I had so much fun reading How will our world change if all men suddenly die? that I decided to register here.

It also made me wonder about the opposite case: In a world... with today's technology and level of development there is a Mad Scientist. A man, to be exact. One day he concludes that women are responsible for all evil in the world and starts to bioengineer a virus. Super advanced virus, because he's a genius. A virus to solve all the world's problems - in his wicked understanding.

He succeeds and the virus starts spreading, very stealthy, via air and water and all the other possible methods of infection. Soon after the entire earth population is infected. And then, in one day, the virus activates and all female humans die, almost instantly. Basically, only men are left on earth, forever.

It is well established that men would have a problem living for very long since they can't give birth, but would they be able to develop a way to actually make babies without women? This is already kind-of happening, although women still have to take part.

How will the world change? Will the civilization survive? What are the consequences?

(Answers giving the differences between this and the opposite case are more than welcome!)

  • 3
    $\begingroup$ Sounds tangentially related to the White Plague by Frank Herbert. $\endgroup$
    – Mr. Smythe
    Mar 17, 2016 at 15:33
  • 6
    $\begingroup$ It would have been nice to see some comments as to why they were close voting, and it is policy to do so, but I can't make them do that. I did just cast the 5th re-open vote though. :) $\endgroup$
    – Tim B
    Mar 17, 2016 at 21:20
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ @TimB Well, "How will the world change?" sounds awfully broad to me. And the linked question, which the OP does point out is exactly the same, is now on hold as too broad. $\endgroup$
    – user
    Mar 17, 2016 at 23:06
  • $\begingroup$ @MichaelKjörling And that is literally the point of what I first said before my comment was purged. If one question asking the exact same thing as this one is on hold as too broad, is there any reason this one isn't too broad? I originally voted to close and it was closed, but then somehow this question was reopened. $\endgroup$
    – fi12
    Mar 18, 2016 at 13:00
  • 5
    $\begingroup$ I posted a question to Worldbuilding Meta about this: Are the questions “How will our world change if all {men,women} suddenly die?” on topic or not? $\endgroup$
    – user
    Mar 18, 2016 at 13:09

6 Answers 6


OK I will go on with a timeline scenario again (as in the previous question) and do my best to be as good hater-magnet as I did on the previous question.

15 seconds after the death of all women: A lot of vehicles crash all over the world, although the count would not be as much as it would have been if all men had died. Considering that there are disproportionately more men drivers than women drivers. However freaked out men (seeing their friend/lover/wife/daughter dying within a moment on the front seat) will still get many millions of fatal accidents all over the world. This would result in major havoc, confusion and frenzy all over the world.

1 minute after the incident: There would be major uproar all over the world. Hospitals (specially maternity homes) would be particularly hard-hit. Communication channels (phone lines) would be overloaded with men all over the world calling home to ensure everything is safe and fine.

10 minutes after the incident: Considering that a lot of roads would be blocked (due to jammed vehicles and crashed cars) and the overall confusion and frenzy, some not-so-nice men would try to take advantage of the situation. There would be a wave of rioting, looting and plundering all over the world.

15 minutes after the incident: There would be a possible outage of communication channels based on government orders. Many governments all over the world might order a complete shutdown of internet and phone lines (both landlines and mobiles) in order to not let the other countries learn what has transpired to them. This would be specially expected of countries such as India, Israel, North Korea, Iran, Saudi Arabia, China, Russia, USA, UK, Egypt, Syria and Pakistan. The reason would be that if this catastrophe is limited to their country (as the governments may think), it might provide their adversary nations a best opportunity to storm their borders at this time of extreme weakness. If it happens (very likely), it would send the world in a communication blackout, increasing the confusion and violence.

30 minutes later: Most countries around the world with a strong military would be put on curfew in order to contain the rioting and violence. Secure lines between national heads and secret service agencies would have confirmed by now that the catastrophe is global. This would actually relieve most of government leaders around the world, with the thought that they wouldn't be raided by their rival nations in this time. Many might actually plan raiding their adversaries. Such incidents, if not involving nuclear powers, would be very gory, but wouldn't have much impact on the global scenario.

1 hour later: Communication channels would be opened gradually, with restrictions. International relief operations would commence. Relief referring to cleaning the dead bodies off roads and houses. The poor dead women would be piled up outside the cities and rural settlements and an urgent meeting of the world's smartest minds (not the government heads, but the scientists and think tanks) would commence about the disposal of these corpses. I cannot posit if the meeting would be over dedicated internet/phone lines or in person.

1 day later: There would still be a lot of rioting and plundering going on around the globe, despite the strict curfews in place. Relief workers (collecting corpses and transporting them outside the cities) would be operating under the security of armed forces. By evening, most government around the world would order to either:

  • burn all the corpses in high temperature fires in closed facilities and then bury all the remnant material. This would probably be the line of action of western countries, India, China and (possibly) several African countries.

  • bury all the corpses in huge, deep (more than 20 feet deep, for hygienic reasons) communal graves outside the cities. This would probably the course of action of most Muslim countries, Japan and most Christian countries of Africa along with (possibly) Israel.

