A world without males Anonymous 22715
Let's pretend men don't exist and we could reproduce on our own!
How would things be like?
Do you think the world would be less violent? Less capitalist? Are any things you think that would be worse? What would be better?
Hmm, hard to say. There would probably be less violent and sexual crimes.
A lot of women world leaders do pretty good, Merkel for example. But there are some bad ones, too, like the Myanmar leader.
A lot of modern technology was made by men, but one could argue that women have been discouraged from academic pursuits because of the patriarchy. I know that may sound overtly SJW, but it's worth entertaining I think.
Not really sure what kind of conclusion to draw.
Regardless, I like duality in my life currently. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
I know I say I hate men a lot and I still do, but the world would be really boring without men. How about a world without ugly men, or a world where all men are enslaved instead?
How would we enslave them though?
Instead of men there would be butch lesbians and nothing would change
Screen Shot 2018-0…
We would have to keep the male population low for it to be viable. A good way to reduce the male population while keeping the female population high is having a mandatory male draft and inciting war. However, the change of power would need to occur relatively quickly, as within a few generations, the ratio of men to women would steadily return to 1:1. I won't get into how to start a war as it is something that would naturally occur without our intervention. The main point is taking advantage of such a situation, so let's assume for now that a war has begun. How do the women in the warring territory gain power? The majority of change would need to occur silently. We would need the passage of laws supporting women over men while there were significantly less male voters.
I would think the world would be much more peaceful. Much less crime. However we would probably advance more slowly due to being less competitive. With too much peace things become stagnant.
I dislike men and avoid them for the most part, but at the very least I can appreciate them for the things they've made.
it would be a cool world some r9k bloke would probably get off to being his fetish
If all men suddenly disappeared the first thing that would happen would be billions of women following them into death as all the infrastructure of modern society falls apart with no men to maintain it.
After that I think the few surviving women would form primitive tribes. The centers of these tribes would be women who know how to hunt and forage and otherwise survive on their own. These capable women would basically become the new men, leading and taking care of other women. Only, I'm not sure women would want that role. Men were happy to be a tribe leader and take care of a bunch of women because it meant he'd get to have sex with all of them. But on I don't really see that same motivation working for your average woman.
If the tribes do manage to survive, assuming they managed to form at all, things would probably then be pretty boring for the rest of time as the women don't really build or create new things, just survive day today. Until some global eco shift or huge scale natural disaster rendered the Earth inhospitable for humans and killed off the last of them.
I don't understand this hate for men.
A world without them would have a fast ending for the most of us.
The survivors would die out because we need men.
Wanting man entslaved or their numbers forcefully hold down is terrible and makes women who want that not better than the redpill guys.
I met as many bad men as i met bad women.
It would be worse. Girls bully girls relentlessly; women sabotage each other in the workplace constantly - if all the social capital and prestige was solely among women it would intensify by at least an order of magnitude. I have many brothers and while they are much, much more physical
they fight much less.
A bit off-topic, but I want everyone to die out.
We are all awful and there's no point being here. I'd kms if I wasn't a coward and a fellow human addicted to the sensory interest generated on earth.
Maybe some kind of highly infective smallpox or influenza strain with virulence factors somehow activated by male specific features like presence of an SRY gene product
Who are you to decide whether I'm awful and deserving of death?
laughed in a library from this
Pretty much this. There would be a much stricter hierarchy that is decided by social status (basically a huge popularity contest). A lot of people forget that girls can be cruel and judgy even the ones that claim that “everyone is beautiful just that way theyare and we shouldn’t judge them!”. Although I think there would be a lot less competiveness and obsession over looks. Lots of girls dress or do their make up a certain way to appeal to guys, but now that men are gone, they have no reason to unless they just like dressing like that for themselves.
If I lost the men in my life I'd literally jump off a bridge the same day. I don't get this hatred for men.
Me neither, I think a better question to ask would be "what would life be like if we didn't have to reproduce" I think that way a lot of bad things about men would disappear
>>22728>all the infrastructure of modern society falls apart with no men to maintain it.>women don't really build or create new things,
You sound male and/or idiotic, sorry.
Can this thread be deleted, it's full of LARPers.
Ok point out the LARPers then
I didn't bring up feelings, I said you sound male and/or idiotic. It's not a "feeling" any more than saying "The sky is blue" is. It's a very simple observation. I think this lack of nuanced thinking is a much larger issue.
