A future with more women and fewer men?

Originally posted by FeceMan
That's a truncated version.

At the end, it says "A good wife knows her place".

P.S. "Roll" is not equal to "role".

P.S. "Roll" is not the same as "role".

Originally posted by Akira99
I want to share a thought that has been swimming in my mind for some time now. http://www.angryharry.com/esMoreWomenThanMenRequired.htm
Here is a long but interesting article that looks at the pros and cons in some detail.
It is only a matter of time [maybe even now I'm not sure] until the gender of children can be selected. My own beliefs that a future [maybe even 50 years from now] where the male:female ratio is 1:3 stem mainly from:
1. When it comes to crime, violence, war and general delinquency, males are clearly more involved in such things than are females. And they seem more prone to engaging in them at an early age. Boys like guns. Girls like dolls.A reduction in the proportion of males is therefore likely to reduce the amount of mayhem that generally takes place.
Less males = Less violence, crime and mayhem, Less aggressive competition among men for women, Far fewer relationship crimes; domestic violence, rape etc, Far fewer wars, More help with domestic chores, More freedom to go out to work or to stay at home for women, Far better job opportunities,

2. Given that sex and intimacy are both extremely powerful motivators for men, a surfeit of females would also likely lead to a reduction in sex-assault, domestic violence, rape, prostitution and a host of other associated evils. The counter-argument that women are just as bad as men but that they simply tend to use different mechanisms to achieve their wicked ends is almost certainly a valid one, but unless it is the case that women are actually worse than men in provoking disorder, disharmony and mayhem, then altering the gender ratio in their favour is not going to make matters worse.

3. Technology. Manual labour is no doubt being replaced in developed countries - muscles by machines and intelligence and skills by computers. Women can carry out the same tasks as men nowadays. Furthermore women need to devote less of their lives to child-rearing fue to the introduction of artifical wombs [not far off if not here already] and will move up into the workplace.
Also men have become much less important than they once where when it comes to progressing the societies in which they live.
These are just excepts from the article and there is much more in it.

I wouldn't believe all those bullshit sources that say the Y-Chromosome is fading. Maybe it is maybe it isn't. It is irrelevant as it would take 1000s of years which doesn't affect us. Most of it is feminist BS too.
Thats another reason why more men would be of benefit. It would satisfy feminists who believe men are parasites etc. but thats not the sort of crap we are using as arguments here though the likelyhood of the future turning out with a female surplus is certainly an issue which we could discuss here without unpleasantries.

Here is another article which unlike the other you should read at your own risk as it is biased to an extent and the humor is not female friendly:
http://www.angryharry.com/esTheyearis2052.htm
Basically asking who would actually oppose such a future

What do you think? Do you think a surplus of females to human society would be of benefit? Don't just give one sentence answers [read the article first before making instant assumptions etc.] - explain your ideas...

Yeah, this is some serious feminist bullshit. I've never seen anything that even vaguely implies that women can do anything as well as us, let alone better, and what's this crap about us being less important than we were? Women need to learn some damned manners.

Originally posted by Nogoodnamesleft
Yeah, this is some serious feminist bullshit. I've never seen anything that even vaguely implies that women can do anything as well as us, let alone better, and what's this crap about us being less important than we were? Women need to learn some damned manners.

Too many paragraphs for you? I understand. It wasn't meant to be a current political debate, just a hypothetical one. Too bad for you.

But in your defense. it wasn't a very good one to begin with...

More woman !!!!! 💃 great!!!!!!!

Originally posted by Nogoodnamesleft
Yeah, this is some serious feminist bullshit. I've never seen anything that even vaguely implies that women can do anything as well as us, let alone better, and what's this crap about us being less important than we were? Women need to learn some damned manners.

Au contraire my friend this is not feminist bullshit. Not in the very slightest. First of all read the 2 articles and you will be a VERY happy man as you see what an amazing world could come of this. This was written by a very very clever Men's rights activist. Now after you have done this explain why more women and less men would make us [men] less important than we were. We are currently as unimportant as is possible! Surely if there wer eless men our value to women would increase? As a matter of fact the article explains how having more men than women actually weakens Men's power in society because they are so easily manipulated by women [and no offence to women her]. So if there were more women then there would be less men to manipulate

And Capt Fantastic was right. If you read the article [1st one] it goes into detail about the steps that would be taken for such a future. If we wanted we could potentially start tomorrow!

Originally posted by JOE NUNEZ
More woman !!!!! 💃 great!!!!!!!

Originally posted by Capt_Fantastic
I think a future with more women than men would be a bad thing.

are you gay?

Originally posted by Inspectah Deck
are you gay?

is that rhetorical?

Originally posted by Inspectah Deck
are you gay?

Originally posted by Lumanix
He is. 😐

I am?

I read this in the Body and Soul paper that comes with The Times on Saturday:
SEX-SELECTION of babies in cultures that favour males could be the downfall of us all, says a University College London report. The paper, in the Procedings of the National Academy of Sciences, says an epidemic of men would leave millions of guys unmarried, creating a "glowing number of young men with little outlet for sexual energy." It adds: "This could lead to increased antisocial behaviour and violence ... and has worrying implications for organised crime and terrorism." Oh boy.

Yeah for once the usual feminist BS that infects The Body And Soul paper has a point. Its like they are un-doing themselves 😄