Worldbuilding Realism Consultation Thread Mk. 4

[Gallia-]

youre just trying to grill and all three of the wives are working successive 8 hour shifts to nag you to death

suicide rate approaches unity when the 4th wife arrives

it really do be like that sometimes

[Dayganistan]

Are you saying fear of physical violence is the main reason for that?
There are cultural reasons.
You can get people do things that are not in their interests if they believe they'll go to heaven (medieval peasants outnumbered nobles for example).
Also that's assuming it's not in their interests.

"Cultural reasons" isn't a be all end all answer. There were "cultural reasons" why feminism wouldn't have taken hold in the west and well look where we are now. You're going to have to totally cut off their access to the internet (Literally impossible without shutting down the internet in your entire country thanks to VPNs. Seriously, ask Iran) or ensure there's no contact with expat communities if you don't want all of your women to start becoming hardcore feminists who won't take being someone's 4th wife anymore.

[Champagne Socialist Sharifistan]

youre just trying to grill and all three of the wives are working successive 8 hour shifts to nag you to death

suicide rate approaches unity when the 4th wife arrives

it really do be like that sometimes

Does a 2% suicide rate make sense?
I think that's a high rate,
is it?
Also: https://www.nationstates.net/nation=cha ... id=1314953

By the way Sharifistan has almost constant war,
often against more powerful nations like Israel or (in the 1990s) Russia.

[Champagne Socialist Sharifistan]

Are you saying fear of physical violence is the main reason for that?
There are cultural reasons.
You can get people do things that are not in their interests if they believe they'll go to heaven (medieval peasants outnumbered nobles for example).
Also that's assuming it's not in their interests.

"Cultural reasons" isn't a be all end all answer. There were "cultural reasons" why feminism wouldn't have taken hold in the west and well look where we are now. You're going to have to totally cut off their access to the internet (Literally impossible without shutting down the internet in your entire country thanks to VPNs. Seriously, ask Iran) or ensure there's no contact with expat communities if you don't want all of your women to start becoming hardcore feminists who won't take being someone's 4th wife anymore.

What if it's either 4th wife or no one's wife?

[Purpelia]

Are you saying fear of physical violence is the main reason for that?
There are cultural reasons.
You can get people do things that are not in their interests if they believe they'll go to heaven (medieval peasants outnumbered nobles for example).
Also that's assuming it's not in their interests.

"Cultural reasons" isn't a be all end all answer. There were "cultural reasons" why feminism wouldn't have taken hold in the west and well look where we are now. You're going to have to totally cut off their access to the internet (Literally impossible without shutting down the internet in your entire country thanks to VPNs. Seriously, ask Iran) or ensure there's no contact with expat communities if you don't want all of your women to start becoming hardcore feminists who won't take being someone's 4th wife anymore.

Again I disagree. Just look at how every person that is even moderately successful in life can easily get a mistress if he wants. Women don't mind being #2 or #10 as long as the man is right. Of course you do get harem politics where mistresses or second wives try and become #1 after they have a foot in the door. But that's different.

[Champagne Socialist Sharifistan]

"Cultural reasons" isn't a be all end all answer. There were "cultural reasons" why feminism wouldn't have taken hold in the west and well look where we are now. You're going to have to totally cut off their access to the internet (Literally impossible without shutting down the internet in your entire country thanks to VPNs. Seriously, ask Iran) or ensure there's no contact with expat communities if you don't want all of your women to start becoming hardcore feminists who won't take being someone's 4th wife anymore.

Again I disagree. Just look at how every person that is even moderately successful in life can easily get a mistress if he wants. Women don't mind being #2 or #10 as long as the man is right. Of course you do get harem politics where mistresses or second wives try and become #1 after they have a foot in the door. But that's different.

True would most women you know accept being no #10?
Please answer the question, maybe it's yes.
Enough women for any moderately successful man, sure.
But most?
Studies show women want an emotional connection and financial support.
But this doesn't matter as most men follow Islamic law and only 4 (official) wives.