I'm sorry about whatever feelings must have consistently blocked you from Googling "female inventors", "women and agriculture", or "women and labor force" for so much of your life, but as someone who believes in self-determination, I believe that you can do it if you just push yourself hard enough. It must be hard not having your biases confirmed, but I believe in you. If you disagree with consisted, documented history, please feel free to post your counter-evidence for the world to see.
A small number of women with skills and experience in some of these industries isn't going to be anywhere near enough to stop the massive chain of problems caused by all the men disappearing.
The source of those massive problems would be the sudden disappearance of half of the world population.
Of course there would be a difficult adaptation period when people have to be retrained for jobs.
I wouldn't assume things would be automatically better or worse, just different. And not based on shallow stereotypes like "wow how can women run the world if they're too busy being bitchy"?
This hypothetical is honestly boring.
No, because men would survive just fine without women. Assuming the same reproductive power is given them.
You really underestimate how much work goes into maintaining all the modern conviniences that keep you comfortable and alive if you keep dismissing it as "oh we'd just learn to do it ourselves"
How? Who's teaching you? How are you surviving while you try to learn? How many women will even be physically capable of some of these jobs even if you survive? Have you thought through any of these steps with any level of depth or do you just picture it happening in your head with no details because you think "men aren't so special. We can do all that too".(YOU CAN'T SIT WITH US)
I can't compete in a Stacy World and I'm not a lesbian so I'd probably go be a nun and join a hermitage with other social outcast women for platonic company. Could be comfy.
>>22770>men would survive just fine without women
idk why incels and woman haters take this proposition for granted. a hellish lord of the flies type scenario seems just as likely under such circumstances
All that would happen is the sexbot industry would explode.
>>22770>No, because men would survive just fine without women.
lol there are literally online communities of men who mentally destroyed themselves just because they never got a hug from a woman. Best part is they insist they're doing fine or that they no longer wish/desire to interact with women
males = original tsunderes
>>22770>men would survive just fine without women.
that is not true, it is like saying women can survive just fine without men.
Of course a group of one sex or another can survive. It is not witchcraft, but i think it has a reason that we have two sexes.
Hell yeah, men are idiots and just giant babys and women are crazy and emotional, no sex is better than the other.
Women and men are different, in many ways, but I believe that is made from years of evolution so we can complement each other.
I hope you guys get my point.
There are communities doing that just fine. (With strict discipline)
being a cloistered nun sounds like it would be very chill tbh. i'm 100% for this idea.>>22770
i know grown-ass men who can't even operate a washing machine, you really think those guys would be 'just fine'?
when my granddad's wife died he ate out for the next thirty years because he refused to learn how to cook. his elderly (female) neighbor felt so sorry for him that she would come over every week to clean his house because he refused to do it. yeah, sure, men will be fine on their own. just let their stubborn asses live in filth, ill health, and misery.
The point is that without any women enforcing privacy, the lowlife men would just be swept up by other men who have their shit together. They'd be used as literal minions and probably enjoy it because they don't have to worry about much and are taken care of.
Men in a nutshell. It only needs a handful of tricksters/schemers/"wizards" who have oversight and some others who are bold and charismatic.
Around here we also have some concepts like that where "homeless" University students are swept up (and given a cheap home) by fraternities who are more or less civilized but teach them how to function at least in basic concepts, until the older ones graduate and get own homes and then teach the young ones in occasional meetings.
I guess if it just was one house with everyone living in it forever it would become the epitome of barbaric, but at least it would work somehow
idk where you live, but where i'm from, fraternity brothers are regarded as scumbags. they're arrogant, inconsiderate, throw loud parties and don't clean up after themselves, and they bully the younger members of the frat.
plus, most of them don't
learn to function even in those basic concepts, at least not in the long run. they get their degrees, marry their girlfriends, and then go straight back to being as messy and lazy as they want because they have a domestic servant to take care of them again.
like the frat communities that you're describing sound fine to live in, but i think you're really underestimating the number of pic related that exist. those lowlife men are lowlifes usually because they have no skills, social or otherwise, and i find it hard to imagine that the other men who have their shit together would pick them up and transform their lives without them being able to demonstrate some sort of value.
The thread topic seems to have slid towards a men-only planet.
