I was thinking about how a world that benefitted men at the expense of women would look, as a thought experiment.

Women would be forced to do all the worst and most dangerous jobs, such as construction, mining, logging, etc. If a singular woman was unable to do her job, she would either be punished or more women would be assigned to do the task. Men would claim the safe and delightful jobs as their exclusive preserve, such as teaching, office work, vet care etc.

Whatever money the women earned would go to the men, who would then use it to buy food, medicine, gifts, supplies for their children, etc. Women would have less than 20% of the consumer spending.

Women would be much more unhappy at their work than men.

Men would be given special services and concessions, such as longer breaks and special rooms and limited working hours and daycare rooms, etc.

Most world religions would tell women to provide and protect men,even at the expense of their own lives, and would condemn them harshly for not doing so.

Women would work much longer hours than men, and such earn more money andpay more taxes. But these taxes wouldn't go to women's issues, no, women's issues would be ignored. There would be screening programs for men but not for women. There would be domestic violence and homeless shelters for men but not for women. There would be outreach programs and scholarships and grants for men's welfare and rights, but not for women.

As such, women would be the majority of the homeless, especially single women. Single men would be the majority owners of homes, not single women. Landlords and agents would discriminate against women, not men.

Women would be used as test subjects in medical trials, no matter how dangerous they were. And after the trials had proven successful (after a few women died) only then would the medicines be given to men.

Psychotherapy would have been created to treat men, not women. As such, women would have been the ones to receive electroshock therapy, and not male soldiers. (See Peter Watson, War on the Mind, London, Hutchinson, 1978, p. 235.) Men would have been able to say they were afflicted and be given bedrest. ( Shorter, From the Mind into the Body, p. 83.)

Due to this, the suicide rate would have been much higher for women than men, not only because their life is harder, but also becausetherapy was not created for them. They would also have been prevented from accessing therapy.

Since women work longer hours than men, they would have been less able to visit the hospital, and wouldn't benefit from free screening programs, like men. As such, they are generally in worse health than men.

Furthermore, more research is dedicated to men's health issues, even if men were healthier than women. As such, women's life expectancy would be shorter than men's.

There would be special offices in almost every country for men's issues, there would be offices for men's health, there would be men's representatives.

Women would pay more for car insurance despite dying more from car accidents.

Women would die more on the job, for doing most of the dangerous jobs.

Women would be killed more than men, for spending more time outside in unsafe areas.

Women would be assaulted more than men, because it would be seen as more acceptable to hit a woman.

FGM would be legal and celebrated worldwide whereas MGM would be banned everywhere, and people would be spreading information about MGM, and other men's health issues.

The majority of child laborers would be female, with them doing very difficult work

Girls would be punished much more often and harsher than boys in schools.

Girls would be punished much more often and harsher than boys by their parents.

When it comes to military operations, women would be forced against their will to go to war or viciously made fun of for not going. Furthermore, in a massacre,the women specifically would be targeted, to the point of female babies killed, whereas international orgs like the UN would make sure the men are put on buses and driven to safety.

Police would be much more violent toward women than men.Women would be 90% of the people killed by police. Women would be less likely to be let off with a warning, less likely to have charges dropped, less likely to be given bail, less likely to be convicted, and less likely to avoid incarceration if convicted. Furthermore, women would face much longer sentences for the same crime.

There would be crimes only women can commit, such as rape.

There would be special punishments reserved only for women, such as being hung, drawn and quartered.

Women would be the majority of people in jail and being executed.

Crimes against men would be treated much more harshly than crimes against women, and criminals who hurt men would receive longer sentences than those who hurt women.

Like a man was harmed, killed, or raped, there would be massive protests, and initiatives to 'end violence against men'. If the perp was a woman, all women would be blamed. MPs would try to impose a curfew for all women. Even though two female students had been stabbed the SAME WEEK, that would have been brushed aside (that actually happened by the way, when Sarah Everard unfortunately passed away, two male students were stabbed and not a single fuck was given)

If a horrible pandemic such as the coronavirus happened, the majority of the deaths would be female, but the reactions would be all about how the pandemic is bad for men, how violence against men is occurring, etc.

Gay women would be beaten, killed, and persecuted and declared illegal in many countries, while gay men would be mostly left alone, declared illegal in less countries, and wouldn't even be explicitly condemned in many religions. If it IS illegal, it won't be enforced for men. If it IS legal, gay women would be the majority victims of hate crimes.

Transgender men would be the majority victims of hate crimes because "they are not real men, just women in a dress" and transgender women would be treated more gently because they are assigned male at birth. People would complain about women identifying as men and going into men's bathrooms and harassing helpless men. Even though this doesn't happen, just the thought is enough to make people hurt transgender men, to the point where women threaten to beat up transgender men for following their father, brother, son into the bathroom.

If a woman is a member of a racial minority, she will be more likely to be a victim of racial hate crimesand police brutality. People will justify oppressing the members of her race by saying the women might rape or harm the men of the majority race.

Women would have to pursue men for a date, and if they agreed, the woman would have to pay for the date. The woman would have to do a lot to impress the man, such as buying him gifts, paying for dates, and than one day, the woman has to provide an expensive piece of jewelry to the man and ask him to marry her. Then the woman would have to take the permission of the parents. The woman has to have certain requirements, like the level of education, having a house, car, well paying job etc for the parents to accept. In some cultures, the woman has to either pay a dowry, or perform bride service. After the parents agree, the woman has to pay for a part or all of the wedding. And then after all of this, the woman has to work and provide and protect the man and his children for the rest of her life.

There would be multiple campaigns telling the woman never to hit her husband, and that women who beat their husbands are the devil, etc. It;s almost never said for men to not hit their wives. There are multiple DV shelters for men and hotlines and funding.

And even if women made up 40% of domestic violence victims, they will not be given any support. If they tell their friends they will be laughed at.If they call a hotline, they will be gaslit and told they are perpetrators.They will be blocked from accessing DV shelters, the same shelters they build, first with their labor, second with their taxes.

90% of villains in religious texts, plays, movies, TV shows and books will be women. Most of the villain's henchpeople will be female. As such, the hero of the story will be seen as good for bashing the villain and the henchwomen to bits. If there are any henchmen, they will most likely be spared or atleast not killed. As such, 1 male death on screen will have 200 female deaths onscreen. In the rare occasion that a male villain is cast, he will be looked at sympathetically, and rarely killed off, and even that will be criticized for being too sexist against men. The male characters will almost always be portrayed as pure or perfect. Any female hero will be tasked with saving the male character, or die trying.

People, both men and women, would show more empathy to men. People would be more comfortable killing off women. People would be more comfortable with men hitting women than vice versa.

People would prefer adopting boys rather than girls.

A majority of street children would be female.

A majority of children killed before the age of five would be female.

Paintings of men would sell for more than paintings of women.

People would prefer male voices for AIs than female voices.

And if women dared to complain about ANY of these issues, they would be told to shut up, to 'check their privilege', to stop distracting from men's issues.

Any and all of women's issues would be ignored and blamed on them because "matriarchy hurts women too", and "toxic femininity", "female privilege backfiring"