

As a feminine I strongly believe we need men and women in society. Different people bring different strengths and no gender is more important

AutoModerator · 2024-08-22T11:40:33+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.

Stacie_Sophia199 · 2024-08-22T19:46:21+00:00

Society works good if there is a balance. I believe men and women are equal, but not the same. If we look at christianity we can see women are placed in a lesser role and are seen as less. Just look at the "in the name of the father, son and holy spirit". Where is a woman in there? Why is the focus on only the father and son? Not on the mother or daughter. Also holy Mary has been the mould women were pushed into: virgin and pure. She even had a child without having intercourse. When we look at way older religions, from before christianity, men and women were much more equal. So I think religion plays a huge part in how society works as a whole.

Back to your question: no, I dont believe women alone could run the society, neither the men alone. We need eachother, to balance eachother out and have stability.

Weecodfish · 2024-08-23T02:10:43+00:00

No, society requires men and women.

Comments