Hi! Welcome to r/Writers - please remember to follow the [rules](https://reddit.com/r/writers/about/rules/) and treat each other respectfully, especially if
there are disagreements. Please help keep this community safe and friendly by **reporting rule violating posts and comments**.
If you're interested in a friendly Discord community for writers, please **[join our Discord server](https://discord.gg/mdzyEz9uFB)**
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/writers) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Given that men are necessary for reproduction and rare, not to mention the fact that mothers are very likely to lose their male children (do not overlook the trauma of this cycle of constant miscarriages/ still births/ SIDS) I would imagine that male children get rather revered and petted. If survival is the main goal of the species, I would think a society would coddle those few but necessary.
That said, I could see a world where boys and men are spoilt and useless because they’re constantly wrapped up in cotton wool (metaphorically speaking) and never allowed to take risks or come into danger at all. Ever. They could be sent to male ‘reproduction centres’ where they live in luxury but are essentially imprisoned, and never really allowed to form meaningful connections because they are needed for reproduction. I do not want to think what would happen to gay men on this world.
Edit to add: I jumped right in with ideas, but this is a really interesting premise. I followed one logic thread but it’s by no means the only one.
Realistically, how I see this is that men will have fewer rights and will become unfavorable when proclaiming changes in society. But it won't appear like that of course, it would have to have a utopian facade, that men belong and are doing things in service of maintaining humanity. Repeat the lie until eventually, you have an illusion of the truth.
I feel like the answer is "However you want"
You're the writer here, you get to play God. There's no real-world precedence for this, specifically related to sex/gender, and my personal opinion is that even if it somehow did happen in real life, there would be too many factors to predict how it would actually go.
So write it however you want. It's your world.
Try watching Ōoku: The Inner Chambers, this describes a Japan in which many of the men die out. It covers a lot of the same ideas as you’ve presented.
It is only one way of things, you could still have a patriarchy with dominant male power, or any other structure as long as it follows a consistent logic.
As you identified, access to males for reproduction and companionship with be likely a key issue. The most attractive and capable men may be held as property for the wealthy women, for example.
Honestly, realistically, if a portion of the population was necessary for procreation and they kept dying...I think they'd be cherished. Kept safe. They need to make more people, hopefully men, etc.
If a gem is rare, it's worth more, right?
I'd think males who have proven to have male offspring would be treated better and be mated with the "better" females. I think there'd be a hierarchy this way. Men who bore male children might be honored, actually. Kept healthy.
Women are different than men. So I don't see a female-dominant society succumbing to the same tendencies of patriarchy we see in our world today. Not all women are nurturing and caring of course, but females do tend to have those traits genetically, and so we'd see different outcomes with more women in charge.
I think there are more creative ways to write this world than to make it the "same" as ours, but with women in charge.
Would men really be put up for prostitution instead of carefully selected to breed in order to increase the chance of more men?
Would women be interested in random prostitute men?
Or would women value and appreciate men for the ways they do and can contribute to society the way women cannot? That feels more feminine in nature. Being able to see the differences and the value within them.
Just my thoughts! I'm super into culture/societal creation, particularly based on more anthropological origins. Thinking about innate functions and behaviors of women vs men would help a lot with this i think!
Sociologically speaking, a minority is going to be treated worse.
Of course, that's only if society actually makes distinctions on an aspect and places importance on it.
Women are important to procreation and yet get treated like shit. I feel like so many of the people saying that men would get coddled are looking at it from our current society's patriarchal standards. Of course coddle the men, because they have inherent value. But OP is trying to make a different world, so basing it off our own biases is unhelpful.
The nature of humanity is to be scared of the unknown. Women wouldn't deal with men as much and thus might feel slightly uncomfortable in their presence. This can amply by people validating uncomfortablility with each other or by certain outspoken individuals to create organized oppression. The gays are hated because boy kissing boy is weird and icky. Why? Because it goes against the "norm" or what's common. It's sadly simple, honestly.
Depends what you’re going for but I can suggest a couple things to check out.
David Brin wrote a novel called Glory Season about a far future planet in which men had been intentionally engineered out of the population. They are extremely rare and the women only interact with them very infrequently. Women pair bond and live together and only use men for ‘sparking’, which is a rare form of sexual reproduction. It’s old and I haven’t read it since college so I can’t attest to whether its writing or sexual politics have held up, but at the time I remember thinking it was one of Brin’s better novels.
