Would the women's houses look as good as the men's?

Post Reply New Topic

Let's be purely fantastical and fictitious for a moment and consider this scenario:
At some random future date, a huge war occurs between the sexes. It's epic and horrible, millions die and there's tremendous devastation and destruction.
Somehow, a handful of men and women eek through it and end the war with strict treaties to ensure it never happens again while the human population attempts to recover.
One of the treaties states men and women can no longer live in the same communities. They must have their own districts. The North American continent is divided straight down the middle. The women get the western part, the men the eastern and there are stringent guidelines about when they can be together and the only time they can is to mate in order to replenish the diminished population.
Men and women can no longer help each other out. Each sex is strictly on their own and must rely on their own gender to build their civilizations.

My question to you all is:

Will the women's houses look as good as the men's?

State why or why not.

In case you guys are wondering what happens to the babies once the mothers give birth since they can be either sex, the girl babies stay with the mothers, the boy babies are sent over to the men's side to be raised by them.

So if a female has a male sibling(s) they would not be able to visit those siblings and vice versa? And being stuck around just other females that would suck. Also though what happens to people that don't have a clear sex and babies born that way...would they have a separate society?

Anyways not exactly sure what you mean by would womens houses look as good as mens, look good in which way? If you just mean like the construction and paint job....I might say the mens would look better. But I don't know a lot of female construction workers/house painters so I am only basing my perspective on the idea that at this point it seems there are much more males in that field than females so they might have more experience in constructing houses and painting them.

But I never see this war between men and women actually happening.

This is just fiction for now, Sweetleaf. In the future, who knows?
The ones without clear genders would have theirs chosen for them and sent to the appropriate community.
Each man would have a mating partner he would create offspring with and they would only meet once or twice during her ovulation period and if nothing happens, she doesn't see him after that. Instead she is artificially inseminated as designated by treaty 8675309.
I meant construction and design since these are areas men traditionally dominate the workforce. Would women do a better job on their own? Would their houses be better designed and built. No men will be helping the women will do everything in The Western Zone but they are free to plunder their environment and trade with other women's zones (this was a war the world over.)

There will never be a war of the sexes. Zombies are more likely. Zombies would do less damage to Humankind as a whole.
If the world turned into a replica of an Anime about giant robots, the world would be better off than a war between sexes.
If men and women had a war, it would be horrific. I mean the war itself would be an abomination. Tons of people would die out of pure sexism. It is like if the holocaust were a war between Nazi Germany, and an equally powerful and sinister war machine of Jews.

Now that I got that out. I will humor you.

I would commit the ritual suicide of the samurai, with a cross, and pray to God I am helping his kingdom by removing myself.

So there's the actual question. In the spirit of your narrative, I'll assume that so many existing structures were destroyed that living in them isn't an option.

An actual biological difference between men and women could manifest here. Men and women have different physical strength patterns. Men have the ability to build up more muscle mass than women. Women seem to have a slight edge in endurance- slogging through something (an evolutionary necessity in order for enough women to survive childbirth, although many didn't historically). Technology makes those strength differences moot currently but in the absence of technology they would be important again, I am guessing any war devastating enough to destroy nearly all structures would also destroy the technology.

Without technology, the strength differences between men and women become important and would influence the design. Men can lift heavy weights. Women can't do that (without technology) but can lift light weights multiple times. Even if all the industrial technology was destroyed (backhoes, cranes, trucks) women could still implement simple technology that doesn't require a single person to have large muscles: pulleys, levers, rollers. These things would be possible for women to use but would require multiple women pushing/pulling/lifting the same thing in order to make up for the lack of muscle mass.

Women's structures would likely be built of multiple small elements that could be lifted individually by a woman. Bricks or something analogous to bricks. Would they be better than mens? I doubt it. The lack of muscle mass in the absence of technology to offset it would really impose a limit that the men wouldn't face. Women could get around this limit somewhat with simple technologies (lever etc.) and teamwork. But the men would also be using teamwork and simple technologies on their side too. Therefore the womens' structures would be adequate but not surpass the mens'. The womens' structures would tend to being pieced together from multiple applications of small, individually light materials (bricks, small boulders and small pieces of rubble) while the mens' structures would have the advantage that they could use much larger and heavier materials. A dozen women can get together to lift something but a dozen men can get together to lift something even bigger.

Yes it would be that terrible, the worst war in the history of the species. Near total devastation until 600,000 were left, 300,000 women, 300,000 men.
500 years later they are still living apart under the most complicated, longest and enduring treaties the world has ever known. They have successfully raised their numbers so now they are roughly 30 million on each side (the women were required by treaty to become pregnant within three months of giving birth to each child in order to replenish the species. The Eekers as they were called, true heroes of the war, panicked the species would become extinct.)
How do you think this shapes the psyches of both groups? Remember they have had limited contact for 500 years. Do you think taboos against same sex unions would still be in place? Doubtful.
What do you think such societies would resemble? How would they be different from the ones existing today? Would they be better or worse.
As for the borders between the Western and Eastern Zones, they are constantly and carefully guarded by a series of drones and the penalty for either sex crossing into the others zone is death. The drones have a 100% success rate and cannot be out maneuvered and are maintained by the leaders and devout treaty keepers on both sides in the spirit of the original Eekers.

Well, I think the women's houses would be integrated and built out of the environment. Like using caves and such. Men would immediately start building and would soon be using technology to construct the environment. I'm sure this is totally sexist, so sorry in advance.

Janissy ~
Most everything was destroyed yet some items remained, like backhoes, bulldozers, some cranes, in the cities on both sides so they both have access to some equipment and as they flourished once again, they both began manufacturing their own supplies and trading with same sex partners the world over. It is one global community glaringly divided into two halves and both are pretty much on equal footing now and have no reason to ever fight one another. Both sides seem peaceful and there's no more wars or conflicts. It's ironic they are so divided yet work together so well and are actually more united than they have ever been.

So my question is, which side would have the nicest homes based on these details. Or, would they pretty much be equal since equality is the theme in their lives?

I am interested in what such a world would look like.

"If women ruled the world there would be no wars. Just a bunch of angry countries not talking to each other."

I would still commit suicide or attempt kamikaze against the Capitol where the leaders are.

Such a world doesn't deserve to exist.

Who says the countries would be angry? What if they are better than what exists now? Who are you to say what is or isn't better? What is out there now doesn't seem to be working all that well.

There's no official capitols. just the Western and Eastern Zones and each country has these zones. The west always belongs to the women to tend and make what they will of it, the east, to the men to do the same. Just imagine how the mind would shape to this environment after 500 years. I like to imagine what such individuals would be like in this unfamiliar world. There's no grumpy people remembering how things were to make them bitter. This would be all they know, their culture and way of life. That's what makes them so intriguing. It would be unlike anything experienced before.

Various representatives would be scattered about each zone to ensure complete compliance with the treaty.

I would still do what I said I would do. I wouldn't care. I would have entered hell.

I want to be able to sleep next to my beloved lady, not stare at her through reinforced glass.

You would never know what that was like in the first place so you would never know what you are missing and you would be totally accustomed to living with men and that's it. Your female mating partner would be determined by Upholders of the Eekers and that's the only experience you would have with someone of the opposite sex and if it didn't work out for whatever reason, technology would step in and save the day with artificial insemination. Pretty interesting idea, huh?

No.
Merely talking about this makes me feel sick.
I'm not going to post on this thread, I find it revolting as a concept.