  • dump all corpses in the sea. This would be a city-wide policy of several coastline cities such as New York, Shanghai, Karachi, Mumbai along with many others.

2 days later: Relief operation would be initiated for taking all those jammed and crashed cars off the roads. Also, in several countries of the world, military would be authorized to shoot insurgents on sight.

1 week later: The first wave of depression would surge globally with millions of suicides all over the world. Although order would have been restored in most parts of the world, many would still be burning in flames of anarchy and violence.

1 month later: All countries of the world unite to wipe out any and all anarchy. Scientific meetings are organized all over the world in efforts to find the cause of this mass extinction and to find ways to save the human race. (And no, the link posted by OP still states that women would be required for carrying the fetus. The process only eliminates the need of an ovum for making a baby).

6 months later: Suicide rates continue to surge. Although the standard of life apparently rises for most 3rd and 2nd world countries (irony. with all women gone, half of the resources in developed world are now shipped to developing and 3rd world countries), the horrible consequences of not having any women left in the world would continue to frustrate leaders, scientific personnel and common man alike.

1 year later: Suicide rates return to pre-catastrophic times. Order is maintained all over the world. All countries are cooperating vigorously in search of a way to save the human race, with no progress made whatsoever. Food would be in excess and everything would be very cheap ... but with the consequence of living a pointless, frustrated life.

10 years later: Cities and towns start merging with waves of mass migrations as there just aren't enough people to keep cities alive and active. People from towns and villages would move to cities as men die each year, leaving little population pockets here and there. These population pockets would continue to merge in places where mega cities once used to stand.

20 years later: After cities and towns, now whole nations and countries start merging. This would specially be a necessity in the western world where the population density is very low. All efforts of the world are now focussed at finding a means to repopulate the world.

40 years later: All the human population of the world exists as one country consisting of disgruntled old and middle-aged men.

... And so the things would be, until the population continues to plummet. The last shreds of human population being wiped out with a sorrowful ceremony of ritual suicide ...

  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat. $\endgroup$ Mar 18, 2016 at 7:29
  • $\begingroup$ Here's a link where the man carries the fetus. $\endgroup$
    – JDługosz
    Mar 18, 2016 at 8:52
  • $\begingroup$ You've missed a bit on the 10+ years later, rates of depression would start to rise again as men grow tired of watching the same porn over and over again to relieve their libido ;) $\endgroup$
    – Cronax
    Mar 18, 2016 at 9:02
  • $\begingroup$ @Cronax. Hahah! Well by that time the video editing and CGI would also have made huge leaps and it would be possible to create entire pr0n content out of old static images. You know what I meanz ;) $\endgroup$ Mar 18, 2016 at 10:37

It will be the end of humanity.

All porn sites will be raised to religious status. It will be paramount that they are preserved forever!

Goats and sheep will have a raised value in society.

Some few scientists will be working overtime to find a way to reproduce humans, possibly by using cows or some other domesticated uterus as a home for human fetuses.

Lots of violence, especially in areas without internet to supply porn.

The term Mother-F***** will become a term of respect...

  • 7
    $\begingroup$ Please explain why goats and sheep will have a raised value. That part can do with some elaboration. Thanks :) * naive face * $\endgroup$ Mar 17, 2016 at 14:29
  • 4
    $\begingroup$ Do you really think that there are that many people out there just waiting for the chance to have sex with an animal? $\endgroup$
    – coblr
    Mar 17, 2016 at 22:09
  • $\begingroup$ @fractalspawn Oh... * ex naïve face * $\endgroup$
    – wizzwizz4
    Mar 18, 2016 at 7:12
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ I always thought porn * raises* libido, not relieves it.... $\endgroup$
    – frIT
    Mar 18, 2016 at 10:20

Healthcare falls to pieces.

While males make up the majority of professionals in medicine, women make up the vast majority of nursing and healthcare.

Nursing is not about changing bedpans and making beds. Nursing is about making sure that you actually get well again after you have seen the doc. Nursing is an academic profession, with extensive science and research backing it up.

Think of it like a (association) football team: the doc is the goalie, the nursing / orderly staff is the rest of the team. Take away the goalie and your team loses a key player, true... but lose the team and your goalie is truly screwed.

Another analogy would be architect vs builders. Sure, the architect may propose a fancy solution to a need... but it is the builders that make sure it gets put in place and does not fall apart. The builders are the ones with their feet on the ground and the experience of making sure that buildings are not just looking nice on a blueprint but that they also do not leak through the roof, electrocute tenants when they get into the shower, or have doors that lead outdoors to a 10 story plunge to the ground. And you would be surprised how often this is the real case when it comes to hospitals, where nurses catch the blunders of doctors.

With 3.5 billion corpses littering the world it will not be long until plagues of all sorts are rampant... and then the world ends... not with a bang, but with the most epic man-flu you ever saw.

