Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

If men were wiped out post-1800s, where would women be now? Watch

    Offline

    2
    (Original post by SunIllusions)
    Why is this Miso dude obsessed with threads about women?
    The clue is in his username.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jonty99)
    I wouldn't, but that wouldn't affect how much the person who took my place was paid surely? Is the pay not generally decided before the person gets the job?
    Sometimes, or you get a range which is negotiable.

    I think I lost my point: that it's difficult to tell that you are being discriminated against, and to evidence racism. Could be applied to pay gap and in general.

    - as an individual you don't know whether you are being rejected for a high level job or promotion because you are white. [there's greater disparity in high level jobs, there are also sometimes more pressure to work late etc.]
    - you likely don't know who else applied, and you don't know how much your colleagues earn, unless they tell you.
    - it's difficult to find evidence that you are subject to discrimination - your employer could say that the black employee came across better in interview. As it happens, the presence of a female on the board can lead to increased recruitment of females. [sometimes discrimination is subconscious, too - but leave that alone]
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    They'd at least be on Mars.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by sleekchic)
    The clue is in his username.
    Oh I'm not blind lady. I just don't see why this half-****** can't get a life and move on.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    That's a good 200 years of what-iffing... for a start, almost everything in terms of technology and knowledge would die out with them. Humanity would take a huge step back before going forwards - if they went forwards at all.
    Offline

    2
    (Original post by SunIllusions)
    Oh I'm not blind lady. I just don't see why this half-****** can't get a life and move on.
    :erm: calm down I wasn't implying that you were blind besides why is it a big deal what threads he makes considering he isn't really harming anyone?
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    This is quite literally the only thread I've made on this subject anyways. I'm not a misogynist - I love women. I just think men are better (ie. outperform) women at most things, which doesn't make women crap, it just means men are better.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Misogynist)
    This is quite literally the only thread I've made on this subject anyways. I'm not a misogynist - I love women. I just think men are better (ie. outperform) women at most things, which doesn't make women crap, it just means men are better.
    If we were to go by the UD definition of a misogynist whereby a misogynist is 'A man who hates every bone in a woman's body, except his.', you probably in fact are a misogynist :awesome:
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Clements-)
    If we were to go by the UD definition of a misogynist whereby a misogynist is 'A man who hates every bone in a woman's body, except his.', you probably in fact are a misogynist :awesome:
    Lol yeah, that'd fit
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Misogynist)
    Lol yeah, that'd fit
    That definition should so make the oxford dictionary.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Misogynist)
    This is quite literally the only thread I've made on this subject anyways. I'm not a misogynist - I love women. I just think men are better (ie. outperform) women at most things, which doesn't make women crap, it just means men are better.
    Which means you're not even misogynist. A misogynist hates women.

    What's more, from what I've seen you happily look down on women like they're trash.

    They're just women FFS.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Misogynist)
    Okay - Let's assume women can reproduce on their own for all of you idiotic girls who can't seem to grasp the concept of this thread.
    :rofl: You crack me up Misogynist.

    At the risk of becoming unpopular with the fellas... one benefit would be a dramatic fall in crime and the associated harm and cost. As any criminologist knows, the vast majority of crime (and particularly violent crime) is committed by men.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    one thing I can guarantee is that COMEDY would die, women fail at being funny
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    All these posts either anti-feminist or feminist are ridiculous imo. In an all-female society, some women would take on more 'masculine' roles, some more 'feminine' roles, others more passive roles. Do you really believe that in this scenario all women would be the stereotypical 'female'? I'm directing this especially against those who say there'ld be less crime blah blah blah.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by McKholin)
    All these posts either anti-feminist or feminist are ridiculous imo. In an all-female society, some women would take on more 'masculine' roles, some more 'feminine' roles, others more passive roles. Do you really believe that in this scenario all women would be the stereotypical 'female'? I'm directing this especially against those who say there'ld be less crime blah blah blah.
    What you're proposing might be true to an extent. However, I do believe a lot of the reason that women do commit less crime (particularly violent crime) is because of biological differences, not just differences stemming from social factors.
    Offline

    8
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by basketofsnakes)
    one thing I can guarantee is that COMEDY would die, women fail at being funny
    This
    It's the only thing I would be sure of. Women are simply not as funny as men. Sorry women.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Olivia_Lightbulb)
    You have misunderstood. Men have been wiped out post 1800 according to the OP - the question is 'where would women be now?'. The point is, at the point of male extinction women would have had to take on the responsibilities previously held by men.
    No one is denying that in our current history, medicine would not have advanced without Koch and Pasteur with the Germ Theory and the factors such as the Franco Prussian war which contributed to its discovery. However if men had been wiped out, women would have acquired new freedoms to attend university and enter professions previously closed to them and dominated by men. Therefore at some point these inventions (such as the computer) and discoveries, would have been made by women. In this way, it is perfectly possible that civilisation would have progressed in a similar manner to our own and we would now be living an existence little removed from our current one.


    Oh, did you study Medicine and Public Health Throughout Time by any chance?



    There is a big difference between having the opportunity to do something and actually doing. We just have to look at African,Asian and South American countries after independence. Some succeeded at building a stable developed democratic country while many,many failed. They were given the chance and failed.

    Just because women are at the forefront of society in the 1800s doesn't mean that they will discover the same thing that happened in our male domianted society at the same pace or even at all.

    A good example is the printing press. First the Chinese invented it and then later the Germans did it. But the German one wouldn't have been invented at the time it did or maybe not even at all if the Chinese one wasn't invented several hundred years earlier.

    Being serious. I would say that a female society that could reproduce would probably fail or be less advanced. Especially when you consider the fact that men at the time this society comes to existence are the skill force. All the skills will have to be learnt since not many women at this period have skills of any sort except for a certain privileged few. How many women could actually command a Sail boat? Something necessary for trade at that time. How many were doctors? I doubt many.



    I did Medicine through time for GCSE History I never paid attention to it because I liked the American West better but one day I got bored one day in a library and I picked up a book about Koch.
    • PS Helper
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    PS Helper
    (Original post by manwithaplan)
    Even though, it is not related to the thread at all, It is the only sensible, interesting thing I have read in this entire thread. To sum up other than some hissy fit between the people in this thread about something entirely speculative. I have learnt what you have just told me, Thank you.

    + Rep sometime
    I'm a sensible, interesting person :p:

    I wonder who the 27 men would be....
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Olivia_Lightbulb)
    The world would continue as normal. It would hardly grind to a halt now would it?
    How? The official sperm cell was made just 4 years ago by scientists. Since it would be hardly likely that women can somehow find a way to live for 200 years in the 1800s when biology of the human body is much less understood than now. So in conclusion, humanity will be simply wiped out.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by necessarily benevolent)
    Cooking for themselves.
    Yeah well that's good for survival so I guess we would.
 
 
 
Reply
Submit reply
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: August 4, 2013
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    What's your favourite Christmas sweets?
    Useful resources
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.