Gender Balance: A Hypothetical Question
 

Biologically, we tend to have roughly equal numbers of males and females throughout our lives. Babies are slightly more likely to be male, but then they fall earlier to illness, kickboxing, and electric poles, so in adulthood we have roughly equal numbers of males and females. Then once you get past 40 the women become more common since they live lives of leisure and comfort in their corsets and bonnets while the men dig coal and chop wood and kickbox. However, the ratio doesn't really get extremely out of whack until the age of 70 or 80 when the men are mostly dead and the women are watching Court TV.

But what if it was different? How would society be different if one gender was notably less common than the other? I'll propose two scenarios, and let me know how you think the world would be different if...

Scenario 1. The ratio of men to women was 8:1. In other words, there were 8 men for every woman.

Scenario 2. The ratio of women to men was 8:1. In other words, there were 8 women for every man.

How would the societal power structure be different? Family structure? Sports? Housing? Leisure? What do you think?

Have you not heard?? A rabbit ate Sofa King's possum!

Too many men would mean more gay men.

Too many women would be the end of the world.

I thought a opossum ate his sofa.

Scenario 1 was pretty much played out in towns which sprang up during our move westward.

Scenario 2 gives me chills just thinking about it. The horror.

Scenerio # 2 would add 5 to the Bill Clinton and porn stars pic..

Everybody would be dead by now either way.

I think it was maxim, but rio I believe has way more women to men.

So one, they love foreign and american men. Two, women share quality boyfriends. That is just win. Wars would be wrse though, have you seen women shopping against other women. Total bloodshed.

If it were opposite women would be hoarded and sexed up even earlier then now. And probably increase in bromancing.

I don't necessarily think social structure would be different because the status quo has already been decided by that later age assuming I'm understanding your question correctly.

If there were far more women than men, I have a feeling men would be kept underground for breeding only, and women would try to assert their authority and rule the world. That is, until men figured out they could run things and would rebel against the women.

Interesting thought though: would body images be the same as they are now if there are far more women than men? Would women subject themselves to fitting into a stereotype body image or would they just not care? Before you answer they wouldn't care, I remember reading a study about why men and women want to be in shape or have a particular body image. Men said they wanted to look good so they would be more attractive to women, but most women said they wanted to be in shape for its own sake, and that it had little to nothing to do with men.

Funny you pose this question. Myself and about 10 couples I know are having baby girls in the next year. I think mother nature is conducting her balancing act.

Don't forget being able to show off to other women. That's why I love going to the pool. Watching the women looking at each other and comparing is a great way to pass the time.

This was another one of the choices in the breakdown that a lot of women picked. Basically, I think women would still want to look good, whatever their reasons are.

I wonder if, outside of modern pressures towards equality, there would naturally be more women than men or vice versa. Or if it would end up equal. In other words, our species was genetically naturally selected to have more of one gender than another, but modern medicine and health advances interferes with this tendency.

China won't allow that to happen. We're safe.

I'll address individual issues, starting with family structure.


If men greatly outnumbered women...


I don't think that core family structures would be that much different than they are now, other than the fact that we'd have a lot of wandering bachelors. More powerful men would have wives, and less powerful men wouldn't. Would this give females more power in the family or not? It's a tough question. Women could become "prizes" and would trade any power for what would undoubtedly be a comfortable life (no poverty other than maybe cases of true love). Or they could become power brokers and use their relative scarcity to create matriarchal power structures. However, I'd lean more toward the first outcome, in part because there would still be lots of women competing for the "best" men and in part because they would be a small minority. Perhaps I'm projecting historical shadows on that, though. You'd probably reverse fidelity roles a bit, though, with husbands becoming less "wandering" and more protective of the relationship, while women would be more likely to wander.

Maybe you'd have some guys getting together in some sort of "bachelor civil unions" just for companionship and standard of living. My guess is that gay behavior would be quite acceptable and no one would give it a second thought.

If women greatly outnumbered men...


I think core family structures would be a lot different. I think that families would consist of one man and multiple wives, and with children being born to all of them we'd have little tribal villages instead of families.

The bigger question is power. Would women have greater control due to their greater numbers? In this situation, would we have a matriarchal structure where the guy is just the "pet" in the clan, playing a critical reproductive role but otherwise being a secondary member of the tribe, or would he be the ruler of the clan?

I think an easy assumption is that women wouldn't have much power because they'd be in great supply, so you'd see lots of "divorces" as guys traded in wives for newer models, because they'd be less loyal other than cases of true love. However, I think that the opposite might occur. I think women would control the clans, and they would control if a woman gets kicked out or not, or at least have equal control with the man.

In fact, another plausible scenario is that the men aren't even permanently attached to clans. The women would be in stable clans, and the guys would rotate between clans as they and the women saw fit. In this case, then, you wouldn't have the permanently exiled female bachelor civil unions like you'd get in the other scenarios. The unions would exist in group form, but with men entering and exiting them over time.

That's my family structure theory.