  • 7
    $\begingroup$ As health care practitioner i can tell you that nursing is not just the pretty nurse, there are a tons of male nurses and a lot of other health care practitioners that have the knowledge and ability to take over. Healthcare is not just doctors and nurses... $\endgroup$ Mar 17, 2016 at 13:37
  • $\begingroup$ @ErikvanDoren I am not sure what you are after here. Care to clarify? $\endgroup$
    – MichaelK
    Mar 17, 2016 at 13:59
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ Yes, there are people other than women in nursing, but according to the 2010 census (census.gov/people/io/files/acs08_detailedoccupations.pdf), registered nurses are 89.4% female and nsuring, psychiatric and home health aides are 87.4% female. So if you lose upwards of 85% of your work force in a field with roughly 52% less demand, you're going to be hurting, regardless of how dedicated and competent the remaining personnel. $\endgroup$
    – JAQFrost
    Mar 17, 2016 at 15:51
  • $\begingroup$ 52% less demand assumes there will be no increase in burden. With several billion dead, that would be a very unsafe assumption. $\endgroup$
    – MichaelK
    Mar 17, 2016 at 15:56
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ True. My point was that even in the best case scenario it is the unbalanced ratio rather than the existence or competence of men in the field that make this answer useful. $\endgroup$
    – JAQFrost
    Mar 17, 2016 at 16:11

First of all, if all women die; the birth rate would go down to 0. Obviously, because there are no babies to be born without women. Furthermore, the old men left in the world would die and then more and more people die as people start to grow old until, finally, the human race goes extinct because there are no babies to fill in the places of the old people who are dying.


The same mad scientist would be ordered to create an alternative means of human reproduction. Shortly after a new generation of women will be created to replace what has been lost.

  • 4
    $\begingroup$ He have killed 3.7 billion people "just because". Do you think he is the type to follow orders? $\endgroup$
    – user8808
    Mar 17, 2016 at 14:59
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ Electric shock, sleep deprivation and solitary confinement can break even the strongest of people if implemented correctly. $\endgroup$
    – Fil Nick
    Mar 18, 2016 at 2:23
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Probably the most realistic so far... but could you make the answer a bit bigger? Maybe adding stuff from the comments would help. $\endgroup$
    – wizzwizz4
    Mar 18, 2016 at 7:17

A few things come to mind.

  • More pizza.
  • More beer.
  • More football, basketball and baseball. More box fights.
  • More parties.
  • Fight clubs become common past time occupations.
  • More flexible and lenient work hour regulations due to the items above, and because after a few years no school hours dictate early mornings any more.
  • More swear words.
  • More accidents with children for a few years, but almost all minor.
  • After a few years it will be possible to have pregnant men, animals carrying human fetuses, or artificial wombs. Mankind will not die out.
  • After a 2000 year hiatus, male homosexuality becomes common again.
  • The above notwithstanding, a virtual reality/movie porn business becomes a major economical power house, driving VR technological development. The telecommunications industry will have a mandate to serve every household, however remote, with broadband internet access, for, well, educational purposes.
  • If between Jan. 20, 2017 and some time 2025: The deceased president is succeeded by the not-quite-yet deceased vice president.
  • The table cloth industry collapses.
  • The above is part of a transformation of houses to man-caves in which provisions for recreational sports (including chess, poker!), smoking, drinking and drugs in general become the center pieces of the homes.
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ Goodness, if that's who you think is president then by 2025 there will be little left in the way of freedom for the governments to get rid of anyway. Besides, I find this a ridiculous answer. This is like stereotypes taken up to 2,017. $\endgroup$ Mar 17, 2016 at 13:35
  • 4
    $\begingroup$ theres no humor in WB? Beside, some things are probably right: who needs tablecloths anymore, we will be eating on the couch directly out of the pot and the kitchen table will be covered with car parts... $\endgroup$ Mar 17, 2016 at 13:41
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ @XandarTheZenon Well, neither Trump nor Cruz are electable to the general public (because stupid -- or rich -- white men are not a majority). Kasich would be, but he's an unlikely candidate. In addition, Trump and Cruz are not deeply rooted even in their own party. Cruz openly opposes the party mainstream, alienating his colleagues; and Trump uses the party just as a vehicle. And that's their relation to their own party.-- Of course it's a ridiculous answer. I was extrapolating what I'd do without a family. $\endgroup$ Mar 17, 2016 at 13:49
  • $\begingroup$ @PeterA.Schneider Well, you are partially correct. Trump is rich white and stupid. But can you not understand that at this point republicans want a smart, conservative, Latin American candidate who is not in with the politicians they feel have betrayed their interests? Not only this, but when it comes down to a felon who pretends to not be a socialist and an almost dead socialist against a conservative candidate who stands for the constitution, the winner becomes plain. At least, if people still like their freedom. $\endgroup$ Mar 17, 2016 at 14:08
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ If this became true, I'd off myself the first chance I got. Last thing I would want after losing all those soft beautiful women is for sausage fest jock time to ensue. At least you didn't mention sex with farm animals like the other guy. $\endgroup$
    – coblr
    Mar 17, 2016 at 22:20

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .