This is discussion archived from a time before the current discussion method was installed.
Ross N: In almost all examples, it's the men who die off, and the women who must rebuild society. This has several causes. First, a story with no or very few women in it describes a fair percentage of the stories ever written, so it's not exactly new ground to cover. Classic gender roles and the glass ceiling being what they are, the death of all men effectively decapitates most of the world's organizational structure, meaning descent into chaos is highly likely, at least in stories set before 1970. Not to mention that, realistically, if all women died at once, the men would probably panic and nuke each other in forty-five minutes.
Sheesh, where to begin with what is wrong with this paragraph? The casual misandry or the Fridge Logic?
Duckluck: Yeah, no kidding. I see no reason why we wouldn't also get nuked to hell if the men died. "Positive" discrimination is bad enough in fiction, let's keep it out of the real world, too.
Later: OK, I've given this page a pretty significant re-write, both to cut the misandry, and to add a section for stories in which the women die off. I had to make a some changes to make the new format work, but I mostly just moved things around and changed the wording in a few places.
Peteman: Can anyone who has Season 5 of Babylon 5 confirm that the Hyach were heading for a Gendercide? I thought their birthrates were decreasing but there was no mention of any gender disparity.
"The name is a pun on genocide"
Isn't it also pretty close to a legitimate word?