[Gallia-]

Are you saying fear of physical violence is the main reason for that?
There are cultural reasons.
You can get people do things that are not in their interests if they believe they'll go to heaven (medieval peasants outnumbered nobles for example).
Also that's assuming it's not in their interests.

"Cultural reasons" isn't a be all end all answer. There were "cultural reasons" why feminism wouldn't have taken hold in the west and well look where we are now. You're going to have to totally cut off their access to the internet (Literally impossible without shutting down the internet in your entire country thanks to VPNs. Seriously, ask Iran) or ensure there's no contact with expat communities if you don't want all of your women to start becoming hardcore feminists who won't take being someone's 4th wife anymore.

Slapping works. Women won't become feminists unless they have an ability to support themselves outside of marriage, which would be hard to achieve in a traditional Islamic society (like the Taliban or ISIS) because women wouldn't be allowed to work or read, so they would be non-functional without the support of the husband.

The Taliban were not substantially worse than, say, Joseon Korea, and women did not suddenly rise up and replace the Joseon state. The Japanese did.

It took two world wars and the creeping encroachment of Western liberalism to dislodge male chauvinism in Korea. They just now decided to allow abortions a few weeks ago. It will probably swing back in the future, as the declining birth rate and the natural anti-feminist beliefs of Koreans take hold.

[Champagne Socialist Sharifistan]

"Cultural reasons" isn't a be all end all answer. There were "cultural reasons" why feminism wouldn't have taken hold in the west and well look where we are now. You're going to have to totally cut off their access to the internet (Literally impossible without shutting down the internet in your entire country thanks to VPNs. Seriously, ask Iran) or ensure there's no contact with expat communities if you don't want all of your women to start becoming hardcore feminists who won't take being someone's 4th wife anymore.

Slapping works.

In many cultures male protectiveness of women is emphasised.
Also women outnumber men in this.
Also, does it work?

[Champagne Socialist Sharifistan]

"Cultural reasons" isn't a be all end all answer. There were "cultural reasons" why feminism wouldn't have taken hold in the west and well look where we are now. You're going to have to totally cut off their access to the internet (Literally impossible without shutting down the internet in your entire country thanks to VPNs. Seriously, ask Iran) or ensure there's no contact with expat communities if you don't want all of your women to start becoming hardcore feminists who won't take being someone's 4th wife anymore.

Slapping works. Women won't become feminists unless they have an ability to support themselves outside of marriage, which would be hard to achieve in a traditional Islamic society (like the Taliban or ISIS) because women wouldn't be allowed to work or read, so they would be non-functional without the support of the husband.

The Taliban were not substantially worse than, say, Joseon Korea, and women did not suddenly rise up and replace the Joseon state. The Japanese did.

Firstly that assumes most men don't have an emotional connection with their wife
(and that emotional connection is actually an evolutionary advantage because it means the current or future mother of your children doesn't die)
Also many traditional Islamic societies educated women since Muhammad's time.
I believe Joseon Korea also educated women.

[Taihei Tengoku]

In many traditional societies not only the women, but the men, were completely illiterate

[Gallia-]

Firstly that assumes most men don't have an emotional connection with their wife

How many wives did Henry VII kill again?

Women raised in an environment that expects women to be subordinate rather than equal (or superior) will end up being subordinate. Women that don't fit the mold (in any possible combination of expectation-individual interactions) will be corrected by whatever means society thinks are justified. Nowadays, for women who feel that "feminism has gone too far", this usually means online heckling and doxxing by other women who feel that they should be superior, while males are typically sidelined in the conversation because they aren't women. Women simply didn't have the same expectations of life back then that they do now. It was enough that they had food, a place to stay, a husband who had given them children, and that they weren't slaves.

They obviously did not have a lot of rights relative to men, but that was just accepted as the way things were and very little could be done to change it. It was pretty effective until the arrival of democracy in Korea's case.