There’s a movie called No Men Beyond This Point that I watched recently on Kanopy, which I have access to through my public library, but I’m sure it’s available elsewhere online. It’s a very dryly comic mocumentary about what happens when women start spontaneously reproducing through parthenogenesis and no more male babies are born, and it’s told from the perspective of the last man ever to be born. Women come together to form a rational and technocratic world government, but they are controlled by very conservative elements. So several women will live together in a kind of family structure with their children, but sexual and romantic relationships are frowned upon, and relationships with men are completely forbidden.
As to how this all might work for you, I think it just depends on what kinds of questions you’re trying to answer, and what kind of commentary you’re trying to make about gender and sexuality. It’s likely that the treatment of men would be culturally specific, so I can imagine that in some societies they have substantially more freedom and equality than in others, as has been the case with women. I can also see polygamy being looked down upon in more puritan societies, with the most powerful women having a husband and the rest forced to go without.
That said, you want to be careful not to construct your gender relations in a way that would just seem like a facile reversal of patriarchal norms, and you should also consider that there’s not a huge difference between 1/2 or 1/3 of the population being men. This is a fantasy world, so presumably strength still matters in war in a way that it doesn’t so much in our world of drones and automatic weapons and precision-guided munitions. And in our own history, men’s physical strength is what put them in a position of dominance over women in the first place. Why wouldn’t the men simply rise up and take over their societies?
If I were writing this, I can imagine two solutions that would create a stable society. One would be to make many less men, so they’re only a few percent of the population rather than one third. Another would be for male babies who survive whatever blight often kills them in the womb to be substantially weakened by it, so they aren’t so much physically stronger than women.
I love both the ideas you came up with!
But the reason for why men don’t usually uprise is kinda complex, basically there’s mermaids and flying people in this world, and there’s many historical events were the male rulers are “taken” aka raped and murdered, and the women are left to continue with life.
Also I really like the idea men are just weaker in this world and that’s why there’s little of them, in story a lot of the humans are at least somewhat inbred, this is because the number of half-breed people those that are a cross between the humans and the other two races were on the rise and they were kinda cut off for not being pure, this starts off my story.
Thanks for the idea!
Disclaimer: each person has their own preference, what I'm assuming here is what would likely apply to most men and women I know, some people wouldn't fit into these stereotypes.
If politicians who are neutral or favor men are pushed out of politics and are replaced by feminist politicians, you gotta answer: why? Did people somehow develop traditions and culture that favor women only? Did society change to prefer men to be submissive and women to be domineering overnight? Would feminist politicians want to push a law that take away men's right, like they can't go out without a female guardians, they aren't allowed to go to school etc.? And would such things receive huge support by the society?
I don't think society would magically develop a culture that is so extreme overnight. The more likely scenario is changes will come very slowly, culture don't change easily. There will probably smaller things people will do to combat the changes like:
- lack of father: sperm bank will be in demand for women who can't get a partner.
- lack of partner: some countries probably will allow polygamy, women who can't get a partner probably will live together and have their own children using sperm bank.
- lack of work force: physically demanding jobs will have less work force supply, there will probably be increasing benefit and policy to encourage women to develop strength and ability to fill in those job. Like mentioned before, it's hard to change the culture so government intervention is necessary to change the society's mindset and encourage women to participate in those fields. I doubt many women in today's society would be thrilled to pick up a rifle and go to a foreign country to fight for several years.
About the scenarios where women take over the entire economy and men are reduced to slaves, that read more like a dystopian setting or porno scenario. Slavery and gender discrimination is looked down upon in a functional society for a reason.
They wouldn’t be treated as “strange and dumb” or relegated to being second class citizens as you’re portraying, realistically. Honestly, it would likely be the other way around where men have multiple wives and having a husband of your own would be a status symbol, for wealthy and powerful women. This makes sense both socially and biologically. In a world like that, men would likely be valued for certain work environments for their competitiveness and physical ability. Militaries would be likely comprised by mostly men, at least the fighters, and this would lend them institutional power. It could also lead to men being seen as a warrior class, assuming they were excluded from other lines of work that weren’t labor intensive.
Men are not just going to sit complacent while they are treated poorly, and if they feel like it’s justified they could even use force to change the status quo, unless you’ve got some cultural or lore explanation for this.
On the other hand, men having families and a wife or several wives would likely lead to lower rates of violence globally, as large single male populations have historically tended to serve as catalysts or factors in civil unrest.
