In a world without men, would women achieve more or less?

Jex117 · 2017-10-29T16:30:20+00:00

This is what happens A complete and utter disaster.

The men rallied together, set goals, enforced team work and group efforts. The women argued among themselves, bickered, gossiped, sat on the beach all day, and wasted nearly every opportunity they got.

In the end they wasted an entire pig and threw away a bucket + metal jerry can they were using for water, just because it smelled like the spoiled pig. Because they threw out their water containers, they went into dehydration and had to get pulled off.

The men had less hospitable island with no pigs, which rained consistently on them, yet they built a hut, a tiki bar, beds, sheds, etc.

goatismycopilot · 2017-10-29T12:31:54+00:00

It would be like high school or middle school all over again where the mean girls set arbitrary rules and everybody else rolled their eyes.

NalkaNalka · 2017-10-29T14:27:23+00:00

That scenario played out on some survivor type show. Men's island and woman's island.

They achieved less...a lot less. To the surprise of nobody.

Littleknownfacts · 2017-10-29T13:01:16+00:00

I don't think "achieve more" would describe it, but I don't think the human race would die (if you know, they still had a way of making more babies). I'd imagine there would be a big shift in human evolution to something more tribal and communal, as we see with other large, intelligent, herding mammals. Dolphins, elephants, lions, hyenas, all live separately from the males except in the mating times. If we still had the technology we have now, there would certainly be enough women to figure it out and do it, or develop a way around it, so quality of life probably wouldn't drop very much either. I think there would be a steep decline in great works of engineering, art, and so on, as much of that stems from historical pissing contests.

Alth12 · 2017-10-29T11:51:52+00:00

Its be the same. Because political divides would still occur. Over 50% of white women voted for Trump, and that's in a world where the left has successfully given off the impression that the left alone cares about women's issues. People assume women all vote left because they're all tree hugging, pro immigration types. That isn't inherantly true, in my experience most women vote left because the right is seen as sexist.

In a world with no men that wouldn't apply, and the idea that one side is pro women and the other not wouldn't apply. A lot of women care a lot about security and safety, and those are primarily concerns associated with traditional right wing politics.

It'd be an interesting study to see where a lot of women sat politically if you took LGBT and women's rights out of the equation.

Then we have the likes of Hillary, Thatcher, Kirchner etc all who showed pretty strong militaristic tendencies. Even further back there's many women who ruled who were terribly bloodthirsty.

So really it'd be different but overall much the same.

GridReXX · 2017-10-29T14:03:01+00:00

Define achieve?

But in a world without men there would be no hyperloops or iPhones or electric cars or WiFi or major innovation.

It seems like the .05% of really really really smart men are the ones who have the drive and intellectual capacity to innovate on that disruptive technology level.

And they’re able to round up the worker bee men (the coders who aren’t great thinkers / the heavy lifters who work on oil rigs) to do their bidding. Those worker bee 🐝 men are happy to work because it means securing the means to attract a woman.

I don’t think women (on average) have that drive to attract men or fuck men in that way, so I don’t see women finding themselves in that pressure cooker of angst to push their minds to the limit in the same capacity.

On the inverse I think a world without women would be an awful place to live and I wouldn’t want it.

pinkgoldrose · 2017-10-29T11:16:57+00:00

I think there would be no wars, people would just get together and debate endlessly. In places where water ressources are scarce, people would just die instead of going to war over it. Or maybe they would move because there would be less obstacle to immigration.

Even if you think women are useless, I think if tomorrow all the men disappeared, someone would learn to kill the spiders and operate the machinery.

Butt-Factory · 2017-10-29T17:15:36+00:00

This is purely anecdotal, but somewhat relevant.

I have a friend who is asexual. She was born with pituitary and endocrine abnormalities that apparently effect her sex drive, and she claims to have never experienced sexual attraction or arousal. She's about 35 years old.

This woman holds a PhD in the sciences, is an award winning baker, sews amazing clothes, and is a certified motorcycle mechanic. She's also currently writing a novel. Although she is obviously not average and is especially intelligent, but her accomplishments got me thinking. What could we all accomplish if sex and dating weren't a factor?

smokeyjoe69 · 2017-10-29T17:43:32+00:00

If women could achieve as much as men then they’d vote libertarian, but they’re mostly government leavhes

------__------------ · 2017-10-29T11:19:47+00:00

I think it would end up a bit like North Korea where everyone has to pretend to be really happy and patriotic all the time or they're whisked away to reeducation camps. Like team woman turned on itself.

