so evidently gender does matter. Yes it is true that some things do change in those situations, but not everything. Yes I know this isn't a true test of what an all male or all female world would be like, but so far, although perhaps for not as much longer as most people assume (at least as regards all female situations), we don't have too many examples of gender separated social worlds to study.

there are also a lot of politically and ideologically motivated attempts to minimize, hide, or discret it. The situation is quite similiar to what is happening with global warming science.

if the USA doesn't go completely down the toilet it will be more than half the country deserves.

I agree that young people don't usually know what they are doing but I don't think older people necessarily do either, the fact that they may appear more enlightened is mostly due to just lacking the energy to keep fighting. On top of that there are real costs to waiting, especially for women, so I don't think the problems are going to solve themselves. If things are going to improve people will have to start out smarter, somehow.

So women who don't have their own money i.e stay at home moms, are often feel they lack power and control and thus feel very insecure.

then women are going to have to stop complaining about mens' lack of initiative.

no, population control will not make problems solve themselves, but having a rapidly growing population makes any solutions much more costly and difficult and, most importantly, or at least most permanently, more of the natural world will be permanently lost.

given the fact that it is now possible to create sperm from stem cells if even .00000001 of the female population conistently chooses to give birth to only females and nothing else changes the population will eventually become overwhelmingly female. Long before that happens, like starting now, (or whenever this technology becomes available) everyone will know that whatever males do exist only do because someone choose to allow it, and they could have easily chosen otherwise.

This has always been true in the past but things may be different this time. Technology which makes possible universal constant surveillance of everyone and makes it possible to effectively use violence to enforce the rules without regard to physical strength may make control physically possible and the fact that physical strength and physical courage are no longer economically and politically relevant in advanced societies may make it economically, politically and culturally possible to prevent them from doing so.

The point this that when you combine this fact with the fact that if lesbian couples have children which are a biological combination of them both and if the percentage of women who are lesbian couples who want to do this remains the same EVEN IF IT IS VERY TINY, then the population will become overwhelmingly female over time and men will be meaningless/irrelevant. The fact that men are not needed in any other specific practical sense means nobody is likely to step in and prevent this from happening.

Of course lots of things can happen over the long term and there are lots of ways to influence the sex ratio, but the point is that they all involve either positing entirely speculative events or technology (artificial incubators) or doing things that would be difficult (paying surrogates, selective abortion) which would likely cause problems. What I am talking about is the result of people who ALREADY EXIST simply continuing to do what we know they ALREADY WANT TO DO and now can do (well technically "soon will be able" to do). Something will have to be affirmatively done to interfere with this process if it is not to go forward.

Obviously the numbers are not equally balanced or there wouldn't be so many women complaining about sexual harassment and so few men doing so.

given the facts and motives which we ALREADY KNOW exist. You are talking about pushing a rock uphill, I am talking about a rock rolling down, that is the difference. There is lots of reason to believe that the force necessary to roll the rock uphill doesn't exist. There is nothing logically or factually substantial to indicate that any barrier exists to it rolling down.

the permanent fact which can't be changed is thus likely to have more effect over time than the impermanent changeable one. We are talking a long time though.

unlike all the other tendencies that you refer to. The preference for boys in Asia is already dying out, by the way.

yeah, but why go to all that trouble if it isn't going to improve the opinions of women. Yeah, supposedly it would, eventually, indirectly, but it sounds like a lot of work with only vague hope of a payoff.

talking about masculinity isn't. It's like talking about feminism, in fact in practice as far as the things men care about it's practically the same thing. It brings up a lot of unpleasantness for which there is no real remedy.

and any attempt to discuss masculinity in terms OTHER than this is interpreted by women as an attempt to oppress them or defend the patriarchy. So again, what is to be gained.

um...women? I don't know if this is necessarily relevant to you situation, but in general women seem perfectly happy to be lorded over by domineering aggressive women in a way they most of them would never DREAM of tolerating from a man.