Imagine a world where women were the "stronger" sex and men the "weaker" sex. Women are the breadwinners and men are the homemakers. Women's professional sports are dominant. Women hold all positions of power in both political and the business sense. Homemaking is the traditional man's job. Men take the woman's name. Basically except for physical makeup (including the fact that women still would have the babies) and attire, women and men have switched roles.
I'm looking for specifics - what would work and what wouldn't work. Please be descriptive in your answer.
Thanks!
2007-02-08 08:54:26 · 8 answers · asked by L.A. Scene 3 in Social Science ➔ Gender Studies
I think that women would have a lot more support than they do. In the world you are describing, it sounds as if women actually get respected for having babies instead of it being "inconvenient" or seen as a weakness or burden. In this world, society would shut down for a week each month for a little R&R (for both sexes). Women may enjoy having children again knowing that their mate was expected to take care of them. Men could go about their day "fixing" things - which they are extremely good at - and women would make peace in a world that men for the most part have caused war. Everyone, I mean everyone would eat every single day. No child, woman, or man or animal would go hungry, or feel unloved. The media? radically changed. It would show strong powerful men doing the dishes, maintaining the home, etc . . .and women working 6 hours instead of 8, home more with the family (because women work smarter not harder) and the USA would have a siesta. It would be a celebration when women got their periods . . .that week off is for the week before! The world would not be motivated by money, the motivation would stem from relationships!
What a great question.
2007-02-08 12:56:22 · answer #1 · answered by Who Knew! 3 · 2⤊ 0⤋
what wouldn't work is that is still an unfair setup and people would agitate for their rights. other than that, i honestly think not much would be different, except that there would be much better laws concerning parental leave from work. Certain aspects of physical labor might be left to men, but even in things like construction, it's not like women are weaklings. they can hold their own just fine. i'm a skinny 20-year-old and I can almost bench 100 lbs. That's more than enough strength to handle most physical labor.
2007-02-08 10:52:51 · answer #2 · answered by scruffy 4 · 2⤊ 0⤋
You have biology against you.. I'm convinced that the physical strength of men (on average) is the only reason for that gender's dominance. I don't mean that men today take all their power through physical strength, but I believe that is where it began millenia ago.
Women could easily be the breadwinners, but the WNBA still will not beat any men's teams. Sorry.
2007-02-08 08:58:41 · answer #3 · answered by Year of the Monkey 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
there's a reason things are as they are, a believe we're approaching an era of true partnership, but physiologically we are designed, not only for the man to be the breadwinner, but actually to support multiple mates. now, before all the feminists freak out let me explain. I've posted similarly before, but. population ratios worldwide average 3 women to 1 man, also while a women is only fertile a few days every month, a young man in his prime is capable every day (not necessarily to satisfy, but to impregnate, yes). By most countries current laws, 2 out of 3 women are not allowed to be married! We are generally taller, and physically stronger, while women are generally much more patient (an absolute must for child raising, and dealing with us), besides which, how would we feed the baby?
Finally, no matter what you've been led to beleive, women are in charge, otherwise why do I have to put the seat down after I pee?
2007-02-08 09:14:15 · answer #4 · answered by yeraluzer 4 · 0⤊ 2⤋
As a goth I have both a kilt and a manskirt. trust me in case you equipped a particular way then wearing a skirt does no longer something to make you look subservient. perchance in case you are able to pull your question out of the cliched area this is presently in....
2016-10-17 06:04:14 · answer #5 · answered by branaugh 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Year of the Monkey nailed it above.
Women and men of equal intelligence have one differentiator--physical strength. Now, if men had just been patient, women could have cooked up something that helped them do things they are physically incapable of doing. Of course, the evolution of man means the survival of the fittest--in most cases, physically fit over mentally fit.
2007-02-08 09:05:07 · answer #6 · answered by f8_smyled 3 · 1⤊ 2⤋
Idle Speculation.
2007-02-08 09:06:40 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋
so the porn industry would change? and people trafficking/sex trade would end?
2007-02-08 09:42:59 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