Not a solution, and I mean it. There seems to be this mystical belief that woman would naturally be better custodians of the world. That war, would soon cease after the world domination of women, that pollution would cease, and crime would be lowered do to the enslavement, or ensexment as some would call it of men. I summit to you that this is not the case.
In my last post I gave a detailed argument as to why Gynarchy in a bid for world domination could not simply live in peace. Even if woman somehow did take control of the world I believe that they would never live in peace. A large contingent of men would still retain military and police training. Take for example North Korea, the Worker-Peasant Red Guard (Equivalent to the USA National Guard) is comprised of over 3.5 million men. This group is organized at local levels, and in small groups, which train in village sized forces making its members the perfect base for a guerrilla movement there.
Aside from the men in the world women are still capable of violence of violent actions. If one or more regions of the world could not compromise with others there is only one way to resolve the problem. Even within its own territory government uses violence to coerce its populace into following the law. Some of my readers may remember the tragedy of the Branch Davidian compound in 1993, the tragedy occurred not because of the war like nature of man, but because a group was thought to braking the law, and when they refused to cooperate with the authorities, violence ensued. In the end they were left with only one choice arrest or death, unfortunately they chose death. This may seem an overly simple explanation for what went on but the fact is that when the government wants something to happen inside or outside of its territory either the parties involved have to back down, or resort to violence, and for some people some of the time backing down is just not an option.
What of the natural world some would say certainly the caring mother of our children would be a better custodian of the plants and animals. Well no matter who is in charge People will still need power, farmers will still need chemicals because there will still be to many people to feed with out them. Water will still be needed in the desert, flood control will still be needed in the wetlands. The cultural needs of societies who engage in ritual hunts, or eating will still need be met risking violence otherwise. Would someone please tell me how women in sole control of the world would change any of this anymore than men being the dominant sex would?
The fact is that the problems of the world or not the sole property of men, nor are there solutions the sole property of women. To whip a horse that is dead or at least dangerously close to becoming so, two heads are better than one. So excluding anyone from the problem solving process makes no since. Once again I am calling out to anyone that will hear, Female Lead Marriage/Relationships in the home great, equality outside of it, necessary, preferable, and right.