Women taller than men

What would the effects of women being taller than men be in the development of societies, the family, culture, work and gender relations?

In this ATL, women are about 10 to 15 cm taller than men in average.
 

star

Banned
I think there should be species where female is bigger that male, maybe to a good pregnancy.

In another POV after a time of a civilization goverment by taller womens, I guess the mens evolve in near tall but enormous penxx....made love with enormous womens have his requirements.

If I say something else somebody gonna kick me for bad vocabulary.
 
Are there any OTL examples of herd or pack critters where the females are larger? You're probably looking at a whole package of behavioral and lifestyle changes that go along with the reverse dimorphism.
 
Bigger females than males is the rule in most birds most noticably in raptors. A male greyfalcon is called a "Tercel" because it's usually about one third less the weight of a female.

To get intelligent bipedal humanoids where the males are smaller than the females, you have to get them descended from a species where male polygyny was uncommon, as is the case with Gibbons.

Get humans from Gibbons and you have a chance.
 
Wow, never imagined it would be so difficult to achieve a bigger female in humans. Can womans just become bigger, for lets say, have less problems during birth? Or to be more capable of protecting the youngs while males are hunting?

Because I think that having humans evolve from gibbons won't make us the same humans(anatomically speaking) we are but something different.
 
Impossible in homo sapiens without some mad scientist-esque genetic modification.

It seems far more likely to have a sapient species evolve from a species with very little sex dimorphism, rather than a species where the females are larger than the males. Gibbons, for example.
 
What would the effects of women being taller than men be in the development of societies, the family, culture, work and gender relations?

In this ATL, women are about 10 to 15 cm taller than men in average.

I have read about something like this. In the late XIX - early XX C. Silesia men were working in coal mines or were taken to military. The work was hard, long and the probability of death was high. So the women who stayed at home had better chance to survive. The consequence was that mothers tended to feed their daughters better than sons and the women were dominant in families. I have read an article in a special issue of weekly magazine "Polityka" which is a Polish magazine similar to Newsweek - it deals with politics, culture and social matters.
There were photos of newly wed couples attached to this article on which the wifes were taller than husbands - about 10-15 cm.
I'm afraid I have no longer this issue but I'll try to find more informations on this in my free time.

In general you need to find a something - may it be social condition or deasease that makes men more vulnerable and more likely to die in young age so it makes more appropriate to care for women, better feed and educate them.
 
I work with a bloke, and he's no midget, and his wife is a fucking giant. It just doesn't look right, she towers over his 6'1" and when they walk together he holds the crook of her arm. It makes him look pathetic although if he wasnt such a douchebag I may not be so judgemental.

So in a world where women are 10-15cm taller than men I am permamently creeped out.
 
Care to explain why?
It's because, in order to meaningfully apply OTL history (e.g. the Roman Empire) to such a fundamental change, we have to assume near-impossible levels of coincidence. Going by the infinite-multiverse theory, there will be some world where women are taller than men and people speaking Latin rule all of the Mediterranean basin, but such worlds are vanishingly unlikely compared with worlds where Liu Bang dies in battle and Latins rule the Med.

EDIT: And, since "vanishingly unlikely" is the defintion of ASB, any thread that attempts to combine fundamental changes with superficial constants goes there.
 
It's because, in order to meaningfully apply OTL history (e.g. the Roman Empire) to such a fundamental change, we have to assume near-impossible levels of coincidence. Going by the infinite-multiverse theory, there will be some world where women are taller than men and people speaking Latin rule all of the Mediterranean basin, but such worlds are vanishingly unlikely compared with worlds where Liu Bang dies in battle and Latins rule the Med.

EDIT: And, since "vanishingly unlikely" is the defintion of ASB, any thread that attempts to combine fundamental changes with superficial constants goes there.

Anyway, I didn't say we would see the same empires, the same culture and etc.

Just asked how would having women taller than men affect the development of culture, family and such. It's obvious it won't be the same as OTL.
 
This is misleading. Geography and evolutionary AH is in ASB by decree even if it doesn't try insert OTL history.

It's because, in order to meaningfully apply OTL history (e.g. the Roman Empire) to such a fundamental change, we have to assume near-impossible levels of coincidence. Going by the infinite-multiverse theory, there will be some world where women are taller than men and people speaking Latin rule all of the Mediterranean basin, but such worlds are vanishingly unlikely compared with worlds where Liu Bang dies in battle and Latins rule the Med.

EDIT: And, since "vanishingly unlikely" is the defintion of ASB, any thread that attempts to combine fundamental changes with superficial constants goes there.
 
Are there any OTL examples of herd or pack critters where the females are larger? You're probably looking at a whole package of behavioral and lifestyle changes that go along with the reverse dimorphism.

in mammals, the only one I can think of is hyenas. Primates in general tend to be very dimorphic, with males larger than females (sometimes extremely so). Egg laying critters tend to have the females larger too...
 
Top