No, it's not a story feature, it's a lack of imagination. Among the thousand of possible way to establish your setting, you're using the less realistic one. And it's lack of realism isn't due to the reason why the improvement happen, but to the fact that this improvement is needed to achieve such setting ; what is misogynistic.
No, I'm saying that your premise is purely based on the, not assumed judging by this comment, idea that men are superior by nature. What is pure bullshit.
Genders roles being nothing more than a societal construction, there's no need for an improvement to reverse those roles. There's as many women more intelligent than the average human, than there's men. There's as many women stronger than the average human, than there's men. There's as many women more aggressive, including sexually, than the average human, than there's men. The only thing preventing us to effectively see it, is that the society is led by men, dot. This put men at the first place, letting us see their intelligence, strength, aggressiveness, and anything else you can think about, more easily, while hiding the ones of women in their shadow.
Just put enough women in position of power, and you'll reach the same society than the one depicted in your setting. Being freed of there taught inferior status, women would start to act more freely, and you'll see what their effective strength, intelligence, and aggressiveness is. You'll also see men forced to bow their neck like in your setting, simply because being now the ones who make the rules, women will force them to act so ; exactly like men did all over history.
Well, then you should probably think.
The main difference isn't on the strength, but on the default muscular mass ; 10% superior in a male body due to the level of testosterone. At equal muscular mass, there's no real strength difference between a man and a woman. Plus, due to the metabolism difference, women would probably be able to apply this strength longer than men.
But anyway, if the average man is stronger than the average woman, it's not because men are stronger by nature. It's due to a societal construction, that also happen to be a vicious circle. Being assumed to be stronger, men are asked to perform the physical tasks, what put them in a position where their body build more muscles ; what then make them stronger. But put a woman in the same position, and you'll have an average woman as strong as the average man.
Ok
anne O'nymous, with all due respect, if you don't have knowledge on a subject, please refrain from talking about it. It is clear you are not well versed in biology, and you have most definitely not done your research and don't know the current scientific consensus on such matters. So please don't speak on such matters and don't make blanket statements unless fully informed. Because what you have said is scientifically inaccurate, and purely ideological and politically driven propaganda speak.
Ok so regarding the story, I don't see any problem at all using this premise, it is just an artistic choice, the author can better defend himself.
However, on everything else, you are so wrong on so many levels I don't even know where to start. Men and women ARE NOT EQUAL. We are DIFFERENT. Yes we should have the same value as humans, but to suggest that across the board we are equal is so false and delusional. And as someone who has studied evolutionary biology and evolutionary psychology, your ignorance is awfully apparent and insulting.
The main difference isn't on the strength.
Wrong, you are talking about strength and muscle mass as if they are separate unrelated things. MAN HAVE MORE MUSCLE MASS THERFORE THEY ARE STRONGER. That is an established biological reality [1][2], IT IS NOT A SOCIAL CONSTRUCTION. If you say such things to doctor or a biologist, they'll laugh at your face.
Men produce testosterone, over 20 times more than women. Testosterone promotes muscle synthesis. Men on average have higher strength NOT because of social differences, but because of BIOLOGICAL differences. Such sexual dimorphism can be seen in almost all other mammals, it is not unique to humans.
Being assumed to be stronger, men are asked to perform the physical tasks, what put them in a position where their body build more muscles ; what then make them stronger.
Wrong. Men and women both start seeing a difference in muscle growth after puberty [3], REGARDLESS of physical activity. Even if you take into account physical activity, with the same amount of strength training, on average MEN WILL BUILD MORE MUSCLE AND MORE EASILY THAN WOMEN, simply due to the hormonal advantage [5]. That's why male and female sports are separated. The strongest man in the world is stronger than the strongest women in the world for precisely such reasons.
At equal muscular mass, there's no real strength difference between a man and a woman.
Wrong again. Although the entire premise of this statement is wrong, the statement in itself is wrong as well. The matter on this is unsettled and the jury is still out. Some studies suggest that strength relative to lean body mass is [roughly] equal in men and women, however, some studies show difference muscle construction. A study (one of many) [4] I linked shows obvious differences in muscle fiber structure of both men and women:
[...] As mentioned earlier, studies of vastus lateralis biopsies show fiber-type CSA to be larger in men than in women. Specifically, type-I fibers are 19% larger, type-IIA fibers are 59% larger, and type-IIX fibers are 66% larger in men than in women (normalized to total biopsy section analyzed) [...]
But even though, it is irrelevent as men simply have more muscle mass due to hormonal and biological advantage, period.
Now when it comes to IQ. You are right, many many studies have consistently shown, the average male and female IQ is pretty much the same. But there are some interesting differences in there as well. Some studies have indicated that men show a greater variability in their IQ distribution. Which would mean that men are both, dumber and smarter than women on a population scale. Its called the
You must be registered to see the links
, but still more research needs to be done on the matter.
Also I haven't even gotten into the personality differences in men and women, that arise due to the underlying biological differences. Like for example men are on average more violent than women, but differences become a deciding factor at the extremes, (almost all prison inmates and criminals are men). This btw also seems to be a product of testosterone (though still needs more research), as in men, the testosterone levels are directly related to aggressive behavior [7], but doesn't seem to have any long term affects in aggression in trans-men [6]. So it seems like a complex interplay between male biology and hormonal makeup.
On a personal note:
Again, please please please, I am so sick and tired of people (mostly from the left) propagating this unscientific and ultimately harmful ideology, if you are a man of science, don't do this. It deeply bothers me and many other fellows, as this mentality is slowly seeping into the academic fields as well. What I explained above with proper references, shouldn't even have to be explained. Anyone with half a brain can see and tell yeah men and women seem to be different. AND THERE IS NOTHING WRONG WITH IT.
I hope you take heed and learn from this.
References:
[1]
You must be registered to see the links
[2]
You must be registered to see the links
[3]
You must be registered to see the links
[4]
You must be registered to see the links
[5]
You must be registered to see the links
[6]
You must be registered to see the links
[7]
You must be registered to see the links
