Most Popular This Week
- Not to Worry, Rape Victims Who Want An Abortion: We Won't Charge You With Felony Tampering With Evidence, Just Your Doctor
- The Non Zero-Sum Society: How the Rich Are Destroying the US Economy
- Obama Administration Compromise Would Implement No-Cost Birth Control
- The Paranoia of the Superrich and Superpowerful
- As Predicted, Austerity Policies Send US Economy Downward
- The Non Zero-Sum Society: How the Rich Are Destroying the US Economy
- Don’t Put a Fork in It: On the Perils of Genetically Engineered Salmon
- The Paranoia of the Superrich and Superpowerful
- Five Possibilities for the Next Great Progressive Push
- An Economic Alternative to Exploitative Free Market Capitalism
Popular content
Today's Top News
Without Us, They'd Just Fight and Eat out of Cans
Imagine a world suddenly – very suddenly – without men.
Planes would drop out of the sky as pilots disappeared. Cities would grow cold and dark as power generators stopped. No fire trucks would come to deal with the inevitable disasters. Legislatures would empty. Wars would end.
Now imagine the flip side.
Babies would fall out of vanished mother's arms. Things would get dirty and dusty. Men would eat out of cans. Liquor stores and bars would be booming. Drag queens would always have dates.
In the short term, women would suffer.
But, in the long run, men would turn on each other.
These were the parallel worlds that Philip Wylie described in his 1951 what-if book, The Disappearance. For protagonist Bill Gaunt, a university professor, in one instant his educated stay-at-home wife Paula vanishes, along with their daughter, granddaughter and housemaid.
He scarcely notices, at first.
For Paula, after Bill vanishes, the effect is immediate. A driverless car smashes into the front of the house – and nobody comes to help.
Two years later, the women's world is under control whereas the men's, despite its distinct physical advantage, descends into deadly conflict and chaos.
When I discovered The Disappearance in 1974 or 1975, I was struck by what it said about the place of women and the nature of men on the eve of the Cold War.
I've been thinking about it while watching The Week the Women Went, CBC's eight-part reality show that sends most of the women of Hardisty, Alta., packing off to a Rocky Mountains resort for a week. Their men are left to fend for themselves, their kids, their pets, their homes and their jobs.
The series airs Mondays at 8 p.m.; the four episodes that have aired so far are available online.
It started out strongly, with an average of 770,000 viewers for its debut and 858,000 on its second outing. By Episode 3, the ratings dropped to 548,000.
Who knows? Maybe Canadians would rather watch Americans eat bugs on U.S. reality shows than see Alberta oil patch workers cope with their toddlers. Sure, one shoots himself with a nail gun and another takes a BB pellet to the butt, but Survivor this isn't.
Billed as "a social experiment,'' TWTWW doesn't go all the way. Here was an opportunity to bust through the stereotypes and show how the genders are interdependent – or not.
Instead, the producers keep throwing the men a lifeline. For example, many of them rely on their mothers, sisters or teenage daughters to get them out of their parenting jams. Not all the women are gone.
As for the women who did leave, they're out whitewater rafting, not fighting for survival in a world where there are no men to do the heavy lifting.
Admittedly, much has changed since 1951 when very, very few women piloted commercial jets, were civil engineers or performed neurosurgery.
But, sadly, not everything is different.
One Hardisty husband complains about his wife "getting her panties in a knot'' over his fishing trips while another talks about "putting her in her place.'' Most of the men fail to appreciate how difficult their week will be, dismissing how much their wives do both inside and outside the home.
So far at least, nobody has learned anything from the experience. No lightbulbs have gone off. No insights are lent. Not even about how women are the guilt and the glue that hold communities together, despite not running the towns.
Too bad.
One thing The Disappearance made clear is how women's interpersonal connectivity can get them through anything, while men's talent for action and technology can get them into trouble.
That's not just a comment on the sexes, but also on foreign policy in a dangerous time.
