Is it normal to wish that there were 85% girls on the planet?

I wish that instead of 50-50 (or 49-51.. w/e) it would be like 15% males and 85% females in the world, and of course make the females as hot as possible. that world would be heaven.

also if u wanna think this more moderately, make it 30-70 raito in ur mind.

women would chase men and it will be so easy to get a hot ffm threesome or even a fffm fourway.

i also wonder, why is it that there arent much more females than males? a male can reproduce easly with many females but a female is much more limited ( getting pregnant only once every 9 month ) so biologicly its better for the sake of the entire human race (and basicly for just about every other animal). so why is this!?

NOTE: if u comment please state if ur a male/female.

Voting Results
55% Normal
Based on 38 votes (21 yes)
Help us keep this site organized and clean. Thanks!
[ Report Post ]
Comments ( 36 )
  • TheWeasel

    Every drain would be clogged with hair and there would be bobby pins scattered all over the place.

    Comment Hidden ( show )
  • MysteriousTrainerfromBeyond

    It isn't Normal. A unhealthy distribution of males and females will do this world no favors. Disregarding the sexes, this world does need less people. That's for sure.

    If Earth did have alot more females than males as you suggest, there would be a large imbalance in both familial lines and society as a whole.

    Comment Hidden ( show )
      -
    • EccentricWeird

      "Modern" society does a great deal more harm to cause a "large imbalance in both familial lines and society as a whole", so it'll be tough to see the difference.

      Comment Hidden ( show )
  • NeuroNeptunian

    Actually, it's a slow genetic change but the male chromosome is slowly being phased out. In times of duress, indicated by a low caloric diet in females, women are much more likely to conceive females for the purposes of preserving the reproductive ability of our species.

    Comment Hidden ( show )
      -
    • lolol555

      Oh fucking Christ, I hope not.

      Comment Hidden ( show )
    • seekelp

      "slow genetic change but the male chromosome is slowly being phased out."

      From what I understand, that's some pop-sci garbage. Can I get a source on that?

      Comment Hidden ( show )
        -
      • KeddersPrincess

        Nope. It's true. I've heard the same thing from multiple sources. The Y chromosome is shrinking and has been for years. Unfortunate but true.

        Comment Hidden ( show )
          -
        • seekelp

          Sometimes media outlets repeat things without fully understanding them. It's true that since the Y chromosome's development (evolutionarily speaking) it has been shrinking, but that doesn't mean that it's being phased out. The reason that something changes over time is due to selective pressure-shrinking may be a streamlining of a chromosome with relatively few genes on it.

          That's why I'm wondering if you (or anyone else) can link to a study or article exploring the topic.

          Comment Hidden ( show )
      • JustARandomNerd

        <a href="http://www.natureworldnews.com/articles/6720/20140424/y-chromosome-disappearing-researchers.htm" rel="nofollow">http://www.natureworldnews.com/articles/6720/20...</a> the Y chromosome is more slim than it's x counterpart. It is mainly for expressing the genes that differentiate males from females during embryonic development. And more males are being born than women, in nature it was initially because females stayed safe while males have a higher mortality rate. But with the advent of the modern world the mortality rate of both sexes has dropped, making the birth-adulthood ratio of males and females about 101/100. And it is likely that the gap will widen as time goes on. More men being born and lower mortality rate

        Comment Hidden ( show )
          -
        • seekelp

          Thanks for posting a source.

          "However, comparison of the chromosome with that of chimpanzee and the rhesus macaque showed that the human Y has lost just one gene in the past 25 million years."

          The important thing is that while the Y chromosome shrank initially for evolutionarily reasons, it's not shrinking now and it doesn't mean that it'll disappear in the future.

          Comment Hidden ( show )
    • Actually, I recall seeing an article about a year or so ago about how the Y gene is decreasing in some manner, however tests on animals showed that it would not result in the male chromosome "dying out".

      I don't think that this is the same article, however I skimmed through a bit of it and says some of the same stuff about it:
      http://www.natureworldnews.com/articles/6720/20140424/y-chromosome-disappearing-researchers.htm

      Comment Hidden ( show )
        -
      • Anonnet

        How can it even possible for a chromosome to die out? If the species became 100% female, it would cease to exist.

        Comment Hidden ( show )
          -
        • What I keep thinking. However, given that nobody considers it, I just don't mention it under the assumption there is some sort of counter point to that reasoning that I simply do not know about.