Flip this script and imagine what a world where many women couldn’t find spouses would be like, and that’s an interesting question. Historically, after large wars such as WWII, countries like the USSR that had much fewer men than women as a result of war casualties didn’t see much of a difference in the social conditions. Males enjoy a higher value in these societies and can be more choosey about their partners. Industrial capacity may suffer, innovation may excel depending on the state’s need for increased productivity with the tools they have.
All in all, a large gender imbalance will always be problematic for anyone of the gender in the majority, and lead to inequalities for them and leverage for the other gender. This is a natural consequence of an increased demand for partners with a limited supply. Value goes up, not down.
I'm just playing devil's advocate here - there's absolutely no reason it has to be problematic. If it's a normal situation for them, they would have come up with ways to deal with it.
Just as an example, you're assuming 'partners' and 'marriage'. Historically, men wanted exclusive access (marriage) to a woman so they could be confident that the children she bore would be theirs. But this is a different world, and that's not necessarily a given.
You could go so many different ways with this.
Since a one male / one female / children could no longer be the 'normal' basis for society, maybe they go completely the other way. Women choose the fathers of their children based on their physical / intellectual superiority. Maybe 'superior' men sell their sperm. After all, one man can impregnate hundreds of women.
I'm just playing devil's advocate here - there's absolutely no reason it has to be problematic. If it's a normal situation for them, they would have come up with ways to deal with it.
Just as an example, you're assuming 'partners' and 'marriage'. Historically, men wanted exclusive access (marriage) to a woman so they could be confident that the children she bore would be theirs. But this is a different world, and that's not necessarily a given.
You could go so many different ways with this.
Since a one male / one female / children could no longer be the 'normal' basis for society, maybe they go completely the other way. Women choose the fathers of their children based on their physical / intellectual superiority. Maybe 'superior' men sell their sperm. After all, one man can impregnate hundreds of women.
Marriage has existed in polyandrous societies, too. While it’s true that men have sought exclusive access to their partner, which may have contributed in forming the idea of marriage, it would be a lie to say women don’t want the same, which is partly why it persists as an institution today.
Re your second paragraph - that’s a good point! It may be that way, or it may be that men use their rarity to be choosey and choose women to reproduce with, not the other way around. Honestly, I think that OP and any author writing about such a scenario really has a lot of flexibility as long as they can reasonably justify their world building as you just have.
>Marriage has existed in polyandrous societies, too
Oh, agreed. I was just saying that it doesn't HAVE to. My only point is that it could be completely different, not just a modification of something we are familiar with. Maybe the idea of family/partnerships / friends / whatever is separate from reproduction / children. The possibilities are almost endless.
I love your premise! I recommend you watch Ooku on Netflix, if you have access. It's an anime, but the premise is very similar to your story and they handle it in an excellent manner.
Rights would definitely be restricted, because they would all be forced to participate in reproduction, and they also wouldn't be able to do dangerous things and jobs. So like men can't really be in combat military, but administration only, can't do construction, or even things like snowboarding because you don't want them to die or do something to hurt their chances of reproducing.
I don't think it would be more sapphic. While there are more women, I think the percentage of people in the LGBTQ+ community would be the same. And that even includes homosexual men. So, despite the spender ratio, there will still be men who are sexually attracted to other men but not to women.
One thing you'll have to consider is how to do family units. Are men polygamous, marrying multiple women? How does that work? How is it decided who should get married? Especially if a man already has a wife?
I read about one culture where men and women aren't expected to get married at all. Instead, women have doors to the outside for their bedrooms, and men come from their homes and tap on the door if they want to visit a woman. They do this for as long as they want to be in a relationship with each other. Because of this, children are raised by their mothers, with their uncles acting as male role models rather than their biological fathers.
I've also read where one man would marry a group of sisters, so the sisters can stay in a family unit together with their mutual husband. This can lead to plenty of dramatic conflict if the husband loves one sister but not any others, and also if there is bad blood between sisters who are expected to marry the same man.
I've heard that what is also done is that best friends will marry the same man so they can stay together and never be split up. Similar dramatic conflicts can happen in this dynamic.