Wylie's book should be required reading.
Comments
Note: Disqus 2012 is best viewed on an up to date browser. Click here for information. Instructions for how to sign up to comment can be viewed here. Our Comment Policy can be viewed here. Please follow the guidelines. Note to Readers: Spam Filter May Capture Legitimate Comments...

16 Comments so far
Show All"So far at least, nobody has learned anything from the experience. No lightbulbs have gone off. No insights are lent. Not even about how women are the guilt and the glue that hold communities together, despite not running the towns."
This is because there ARE NO insights in commercial "reality" TV. Not on this subject. Not on any subject. It's not reality. It's producers asking you to watch something contrived--between commercials.
What a lovely piece of sexist crap.
Kudos to the author who manages to offend every human with one simple 'article'. Of course Lizzy Borden was a loving daughter who never raised an axe towards her parents. Tommy Douglas never thought of his fellow people when he advocated health care for all. Men all, everyone, are savage beasts who need the civilizing influence of Women. Women all, everyone, are helpless little princesses at heart who couldn't possibly figure out how to run a society without men.
Yep, incredibly stupid pure sexist crap.
Yes, the world would be so much better if we put women like Margaret Thatcher, Condi Rice, Phylis Schafly and Elizabeth Dole in charge.
And sure, men like Wolfgang Puck would forget how to cook and would be eating out of cans if there were no women around.
As always, when people talk in stupid stereotypes, they just sound stupid. The real wisdom comes in treating each PERSON as an individual.
"It's producers asking you to watch something contrived–between commercials."
Actually, its just producers asking you to watch the commercials. Anything else is just there to try to keep you from changing the channel or turning off the TV before the next commercial comes on.
We live in a sexist world, and we all suffer from the conditioning it produces.
I get movies from Netflix, and the animated cartoon movies have food stuck to them and need to be washed before playing. The fast action/adventure/thriller movies have fingerprints on them and need to be washed. The romance/drama movies are immaculate. I made this comment to a Netflix customer service representative and he laughed and said that's the way it is.
Our educational system doesn't help with it's reinforcement of the stereotypes of expectations of male/female behavior. I'm watching my young grandson's spirit being wounded as his father is "teaching" him to tough it out and take it like a man. I understand his father is trying to protect him from being despised for not being "manly" in the man's world he will be entering. "Raising Cain" is an excellent book for understanding how we wound boys on their way to manhood. "The Beauty Myth" shows how girls are wounded. Our society teaches children they can't be authentic, setting them up to be separated from themselves, resulting in addictive behaviors and relationships that avoid intimacy.
kathyodat
I read a study where they separated a sixth grade math class by gender and in the boys' class, some shot far ahead of the group and some fell way behind. In the girls' class, the ones who did best helped the slowest ones and no one shot ahead and no one fell behind. We all have certain gender traits, but what I think was going on here was influenced by culture. Girls are supposed to nurture, boys are supposed to achieve. I think we all have both of those qualities in us in varying degrees, but our society disapproves of boys expressing their nurturing qualities or girls expressing their achieving qualities. So we don't get to be whole.
kathyodat
Is there sexism in this article? Sure there is. But the writer's right about one thing: everything would go to hell in a handbasket if either women or men were to disappear from the face of the earth. And the human race would become extinct in a hundred years or less.
But BeForKids is right on the money with the idea of society's disapproval of boys being nurturing and girls being achieving. And that's too damn bad.
There have been detailed studies of monkey behavior in the past few years which showed that young monkeys, at least, act completely consistently with what we think of as gender stereotypes. The world is not always as simple as we sometimes wish it would be.
And I agree with ticonderoga, that it would be highly unlikely that the human race would last very long if one or the other gender suddenly disappeared. Humans evolved over millions of years with two sexes, and they inevitably developed innumerable feedback loops of unbounded complexity that establish a deep interdependency. Just as we imperil our future by significantly altering the natural environment that nurtured us during our evolution, altering the social environment so fundamentally would likely be inviting catastrophe.
