>if you talked to enough emancipated women more and more of them are thinking exactly that they really don’t need a permanent attachment in the form of a man.
That's right. And there are societies already where women do the bulk of the productive work - ie, the food production and feeding of children etc - and men are chosen for their "attractiveness".
Which leaves a very large bulk of men disenfranchised. They have no meaning structure. You can see what happens in countries where this is the norm- or you can just look at lions.
The birth gender ratio of lions is 50/50 male/female. But look at a lion pride.
Female lions don't need a bunch of male lions. They don't even really need male lions at all - the whole "he goes after the hyenas" thing is something they could also do themselves, but males are just, really, kind of biologically expendable.
I dunno, why would that be desirable? Half your genetic effort is wasted.
We're already seeing that men will not put themselves bodily on the line to physically protect women. That's a problem that will have social consequences. Not sure what yet, I can speculate, but nothing good.