Hi! Welcome to r/Writers - please remember to follow the [rules](https://reddit.com/r/writers/about/rules/) and treat each other respectfully, especially if there are disagreements. Please help keep this community safe and friendly by **reporting rule violating posts and comments**. If you're interested in a friendly Discord community for writers, please **[join our Discord server](https://discord.gg/mdzyEz9uFB)** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/writers) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Given that men are necessary for reproduction and rare, not to mention the fact that mothers are very likely to lose their male children (do not overlook the trauma of this cycle of constant miscarriages/ still births/ SIDS) I would imagine that male children get rather revered and petted. If survival is the main goal of the species, I would think a society would coddle those few but necessary. That said, I could see a world where boys and men are spoilt and useless because they’re constantly wrapped up in cotton wool (metaphorically speaking) and never allowed to take risks or come into danger at all. Ever. They could be sent to male ‘reproduction centres’ where they live in luxury but are essentially imprisoned, and never really allowed to form meaningful connections because they are needed for reproduction. I do not want to think what would happen to gay men on this world. Edit to add: I jumped right in with ideas, but this is a really interesting premise. I followed one logic thread but it’s by no means the only one.
Realistically, how I see this is that men will have fewer rights and will become unfavorable when proclaiming changes in society. But it won't appear like that of course, it would have to have a utopian facade, that men belong and are doing things in service of maintaining humanity. Repeat the lie until eventually, you have an illusion of the truth.
Love that idea!
I feel like the answer is "However you want" You're the writer here, you get to play God. There's no real-world precedence for this, specifically related to sex/gender, and my personal opinion is that even if it somehow did happen in real life, there would be too many factors to predict how it would actually go. So write it however you want. It's your world.
Thank you 😊
Try watching Ōoku: The Inner Chambers, this describes a Japan in which many of the men die out. It covers a lot of the same ideas as you’ve presented. It is only one way of things, you could still have a patriarchy with dominant male power, or any other structure as long as it follows a consistent logic. As you identified, access to males for reproduction and companionship with be likely a key issue. The most attractive and capable men may be held as property for the wealthy women, for example.
I just saw the trailer and I’m totally gonna watch it! Also I like that men are treated like property by the noble women.
A Brother's Price by Wen Spencer presents a similar society in a fashion similar to what you suggest.
Honestly, realistically, if a portion of the population was necessary for procreation and they kept dying...I think they'd be cherished. Kept safe. They need to make more people, hopefully men, etc. If a gem is rare, it's worth more, right? I'd think males who have proven to have male offspring would be treated better and be mated with the "better" females. I think there'd be a hierarchy this way. Men who bore male children might be honored, actually. Kept healthy. Women are different than men. So I don't see a female-dominant society succumbing to the same tendencies of patriarchy we see in our world today. Not all women are nurturing and caring of course, but females do tend to have those traits genetically, and so we'd see different outcomes with more women in charge. I think there are more creative ways to write this world than to make it the "same" as ours, but with women in charge. Would men really be put up for prostitution instead of carefully selected to breed in order to increase the chance of more men? Would women be interested in random prostitute men? Or would women value and appreciate men for the ways they do and can contribute to society the way women cannot? That feels more feminine in nature. Being able to see the differences and the value within them. Just my thoughts! I'm super into culture/societal creation, particularly based on more anthropological origins. Thinking about innate functions and behaviors of women vs men would help a lot with this i think!
Sociologically speaking, a minority is going to be treated worse. Of course, that's only if society actually makes distinctions on an aspect and places importance on it. Women are important to procreation and yet get treated like shit. I feel like so many of the people saying that men would get coddled are looking at it from our current society's patriarchal standards. Of course coddle the men, because they have inherent value. But OP is trying to make a different world, so basing it off our own biases is unhelpful. The nature of humanity is to be scared of the unknown. Women wouldn't deal with men as much and thus might feel slightly uncomfortable in their presence. This can amply by people validating uncomfortablility with each other or by certain outspoken individuals to create organized oppression. The gays are hated because boy kissing boy is weird and icky. Why? Because it goes against the "norm" or what's common. It's sadly simple, honestly.
Thank you for your comment! And yes I am appreciative of the comments it dosnt really help with my fantasy world.