A battle of the sexes could be so much more interesting than the current conflicts behind the international power puppeteers curtains.
I do however concede that much or our current untenable predicament does have a basis in sexuality and mores like competitive nest building that seem to cross boundaries and time.
Check out societies where women have the upper hand and of course there is the assumption that they don't have the upper hand in western societies! Who has the upper hand in mating or in ego development portions of nurture?
The following is a verse that may support the same bias as the author!
Stomp & Powder (Two part MALE female lyrics)
I 'M WILLING TO GIVE UP MY STOMP AND RULE
IF YOUR WILLING TO GIVE UP YOUR POMP AND POWDER
I'm willing to give up my decadent nest
If your willing to say I'm best
I'M WILLING TO CHANGE MY SWAGGER
AND DUMP MY EVIL DOPPELGANGER
IF YOU ARE WILLING TO WARM MY NEST
I'm willing to forego red meat
If you want me to be your sweet
I'M WILLING TO STOP THE KILLING
IF YOUR WILLING TO START THE CARING
I'm willing to nurture, love and snuggle
if your willing to turf that five cornered bungle
I'M WILLING TO GIVE UP MY TOYS
BUT CAN'T BUDGE ON THE FIVE CORNERED FORTRESS
AND YOU WILL HAVE TO DO WITH SYNTHETIC DIAMONDS
THAT'S JUST AS PRETTY AND HARD!
I don't need no diamonds I don't need your chromosome
you and your war mongering days are done
I don't need you.
Yup, yet another sexist (anti-male) diatribe by AZerbisiass.
Been reading her for years. And no surprises at this point, she's as shallow as shallow gets. yawn.
I do get tired of hearing about how the world would be better if women ran it. As already mentioned women like Hillary Clinton or Margaret Thatcher. A Matriarchal society is certainly more desirable than our Patriarchal one, but in this society most women (certainly by the time they reach high school) live their lives in a very patriarchal way, sometimes just to survive. Further there are compassionate Matriarchal Men who want a more caring society, even if as children they did not yet have this understanding. It is one thing to talk of the real sexism in our society: How Welfare Reform mostly hurts single mothers, How most working women get less pay than men with the same job, It is quite another thing to boast of the superiority of all women over all men and seek men's removal from all places of power. A more constructive editorial would be how to make our society more Maternal and more equal.
"The Gate to Women's Country" by Sherri Tepper is a better imaginative depiction of how to get rid of the worst patriarchal tendencies in the human race, particularly the lust for war.
I have read "The Disappearance" by Wylie, and it was an imaginative attempt on the part of one man back in the 50s to look at how interdependent yet how destructive some parts of male/female relating can be.
It seems that our only route to survival would require male behavior to more closely approach traditional female behavior, but what we have been getting the last three decades is female behavior more closely approaching traditional male behavior. If that keeps up, we are all doomed.
As a young man (though I was and am completely heterosexual) I tried to behave in a way similar to traditional female behavior, and found there are no rewards in that whatsoever in US society. Both the men and the women disrespect a man who behaves in that fashion, while they both respect a woman who behaves like the traditional man. Something has to change.
Behind every macho-swaggering-self-absorbed-sociopath male is a mother in denial who adores him, pampers him, and who made him that way. It's females and their concept of motherhood that needs changing.
I know that I would be living under a bridge if my wife was gone! Happy Valentine's Day!!!
It is well known that real power is always exercised from
"behind the scenes." It is also well known that most
great decisions, for better or for worse, are made at
night and behind closed doors. Invariably there is a woman
present, either conceiving the next generation, or
whispering to the father of the present generation what
he is doing wrong. The old adage, the hand that rocks the
cradle, rules the world, has not changed; nor will it ever
change. And when there are no more babies to rock in
cradles, there will be no world left to rule. Simple.