1
$\begingroup$

Continuing the idea of gender swapped world:

The question: How would internatinal politics look in gender swapped world?

Common ideas shared by vast majority in my alternate Earth:

  • Goddess is woman. If you reffer to God (of any kind), you always speak of Her or She. Male Gods do exist, but they are as common as female Goddesses in our world
  • Female contraception is known from ancient ages: There exist set of herbs which if you drink in daily manner, you (as female) cannot get pregnant, while having regular menstruation cycle
  • Giving birth is perceived as stength, woman strength is measured by how many live children did she bring to this world.
  • There exist set of herbs to painlessly end any unwanted pregnancy and doing so is considered pretty normal.
  • However, male unable to care of a child, causing its death is considered as weakness and by religious people as against Goddess
  • There exist set of herbs to ease giving birth. Therefore, giving birth is painless
  • Male is here to upbring child he concieved
  • Cow milk is perfect alternative to human milk, so man can care for a child from day one
  • My alternate world has magic (as form of handvawe of:) where any female knows who is father of given child. This knowledge is not being disputed and considered as "Gift from The Goddess"
  • Men are considered as "caring, stay at home" people
  • There exist sexually transferred diseases, but the most common one has effect only on males (causing erectile dysfunction if untreated)
  • Females are here to think, act and speak. It is inappropriate for a man to pursuit his life goals
  • Main religions have this role of a man also written in their Holy books.

And as of religions, imagine nowadays main Earth religions (including atheism), just swap every notable male of such religion to female and vice versa

Also color of human skin differs by location on Earth, just as on our world

Would such wolrd build states, kingdoms? How would groups of females build the society?

$\endgroup$

closed as primarily opinion-based by Aify, bowlturner, JDługosz, Frostfyre, Samuel Aug 7 '15 at 18:38

Many good questions generate some degree of opinion based on expert experience, but answers to this question will tend to be almost entirely based on opinions, rather than facts, references, or specific expertise. If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.

  • $\begingroup$ For the record, there are plenty of goddesses in our world. Amphitrite, Aphrodite, Artemis, Asteria, Athena, Demeter, Eris, Hebe, Hera, Hestia, Gaia, Nike, Nyx, Rhea, Theia, just to name a few. $\endgroup$ – Aify Aug 6 '15 at 19:43
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @Aify And don't forget more modern examples, such as Mary in some sects of Christianity, or Tolkien's Elbereth. $\endgroup$ – DaaaahWhoosh Aug 6 '15 at 20:01
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ At the very least it does provide cool Bond-one-liners: "Find peace in the embrace of the Goddess!" Bang! Bang! Bang! $\endgroup$ – Serban Tanasa Aug 6 '15 at 22:32
  • $\begingroup$ So this question COULD certainly (and likely would) be answered in an opinion-ed way. That said there are historical examples of matriarchal societies so it can in fact be answered with historic references. I vote leave it open. $\endgroup$ – James Aug 7 '15 at 18:12
4
$\begingroup$

I find such questions are often best approached with a question: why would you believe it would be any different than our world? The answer to that question points you to where you should look for differences or similarities. For example, is it male might that makes a state or a nation, or is it simply the mighty, regardless of gender?

Eventually you will find that your ruleset does change things, but if you think it might prevent something, dig into why you think that particular trait of society could not occur. The answer may surprise you. Societies are remarkably clever in out-thinking their authors

$\endgroup$
1
$\begingroup$

One of the most interesting fields to ponder on in regards to this type of question is biological anthropology. Two very similar relatives of ours are bonobos and chimps. 97%-99% of the genetic base pairs are shared, so a bit counter-intuitively, the average human male has more common base pairs with a male bonobo than with a female human.

Now for the weird part. Regular chimps are like real-world humans: male-dominated societies, lots of violence, etc. Their near-identical twins, the bonobos, are matriarchal. Even though males are still larger, females are still the ones who get pregnant, basic evolutionary game theoretic incentives are the same etc., one species is patriarchal, one is matriarchal. Weaker bonobo females band up against violent males and kick them out of the group. It's really, really weird.

Makes you wonder, doesn't it? How would human societies have evolved had we been just a little bit more bonobo-like than chimp-like? Perhaps human 'herstory' would consist of a 20,000 year peace?

$\endgroup$
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ -1 for not answering the question $\endgroup$ – Pyritie Aug 7 '15 at 14:40

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.