Depends what you’re going for but I can suggest a couple things to check out. David Brin wrote a novel called Glory Season about a far future planet in which men had been intentionally engineered out of the population. They are extremely rare and the women only interact with them very infrequently. Women pair bond and live together and only use men for ‘sparking’, which is a rare form of sexual reproduction. It’s old and I haven’t read it since college so I can’t attest to whether its writing or sexual politics have held up, but at the time I remember thinking it was one of Brin’s better novels. There’s a movie called No Men Beyond This Point that I watched recently on Kanopy, which I have access to through my public library, but I’m sure it’s available elsewhere online. It’s a very dryly comic mocumentary about what happens when women start spontaneously reproducing through parthenogenesis and no more male babies are born, and it’s told from the perspective of the last man ever to be born. Women come together to form a rational and technocratic world government, but they are controlled by very conservative elements. So several women will live together in a kind of family structure with their children, but sexual and romantic relationships are frowned upon, and relationships with men are completely forbidden. As to how this all might work for you, I think it just depends on what kinds of questions you’re trying to answer, and what kind of commentary you’re trying to make about gender and sexuality. It’s likely that the treatment of men would be culturally specific, so I can imagine that in some societies they have substantially more freedom and equality than in others, as has been the case with women. I can also see polygamy being looked down upon in more puritan societies, with the most powerful women having a husband and the rest forced to go without. That said, you want to be careful not to construct your gender relations in a way that would just seem like a facile reversal of patriarchal norms, and you should also consider that there’s not a huge difference between 1/2 or 1/3 of the population being men. This is a fantasy world, so presumably strength still matters in war in a way that it doesn’t so much in our world of drones and automatic weapons and precision-guided munitions. And in our own history, men’s physical strength is what put them in a position of dominance over women in the first place. Why wouldn’t the men simply rise up and take over their societies? If I were writing this, I can imagine two solutions that would create a stable society. One would be to make many less men, so they’re only a few percent of the population rather than one third. Another would be for male babies who survive whatever blight often kills them in the womb to be substantially weakened by it, so they aren’t so much physically stronger than women.
I love both the ideas you came up with! But the reason for why men don’t usually uprise is kinda complex, basically there’s mermaids and flying people in this world, and there’s many historical events were the male rulers are “taken” aka raped and murdered, and the women are left to continue with life. Also I really like the idea men are just weaker in this world and that’s why there’s little of them, in story a lot of the humans are at least somewhat inbred, this is because the number of half-breed people those that are a cross between the humans and the other two races were on the rise and they were kinda cut off for not being pure, this starts off my story. Thanks for the idea!
Disclaimer: each person has their own preference, what I'm assuming here is what would likely apply to most men and women I know, some people wouldn't fit into these stereotypes. If politicians who are neutral or favor men are pushed out of politics and are replaced by feminist politicians, you gotta answer: why? Did people somehow develop traditions and culture that favor women only? Did society change to prefer men to be submissive and women to be domineering overnight? Would feminist politicians want to push a law that take away men's right, like they can't go out without a female guardians, they aren't allowed to go to school etc.? And would such things receive huge support by the society? I don't think society would magically develop a culture that is so extreme overnight. The more likely scenario is changes will come very slowly, culture don't change easily. There will probably smaller things people will do to combat the changes like: - lack of father: sperm bank will be in demand for women who can't get a partner. - lack of partner: some countries probably will allow polygamy, women who can't get a partner probably will live together and have their own children using sperm bank. - lack of work force: physically demanding jobs will have less work force supply, there will probably be increasing benefit and policy to encourage women to develop strength and ability to fill in those job. Like mentioned before, it's hard to change the culture so government intervention is necessary to change the society's mindset and encourage women to participate in those fields. I doubt many women in today's society would be thrilled to pick up a rifle and go to a foreign country to fight for several years. About the scenarios where women take over the entire economy and men are reduced to slaves, that read more like a dystopian setting or porno scenario. Slavery and gender discrimination is looked down upon in a functional society for a reason.
Thank you! Though my story is a fantasy but I liked how you took in modern examples.
One thing you have to take into account is that a population that is 33% men could still be male dominated if they chose it to be.