I believe Joseon Korea also educated women.

lol

In many traditional societies not only the women, but the men, were completely illiterate

Yes. Hangul is women's words (and commoners). OTOH women in Joseon Korea, at least those who were important enough to write to, probably had people read for them rather than read themselves. That said the difference in proportion between male literati and female was probably an order of magnitude. Maybe 1 for every 10 or so men that could read both Hangul and Hanja, at least for Joseon, but I suspect it would be comparable for most other traditional societies. OTOOH, if you just look at Hangul or Hanja, rather than both (males were roughly 1:15 for both Japanese and Korean literacy, probably similar for Chinese and Hangul script) it probably narrowed to like 1 in 4 or 1 in 5. Still small.

But yes, also according to the Japanese colonial administration about 75% of Koreans were illiterate. So it was still pretty rare to read, just rarer still for women. So 90-95% of women are illiterate vice 50-75% of men.

TFW "public book reader" is no longer a viable occupation. ):

[Champagne Socialist Sharifistan]

Firstly that assumes most men don't have an emotional connection with their wife

How many wives did Henry VII kill again?

Women raised in an environment that expects women to be subordinate rather than equal (or superior) will end up being subordinate. Women that don't fit the mold (in any possible combination of expectation-individual interactions) will be corrected by whatever means society thinks are justified. Nowadays, for women who feel that "feminism has gone too far", this usually means online heckling and doxxing by other women who feel that they should be superior, while males are typically sidelined in the conversation because they aren't women. Women simply didn't have the same expectations of life back then that they do now. It was enough that they had food, a place to stay, a husband who had given them children, and that they weren't slaves.

They obviously did not have a lot of rights relative to men, but that was just accepted as the way things were and very little could be done to change it. It was pretty effective until the arrival of democracy in Korea's case.

I believe Joseon Korea also educated women.

lol

In many traditional societies not only the women, but the men, were completely illiterate

Yes. Hangul is women's words (and commoners). OTOH women in Joseon Korea, at least those who were important enough to write to, probably had people read for them rather than read themselves. That said the difference in proportion between male literati and female was probably an order of magnitude. Maybe 1 for every 10 or so men that could read both Hangul and Hanja, at least for Joseon, but I suspect it would be comparable for most other traditional societies. OTOOH, if you just look at Hangul or Hanja, rather than both (males were roughly 1:15 for both Japanese and Korean literacy, probably similar for Chinese and Hangul script) it probably narrowed to like 1 in 4 or 1 in 5. Still small.

But yes, also according to the Japanese colonial administration about 75% of Koreans were illiterate. So it was still pretty rare to read, just rarer still for women. So 90-95% of women are illiterate vice 50-75% of men.

TFW "public book reader" is no longer a viable occupation. ):

Henry the 8th didn’t necessarily represent most men.
Men risking their lives to defend their wives has been documented throughout history.
Think of all that kings that didn’t kill their wives but supported them in great luxury.
Also non-physical punishments such as losing privileges work better in parenting so why not also in patriarchal marriages?
Also as well as it being an evolutionary advantage for women to prefer powerful men it’s also an advantage for them to prefer men who are unlikely to try to kill them.
Love poetry has been documented since before the Old Testament.

[Champagne Socialist Sharifistan]

How many wives did Henry VII kill again?

Women raised in an environment that expects women to be subordinate rather than equal (or superior) will end up being subordinate. Women that don't fit the mold (in any possible combination of expectation-individual interactions) will be corrected by whatever means society thinks are justified. Nowadays, for women who feel that "feminism has gone too far", this usually means online heckling and doxxing by other women who feel that they should be superior, while males are typically sidelined in the conversation because they aren't women. Women simply didn't have the same expectations of life back then that they do now. It was enough that they had food, a place to stay, a husband who had given them children, and that they weren't slaves.

They obviously did not have a lot of rights relative to men, but that was just accepted as the way things were and very little could be done to change it. It was pretty effective until the arrival of democracy in Korea's case.



lol



Yes. Hangul is women's words (and commoners). OTOH women in Joseon Korea, at least those who were important enough to write to, probably had people read for them rather than read themselves. That said the difference in proportion between male literati and female was probably an order of magnitude. Maybe 1 for every 10 or so men that could read both Hangul and Hanja, at least for Joseon, but I suspect it would be comparable for most other traditional societies. OTOOH, if you just look at Hangul or Hanja, rather than both (males were roughly 1:15 for both Japanese and Korean literacy, probably similar for Chinese and Hangul script) it probably narrowed to like 1 in 4 or 1 in 5. Still small.