Temperfuelmma · 2017-10-29T12:13:49+00:00

Boring. So so boring. Everyone will be depressed. They will just slowly die off

Atlas_B_Shruggin · 2017-10-29T13:22:46+00:00

In a world without men women would live in grass huts

iminit77 · 2017-10-29T18:41:54+00:00

I think the world would improve in a lot of ways. Rape and murder rates would plummet. There would be less terrorism, gang violence, etc. The world as a whole would be a lot safer. Besides that, I think things would progress more or less the same, there would still be wars, greed, corrupt politicians, etc. Women would fill in and perform all the "manly" jobs just fine, despite what some of you think. There would no longer be "boy's clubs" so it would be easier to break into formerly masculine careers, and easier to be taken seriously, etc. Science and technology would continue to progress, just a bit slower perhaps at first.

Salty-Bastard · 2017-10-29T14:01:42+00:00

I think they already did that and called it HuffPo.

Pope_Lucious · 2017-10-29T19:42:58+00:00

Societal collapse

[deleted] · 2017-10-29T20:02:11+00:00

They would have no choice but to achieve more, no more infinite free rides

[deleted] · 2017-10-30T12:14:02+00:00

No men.

No computers, no manufacturing, no cars, no satellites, no modern medicine, no agriculture.

If any women are reading this comment, this translates to:

No Instagram, no facebook, no makeup, no birth control, no fashion, no tv dramas, no alcohol.

A world without men would be a whole bunch of women picking flowers, making soups and getting together for wellness journeys befire starving to death.

[deleted] · 2017-10-29T11:05:31+00:00

Theresa May would launch a nuclear attack against Germany, because Angela Merkel called her a slut.

Meanwhile, Kim-Yun-Fat would be laughing himself to death.

tempuserthrowaway5 · 2017-10-29T10:59:40+00:00

There would be no more war, very rare instances of violence but somebody somewhere would get on her high horse and put a ban on chocolate cake.

Dessert bars with high calorie items would be the new meth labs.

AutoModerator · 2017-10-29T10:56:51+00:00

Attention!

You can post off topic/jokes/puns as a comment to this Automoderator message.
For "CMV" 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.

says_harsh_things · 2017-10-29T14:30:56+00:00

"The court of public opinion will now convene"

purpleppp · 2017-10-29T15:22:50+00:00

Do you assume that humans would stop evolving? In your dystopia, evolution would likely cause dimorphism, and some women would become more male-like.

trail22 · 2017-10-29T18:35:12+00:00

I get the feelign there would be a caste system

[deleted] · 2017-10-29T20:54:52+00:00

More obviously. They wouldn't be confined to a gendered role, they'd perform all roles.

1UPZ_ · 2017-10-29T23:42:19+00:00

it'll be different, probably worse off technologically, industrially and structure wise... as it is rare for women to be "into" mechanical/structural things...

Look at each sex's main interests/preconception and relate that to every day things...

damaskrose · 2017-10-30T02:34:09+00:00

I don't think society would have achieved as much, but I also think that would be a good thing. I think the world was probably better off when there were only 4 million humans in it, dying young and living in 1-room houses (the ones that even had houses).

ConnorGracie · 2017-10-30T06:00:09+00:00

Women would have to fill the vacuum but they'd never achieve what a mixed society would. Women like material things but only pursue them if they are handed to them by a man. It would be a primitive society, hampered by social rules and highly contextualized feelings that would devolve into superstition.

IckyStickyPoo · 2017-10-30T11:46:32+00:00

It's hard to imagine. A world without masculine energy would be boring, as would a world without feminine energy. Though I guess you wouldn't know that if you had nothing to compare it to.

We would have developed very similar technology and innovations but mostly at a much slower pace. Because if women are tied up having babies, they are naturally going to be severely restricted. It would be entirely stupid to imagine that women wouldn't have developed high tech. Some parts of it would have moved much faster - women were the first to develop complex language (in the real world), and that was a game changer for the human race. Language cannot be overstated for what it achieved and how it changed everything. Many women are brilliant at mathematics, science etc and they would have specialised.

I guess you'd have to have some women who decide not to have babies and instead do things that men have done, such as working all day without the distraction of children and housework.

I imagine a world that would have been a lot more beautiful, with a focus on aesthetics and a closer relationship to animals and the land. I think women are more practical though, so a lot less phallic, useless buildings and structures built just for dead people. Building would have taken much, much longer without men. Men are stronger, taller and don't get period cramps/pregnancy.

I think there still would have been wars and battles.

Title	In a world without men, would women achieve more or less?
Author	CharlesChrist
Upvotes	4
Comments	59
Date	October 29, 2017 10:56 AM UTC (8 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/PurplePillDebate
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/PurplePillDebate/comments/79fwe4/in_a_world_without_men_would_women_achieve_more/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/PurplePillDebate/in-a-world-without-men-would-women-achieve-more-or.265144 https://theredarchive.com/post/265144

Comments