Men without women would create some sort of cannibalistic human sacrifice oriented culture where dying in war is considered ideal and funerary customs involve turning their skins into war drums and where human bone scrimshaw is the most common form of art. On the plus side there would be personal jetpacks and flying cars, on the downside there would be no license restrictions or insurance for either, fuel efficiency would be considered a cowardly concept and seatbelts would not exist even as a concept. Even our current world has detonated more than 2,150 atomic bombs, mostly more or less safely in test sites. In Man World, and I'm reasonably sure no man on earth would disagree, they'd have easily tripled that number, but a nontrivial percentage of those would not have been tests. Only 4 United States presidents have died by assassination in the current world, 2 shot by far right conservatives (Lincoln and Garfield) and 2 shot by far left communists (McKinley and Kennedy); only one of those was shot after women gained the vote. We can probably quadruple that number for Man World, and without women's civilizing influence on radical leftwing politics illegalism and Propaganda of the Deed such as assassination would be much more common political activities. The Cold War would have gone nuclear and surviving nations would have functioning Orion nuclear engine spaceships, which they would use in their resource wars where they struggle to get control of the solar system's remaining fissile materials so that they can win the next set of nuclear wars. Feminine concepts such as restraint and public order are the only reason there are stop signs, speed limits, and blood alcohol level restrictions on the roads. The whole nightmarish scenario would look a lot like Warhammer 40,000, but with everyone acting like Orkz. I mean heck that's the whole idea of Warhammer's Orkz, there's a reason Orkz are asexually reproducing fungi, men without women and without biological restraints.
Physically, if men still needed a male partner to reproduce with, I don't really know. Men are much more attracted to pale skin than women are, and much more attracted to blue or light colored eyes. They'd probably be larger and have tougher bones and stronger muscles due to the constant personal warfare of all against all that is the natural state on their planet. And since they'd be cannibals they'd probably have better digestive adaptations to drinking blood.
So basically gay vampires with jetpacks.
i think you just really like warhammer
Man World sounds fucking badass
bear in mind it would also be extremely gay in a prison kind of way
How so? Are you sure? Men are actually more empathetic than women in terms of morals and ideals, for example all great moral undertakings have come from men (ending slavery, rule of law, etc). Women are pretty vicious and don't really care either way. I think a world consisting of men would be highly moral and just. If Man World has the same demographics as now, Europeans would just dominate the Earth and without women to impede them they would never let their empire fall. I don't think it would be as warlike as you claim because one tribe or group would quickly pull ahead of all others and maintain stability, much like in our world (Pax Britannica and then Pax Americana).
>>22836>men are more emphatic and have better morals because they ended slavery.
That's not how it works, there were and still are plenty of men that didn't want slavery to end. It's not like woman we're be able to end slavery anyway because they had no power to do so.
>>22716>Merkel>a good leader
thats funny m8
Warhammer is a direct reflection of the male soul. To create a perfect male android we could build a sexbot and train its neural net on Warhammer source materials and pornography, and the result would be functionally indistinguishable from a biological male. The only question is why on Earth anyone would want to do that.
Germany is objectively one of, if not, the most economically successful European country.
Solely because of the German people, and not because of their leadership.
i work in a female-dominated industry (i'm surrounded by women and talking to women all day) and overall it's a very pleasant environment with little to none of the backstabbing and gossip-mongering that men imagine would happen in a world without them. if anyone is unpleasant it's usually in a way that's stand-offish rather than outright bitchy.
then you have male-dominated spaces such as fraternities like >>22818
mentioned which produce some of the most obnoxious and rude specimens of humanity that i've ever encountered.
uncanny coincidence, huh
I'd like to see you explain how Germany is an Anarchist utopia, Anon. Also haven't all the leaders of Germany been German people? Yes, yes they have.
>>22915>random ridiculous strawman
As long as you at least somewhat harness the German people's industriousness, you will have a successful country. The particulars of their leadership is irrelevant and they would obviously be a billion times better off without Merkel and with someone who instead was NOT trying to slowly genocide them.
i don’t think backstabbing and politics and gossip is a male or female thing, it’s a shitty internal culture thing. we’re too quick to attribute shittiness to what people are rather than who they are, i think
>>23218>it was men that decided slavery was badhttp://spartacus-educational.com/REslaveryW.htm>it was men that decided world wars should probably not continue
it's also men who started said world wars, what's your point?
Austrians are, in fact, Germans.
It would be the most miserable place ever.
What a horrible thread.
I think a new gender binary would form around masculinity/femininity and it'd be much the same as it is now, only not as based in biology.
I agree. This thread was probably made as b8 to make the site look bad
Do you actually believe that?