          That awkward moment when you are probably thinking the obvious but since nobody else is, you just assume you're not considering what everyone else is, even though you're right. Aha.

          Comment Hidden ( show )
            -
          • SecretIdentity

            Asexual reproduction? While it's fairly rare in animals, it is a "thing". If males were slowly phasing out then females might also be adapting to it at the same time possibly ultimately leading to the ability to asexually reproduce. That's just my guess, I think it makes sense as a possibility but I know almost nothing about evolution or parthenogenesis.

            Comment Hidden ( show )
              -
            • "May also."

              There have been nothing to suggest as such, so assuming such a thing would be baseless.

              That said, researchers have already claimed that the Y chromo is staying despite former studies.

              Comment Hidden ( show )
        • SecretIdentity

          Parthenogenesis.

          Comment Hidden ( show )
            -
          • Anonnet

            Parthenogenesis doesn't exist in mammals.

            Comment Hidden ( show )
              -
            • SecretIdentity

              Yet.

              Comment Hidden ( show )
  • KeddersPrincess

    I would then commit suicide.

    Comment Hidden ( show )
      -
    • iEatZombies_

      That's what I said and I got deleted!
      >=/
      Just dumb.

      Anyway, I agree with you. =P

      Comment Hidden ( show )
  • anti-hero

    Still too many guys.

    Comment Hidden ( show )
  • Nokiot9

    Lol u wanna change the world population distribution so you can get laid? AYFKM?

    Comment Hidden ( show )
  • TheTraumaWithin

    I think you just made the suicide rate exponentially higher.

    Comment Hidden ( show )
  • seekelp

    "i also wonder, why is it that there arent much more females than males? a male can reproduce easly with many females but a female is much more limited ( getting pregnant only once every 9 month ) so biologicly its better for the sake of the entire human race (and basicly for just about every other animal). so why is this!?"

    Study genetics. The way in which sex is determined is fascinating. Also, more to the point, trying to create a chromosomal arrangement wherein a different ratio than is allowed by independent assortment would be possible, but you'd need to rearrange the genome a bit. I'd put sex-determining genes on the autosomes and throw out the sex-determining chromosomes, and I'd make the genotype for males to be exclusively double recessive. That way, the ratio for a male and a double heterozygote female would be 15:1 female to male, and for a heterozygote- recessive female it would still be ~50 ~50. So it would depend on the number of dominant chromosomes floating around in a given population's gene pool.

    Writing this all out, maybe a species did have a similar ratio at some point, but if it did then it probably selected for the heterozygous-recessive female because that versatility in offspring would be far more evolutionarily advantageous.

    Comment Hidden ( show )
  • dasugaknows

    Female here...why not move to russia?

    Comment Hidden ( show )
  • megadriver

    So... you want to make a harem army out of women?
    Had that thought when I was drunk once, but came to the conclusion that the troubles and stress you would get are not worth it XD

    Comment Hidden ( show )
  • Anonnet

    I'm male. From the looks of it, you want to have sex with a lot of hot girls. Sounds normal to me. Wanting impossible things like an 85% female population isn't abnormal, fantasies don't have to have any basis in reality.

    The reason the human gender ratio is 50-50 is because nature doesn't do what is best, it does what works. In other words, just because another system would work "better" doesn't mean it's going to happen.
    Which gender is born depends on certain mysterious circumstances and genetics. I don't know what is required to be born male or female, but whatever it is has resulted in a 50-50.

    Comment Hidden ( show )
  • Avant-Garde

    Aren't male births already not as common as female ones? I remember reading/hearing somewhere that there are more females than men. Could this be why most cultures have long prized the birth of sons?

    Comment Hidden ( show )
      -
    • disthing

      As I understand it, the 1 or 2% greater number of females can be explained by longer life expectancy for women.

      Cultures preferring sons over daughters isn't to do with rarity.

      Comment Hidden ( show )
        -
      • Avant-Garde

        I see. Thank you.

        Comment Hidden ( show )
  • Riddler

    So do most feminists. When I first came to this post I thought it was stupid but reading the comments made me laugh. I will say that in that I do not think the world would be better ran by women or men only for that matter. Both genders have faults .

    Comment Hidden ( show )
  • Well, given that men make the primary workers that maintain civilization, I'd rather it stay the way it is. I'd prefer the advantages I hve through primarily male contribution over sex from female contribution.

    Comment Hidden ( show )