Screenshot if you wish.
>>2929575>Unironically produce fewer men and train them to be more sociable. That might solve everything.Women can sit still and sip tea but men really can't. Men can't, not without repression into or otherwise disfiguring their inherent maleness, but this implies that men are defective women and that the demand is really for women and not men.
<Men have been thinking in terms of "existential rent" for probably 1000s of years and expect women who started work yesterday to understand the world that wayAssuming that future fitness and healthcare will keep women healthier for longer and give greater autonomy over their fertility windows, fewer men are needed by about 30% - 40% in the population. Relations will be based on wants and not needs and the latter is overwhelmingly a male coded talking point. Fertility is measured in per woman so men are not needed in quantities to keep a population, especially if there is a robust childcare system that helps raise healthy adults. Men will still be needed to raise other men, but women will not immediately need the men. The men will exist because they are wanted (not needed) but that requires that the males are raised properly and sociably to become the wanted men. The need for men is abstract and psychological and not immediately material and personal. Ken isn't ever personally needed anymore, but it is wanted that Ken exists as a type.
There will be a meaninglessness crisis because of how difficult it will be to make a meaningful social contribution to society besides just consuming products and services.
There will be neo-luddite reactionary male-led trends that recognize the new freedoms and shifts in meaning as threats and reframe them as civilization/societal degeneracy.<There are lots of stats I can pull, but surely you can see that this is happening?That doesn't mean that you can run a healthy society without men at all because if they aren't there, then things do not meaningfully exist from their visual perspectives and that would be a little boring and meaningless too for the women. The deflation of meaning and the population deflation spiral will start with the men because of how active they are and the art that they leave behind will transfer their feelings to the women.
"Produce fewer men and train them to be more sociable" proactively and personally invests meaning into males instead of pumping them into the population and out of the house at 18 and expecting the market to produce something useful out of them by 21. Having to buy dating courses to function normally with women instead of acquiring it naturally is an alienating dystopia that thinks in terms of demand and vacancies but not about the health and mental well being of the animal in the cubicle.
"Fewer men" isn't a loss for anyone unless it's mismanaged and left to the market and supply-demand dialectics through social media.