This site is built around not having men post here. Why would you intentionally seek out an online society without males if you think a real world society without males would be miserable?
it isn't bait, i made it because i was bored and the chan was slow. i don't hate males but i agree with >>23652
I like boys too much, I enjoy their company and I think they are cute
but all the alpha males and incels and "nice guys" can die off thX
Not her, but just because I like to post there doesn’t mean I have a desire for all men to disappear. Posting here is something temporary, then I go back to reality.
What about the nice guys without the quotes?
well no, i appreciate actually nice people…
uh well im (>>23666) not even >>23658
Also.. what the fuck is this. lmao, reported asf.
Uh I'm not the same person and no, I don't like kids. I like adults. What the fuck? How did you get this from what I posted?
click drop down arrow at the top right of the post you want to report. you'll get a little boxy at the bottom that says "file-delete" and "reason:(text box) - report". Type in the reason you are reporting (or dont if its obvious!) and click report! ta dah!
Yeah, I believed it until OP stepped in to correct me. I didn’t specifically seek out this site because it’s female-oriented. I found it off lc and thought there’d be like-minded people here (there are).
I agree with >>23658
, I’d miss the company of qt guys. and making sweeping generalizations is dumb
Because Germany had the richest country in history rebuild it and dump money into it as a bulwark against the Eastern Bloc
bing Marshal Plan
Aung Suu Kyi did nothing wrong
I think a better solution would be to have a more or less polygamous society, where you and your girlfriends share one really really hot guy and the rest of the men work manual labor jobs somewhere far removed from society. That would keep just enough men around to keep things interesting but not too many. They wouldn't have any political power obviously.
I think less sex crime would happen but battery and murder would skyrocket without men to vent on.
Maybe less war, but I have no real evidence myself to suggest why that would be true.
Traffic would be worse.
I think mostly everything else would be cool though.
>>25328>murder would skyrocket
Men are responsible for the overwhelming majority of murders right now.http://www.unodc.org/documents/gsh/pdfs/2014_GLOBAL_HOMICIDE_BOOK_web.pdf
Although in the Virgin Islands it's 50/50, so we might want to stay away from there.
What do you mean by men to vent on? To get angry at or abuse? Are we sure most women beat their husbands? I have doubts.
When I have a problem with other women I can't vent about it with other women because they'll gossip about it and I'll get shit on down the line about it so I talk to a guy friend or bf about it since they barely care about it.
A world without men is just a time bomb of escalating frustrations, our murder rates would match men's in a short amount of time
the men i know are the ones who spread the most gossip, but then again, I hang out with mostly men, and they are very bitchy types of men
It sounds like you just know unhealthy women and have a healthy bf lmao>>25350
Most men I know are also backhanded and into gossip and drama. I worked with mainly (straight) men for a few years in a fast food restaurant of all places places and the backstabbing was unreal
. I didn't expect it.
Anyway it's more an unhealthy-person thing than a woman-thing; men betray each other to get ahead all the time. Men can also be manipulative.
The cure for this is to just be honest about your distaste for an individual when it's safe to do so. If it's a boss or something, complain to someone not employed there so they can't ruin your job. ez
I meant underhanded obvs kek
Before I get called out for stupidity.
Just seems to be a tendency no matter where I go. Not to say its always that way, but more like a rule of thumb
idk op, life without a power grid, indoor plumbing and mechanised agriculture sounds kinda uncomfy, maybe deadly
as much as I hate to admit it, they kind of run things around here
Not for long.
t. aspiring tradeswoman
How do you think things functioned while men were fighting during the world wars? Begone, robot.
The world's population would return to a sustainable number. Women would have children when they were ready, instead of being forced into marriages (child marriages, arranged marriages, shotgun weddings) and then the societal expectation that once married, they have to start having kids. They would be able to enjoy their youth/careers and wouldn't think about children until later in life when only one or two children will be possible anyway. The quality of life for those children will be vastly, vastly improved as older mothers will already have large savings and houses purchased. Older mothers will also be more mature, therefore superior to younger mothers and only very serious mothers would go through with carrying a child. There will be no accidental children as mothers will have to go through an artificial insemination process. They won't have to suffer from rape and the pressure religious organisations and families put on them to birth and keep the child. People wonder why women in impoverished countries "keep having children" when they can't afford them, but they never seem to ask why their fucking trash husbands keep impregnating them and making them suffer more. With a reduced world population, the lives of everyone will greatly improve because we will have more food, better access to essential facilities and we would be doing less damage to the earth via climate change, deforestation, pollution etc. It would also be a much safer environment for women to raise children in. Imagine letting your kids play on the street until dark because you don't have to fear kidnappings, murderers or paedophiles as much as the majority of violent crimes are committed by men.
People who wonder "B-But what will we do without big, strong, handsome men?" are men who feel threatened by the idea. Just like they're threatened by feminism and the concept that women can live, work, travel, have kids, make decisions etc. without them. It fucking terrifies them that something they desire to control so much, can actually survive just fine without their influence. Actually, thrive since women who don't marry are happier and less stressed. Do people honestly think that men are the only group of people who can climb a telephone poll or plunge a toilet? Sorry, but society without men would be a utopia and if it bothers you, maybe try to be a more useful member of society or treat women better if you want people to start seeing it as a dystopia.
Older parents are more likely to produce children with genetic or chromosomal abnormalities, and screening tests for such defects aren't perfect. We're getting better at it of course but they aren't perfect.
Older as in early 30s, not 40s.
The average age to have a first child in my country is 31.
For the record, this poster is not me.
This is pretty characteristic of Western Europe I think. When you stratify the US population by graduation from a four year college, you arrive at a similar mean value for the age of women at the time of their first child's birth.
Certainly I believe women must possess reproductive autonomy, but in order to make informed decisions we must also recognize that our biology is optimized for a different sort of life history than those common in wealthy post-industrial societies.
Don't people on (the functional end of) the spectrum often gravitate toward STEM careers? We'd need more STEM girls in this world, so that's fine. This study also didn't seem to mention severity of the disorder, although I only skimmed over it.
Anyway, if that table is right and say every woman has a baby in the 30-34 range with older male sperm even, so ~14/1000 babies had autism…that's only 1.4% of people having autism. Right now it's 1/59 people (in the U.S.), 1.7%. Things wouldn't be too different.https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/67/ss/ss6706a1.htm
So what, "older" women who are emotionally prepared to have children and actually want them would know those risks, and even if their kid did have autism or whatever, they'd be better fit to parent them than some 21 year old who got knocked up.
The world would be so much safer. It's hilarious when guys try to use the b-but we protect you excuse for why we would need them. Protect us from what? Other barbaric male thugs?
>>22814>i know grown-ass men who can't even operate a washing machine
This is dumb though because I can reverse that and say i know women that can't even operate a nuclear power plant. Teaching that halfwit man to using a washing machine takes like 5 minutes, but teaching that woman how to operate a nuclear plant isn't going to be quick. In OP's scenario, men would outlast women because they already dominate almost every field, even the ones that are majority female.
I'd honestly rather live in a less scientifically advanced society than one filled with violent psychopaths.
Just weighing the pros and cons of each society, for me personally this is what I'd prefer.
>>25836>This is dumb though because I can reverse that and say i know women that can't even operate a nuclear power plant.
this is such a horrible comparision, anon, a nuclear power plant takes more than one person to run unlike running a load of laundry, kek
>Teaching that halfwit man to using a washing machine takes like 5 minutes, but teaching that woman how to operate a nuclear plant isn't going to be quick.
nta but…like…that's the point…the simple task of laundry can't be completed by a man. once again, a power plant isn't run by a singular person, kek
okay, I know I'm going to take everyone's hatred here.
I just want to clarify some points.
Many of the social networks have been invented by men, but in the end those who use them most are women.
For example Instagram, a platform to share your lifestyle, and suddenly a group of girla just want attention through likes.
Would you really like to live in a less technological world but without the need to be dealing with the problems of men?
I also believe that most of the problems in the world are caused by men.
I am not against anyone's opinion, you are all right in everything.
Exceedingly few of the problems in the world are caused by people.
A both only one sex society would operate like trash. The sexes clearly operate based on their unique functions. Moids are too dirty and lazy but are capable of doing heavy duty jobs even though they sleep a lot and dont give a damn about their hygiene.
Women can raise children, be natural food providers, are resolve diplomatic issues easily and they are the reason why the tribe is formed actually. Moids barely have anything to protect without us. This is asumming they are more reasonable moids of course, but thats the natural job of the moid.
Thats why feminist law must exist, it makes the police (mostly moids) have our backs in a reasonable manner.
We should live like elephants. Elephants are based. Female only tribes who raise kids except young males are kicked out at a certain age to live with older dudes and far away from us. We meet only a few times a year to fuck the fittest male. Problem solved.