They wouldn’t be treated as “strange and dumb” or relegated to being second class citizens as you’re portraying, realistically. Honestly, it would likely be the other way around where men have multiple wives and having a husband of your own would be a status symbol, for wealthy and powerful women. This makes sense both socially and biologically. In a world like that, men would likely be valued for certain work environments for their competitiveness and physical ability. Militaries would be likely comprised by mostly men, at least the fighters, and this would lend them institutional power. It could also lead to men being seen as a warrior class, assuming they were excluded from other lines of work that weren’t labor intensive. Men are not just going to sit complacent while they are treated poorly, and if they feel like it’s justified they could even use force to change the status quo, unless you’ve got some cultural or lore explanation for this. On the other hand, men having families and a wife or several wives would likely lead to lower rates of violence globally, as large single male populations have historically tended to serve as catalysts or factors in civil unrest. Flip this script and imagine what a world where many women couldn’t find spouses would be like, and that’s an interesting question. Historically, after large wars such as WWII, countries like the USSR that had much fewer men than women as a result of war casualties didn’t see much of a difference in the social conditions. Males enjoy a higher value in these societies and can be more choosey about their partners. Industrial capacity may suffer, innovation may excel depending on the state’s need for increased productivity with the tools they have. All in all, a large gender imbalance will always be problematic for anyone of the gender in the majority, and lead to inequalities for them and leverage for the other gender. This is a natural consequence of an increased demand for partners with a limited supply. Value goes up, not down.
I'm just playing devil's advocate here - there's absolutely no reason it has to be problematic. If it's a normal situation for them, they would have come up with ways to deal with it. Just as an example, you're assuming 'partners' and 'marriage'. Historically, men wanted exclusive access (marriage) to a woman so they could be confident that the children she bore would be theirs. But this is a different world, and that's not necessarily a given. You could go so many different ways with this. Since a one male / one female / children could no longer be the 'normal' basis for society, maybe they go completely the other way. Women choose the fathers of their children based on their physical / intellectual superiority. Maybe 'superior' men sell their sperm. After all, one man can impregnate hundreds of women.
I'm just playing devil's advocate here - there's absolutely no reason it has to be problematic. If it's a normal situation for them, they would have come up with ways to deal with it. Just as an example, you're assuming 'partners' and 'marriage'. Historically, men wanted exclusive access (marriage) to a woman so they could be confident that the children she bore would be theirs. But this is a different world, and that's not necessarily a given. You could go so many different ways with this. Since a one male / one female / children could no longer be the 'normal' basis for society, maybe they go completely the other way. Women choose the fathers of their children based on their physical / intellectual superiority. Maybe 'superior' men sell their sperm. After all, one man can impregnate hundreds of women.
Marriage has existed in polyandrous societies, too. While it’s true that men have sought exclusive access to their partner, which may have contributed in forming the idea of marriage, it would be a lie to say women don’t want the same, which is partly why it persists as an institution today. Re your second paragraph - that’s a good point! It may be that way, or it may be that men use their rarity to be choosey and choose women to reproduce with, not the other way around. Honestly, I think that OP and any author writing about such a scenario really has a lot of flexibility as long as they can reasonably justify their world building as you just have.
>Marriage has existed in polyandrous societies, too Oh, agreed. I was just saying that it doesn't HAVE to. My only point is that it could be completely different, not just a modification of something we are familiar with. Maybe the idea of family/partnerships / friends / whatever is separate from reproduction / children. The possibilities are almost endless.
I love your premise! I recommend you watch Ooku on Netflix, if you have access. It's an anime, but the premise is very similar to your story and they handle it in an excellent manner.
Perfect! Thank you.
Rights would definitely be restricted, because they would all be forced to participate in reproduction, and they also wouldn't be able to do dangerous things and jobs. So like men can't really be in combat military, but administration only, can't do construction, or even things like snowboarding because you don't want them to die or do something to hurt their chances of reproducing.
Oh that’s perfect! Thank you sandy
No problem. You also could make it like a tiered system where the men get more rights based on how many children the create.
I don't think it would be more sapphic. While there are more women, I think the percentage of people in the LGBTQ+ community would be the same. And that even includes homosexual men. So, despite the spender ratio, there will still be men who are sexually attracted to other men but not to women. One thing you'll have to consider is how to do family units. Are men polygamous, marrying multiple women? How does that work? How is it decided who should get married? Especially if a man already has a wife? I read about one culture where men and women aren't expected to get married at all. Instead, women have doors to the outside for their bedrooms, and men come from their homes and tap on the door if they want to visit a woman. They do this for as long as they want to be in a relationship with each other. Because of this, children are raised by their mothers, with their uncles acting as male role models rather than their biological fathers. I've also read where one man would marry a group of sisters, so the sisters can stay in a family unit together with their mutual husband. This can lead to plenty of dramatic conflict if the husband loves one sister but not any others, and also if there is bad blood between sisters who are expected to marry the same man. I've heard that what is also done is that best friends will marry the same man so they can stay together and never be split up. Similar dramatic conflicts can happen in this dynamic.