Moids think they are more important to a society than us but that is not true if more women flew to other societies because they didnt like their own that society would collapse and would be unable to keep new generations going. They underestimate the unique power of women which is one of the strongest ones if not the strongest in biological physical existence.
We can make a society resurge with 30 women and 2 qt racoon moids if we wanted. But they can't maintain the opposite 30 moids and 2 women, they would go apeshit and start killing each other. Women are naturally more valuable scientifically proven.
So I think an anti-feminist society should get killed by their own women. Muslim women should emigrate more to better societies for them than Muslim moids. And let the muslim world and indoctrination die by womanly disinterest, they wont be capable of making new generations if they fly out thats the best punishment you can bestow on shitty societies. Death by loneliness.
>How would things be like?
I think that stronger women would take on the male roles in society (e.g., leading other women). And also the care of the babies would be shared.>Do you think the world would be less violent?
Absolutely. That would be the best part. If men disappear, so does violence.>Less capitalist?
Yes, men are the ones who like to compete with each other and accumulate wealth (power). A world without men would be more cooperative.>Are any things you think that would be worse?
I think women lack ambition and therefore a world without men would develop more slowly.>What would be better?
Less violence and more cooperation. >>65474
It is like this in almost all the animal kingdom.
>>65486>If men disappear, so does violence
Violence will exist as long as there ere living creatures capable of suffering. Animal kingdom is filled with violence, as humans became the apex predator we escaped the struggle for survival, but not suffering.
I doubt that stuff like raping infants to death will still exist without males but ok.
This is the realistic answer.
the world would become more sanctimonious as seen in >>65486
Rape is (mostly) a very specifically male type of violence, so I agree I don't think it would exist anymore. Don't get me wrong I think violence would go way down without men, especially sexual violence and other awful kinds, but I don't think it'd disappear altogether.
As in they just vanished, rapture style?
Get ready for every non-European nation to completely collapse and swarm the last bastions of technologically advanced civilisation who had at least some women trained and educated in fields necessary to maintain and develop core infrastructure.
We have practically entire continents where women are unable to drive, sail or fly, so all transportation shuts down. Food, energy and materiel stops moving entirely for almost the entire planet.
Hundreds of millions die from starvation as farms come to a halt and their produce cannot be distributed more than a week's journey by foot away.
Yet more die to disease as, again, entire continents with a handful of women trained in medicine. The grand exodus from Africa and Asia carry diseases wiped-out in the West and epidemics spread.
Strategic reserves of fuel deplete as oil fields burn out of control or simply sit idle and it becomes a race for a handful of scientists, engineers and machinists in European countries to train a massive workforce to fill the gaps in gas, solar and turbine manufacture.
Hundreds of thousands of women choose suicide, rather than suffer through the loss of fathers, brothers, sons, husbands ect.
Militaries, border patrols and even police are entirely depopulated without enough women with the disposition to fill even the higher ranks required to field much more than local forces.
By the time Western nations start to recover, mass columns of refugees from the world over start entering their undefended borders. In a few months all resources are drained and millions more die.
In the end anywhere connected by easily traversable land and sea connections is overrun and eventually decays into semi-nomadic tribes. The few sufficiently advanced civilisations to survive will be in places considered too cold or difficult to reach by hordes of desperate refugees - perhaps Switzerland, the Faroe Islands, northern Norway and Finland, Siberia, Iceland, Greenland, parts of Canada and Alaska.
We need a containment board for femcel shit.
Not this particular post, this thread. If the men in my life disappeared I would kms.
Id probably be the same, losing half my family, about a quarter of my friends, and my boyfriend all in an instant
If you don't like it, you can hide the thread. It's not that hard.
Good, there are too many people anyway. We need a good soft reset.
>>22723>things become stagnant
Nothing wrong with that. Progress is destroying us and all the other inhabitants of this planet.
That wouldn't work. The "war to drastically reduce the male population" thing already happened in Russia, and it's fucked up female gender relations ever since. Women are forced to dress up like sluts in order to attract the few remaining viable men who aren't alchoholics
>boyim larping thread
That also happened in Paraguay 1864-70, basically 90% of men died and Paraguayan catholic church de facto legalized polygamy after war
sounds about right, the world would fall apart without men. I'd like to see femcels try and survive in a world without men, without hunters and farmers.
Kek fuck scrotes and handmaidens on this board.