But yes, also according to the Japanese colonial administration about 75% of Koreans were illiterate. So it was still pretty rare to read, just rarer still for women. So 90-95% of women are illiterate vice 50-75% of men.

TFW "public book reader" is no longer a viable occupation. ):

Henry the 8th didn’t necessarily represent most men.
Men risking their lives to defend their wives has been documented throughout history.
Think of all that kings that didn’t kill their wives but supported them in great luxury.
Also non-physical punishments such as losing privileges work better in parenting so why not also in patriarchal marriages?
Also as well as it being an evolutionary advantage for women to prefer powerful men it’s also an advantage for them to prefer men who are unlikely to try to kill them.
Love poetry has been documented since before the Old Testament.

I’ve been to Topkapi Palace.
The wives of the Sultans lived in luxurious conditions themselves.

[Dayganistan]

I’ve been to Topkapi Palace.
The wives of the Sultans lived in luxurious conditions themselves.

And when the first lady of Turkey said she thought the Ottoman harem was a good thing a few years back, women across the political spectrum in Turkey got pissed at her. So just because it's luxurious doesn't mean women want it. Especially not in 2020 where it's pretty much inevitable that at least some subset of your female population will be into feminism.

[Gallia-]

How many wives did Henry VII kill again?

Women raised in an environment that expects women to be subordinate rather than equal (or superior) will end up being subordinate. Women that don't fit the mold (in any possible combination of expectation-individual interactions) will be corrected by whatever means society thinks are justified. Nowadays, for women who feel that "feminism has gone too far", this usually means online heckling and doxxing by other women who feel that they should be superior, while males are typically sidelined in the conversation because they aren't women. Women simply didn't have the same expectations of life back then that they do now. It was enough that they had food, a place to stay, a husband who had given them children, and that they weren't slaves.

They obviously did not have a lot of rights relative to men, but that was just accepted as the way things were and very little could be done to change it. It was pretty effective until the arrival of democracy in Korea's case.



lol



Yes. Hangul is women's words (and commoners). OTOH women in Joseon Korea, at least those who were important enough to write to, probably had people read for them rather than read themselves. That said the difference in proportion between male literati and female was probably an order of magnitude. Maybe 1 for every 10 or so men that could read both Hangul and Hanja, at least for Joseon, but I suspect it would be comparable for most other traditional societies. OTOOH, if you just look at Hangul or Hanja, rather than both (males were roughly 1:15 for both Japanese and Korean literacy, probably similar for Chinese and Hangul script) it probably narrowed to like 1 in 4 or 1 in 5. Still small.

But yes, also according to the Japanese colonial administration about 75% of Koreans were illiterate. So it was still pretty rare to read, just rarer still for women. So 90-95% of women are illiterate vice 50-75% of men.

TFW "public book reader" is no longer a viable occupation. ):

Henry the 8th didn’t necessarily represent most men.

Yeah most guys who could have multiple wives just had a mistress or concubine. Or a dozen. Or a hundred. Or a thousand. lmao

[Redemption-America]

Clearly the men of this country are wildly unfit to lead or govern

No they're not, Sharifistan is influential, the deaths of those who were martyred in military service or martyred themselves through hard-work are necessary to create the beautiful society Sharifistan's monarchy wants.

If that many of the population is constantly dying, no, the leadership is bad. And hard for a nation to be influential as well if their demographics have been totally wrecked for generations by incompetent leadership.

Will giving concubines political power be the death of Sharifistan?

Think it's been pointed out numerous times that literally everything about Sharifistan is the death of Sharifistan. None of it works.

[IshCong]

it would be easier to import foreign males than to have females do physical labor

even better if you can buy property and dont need to import anyone when you can just build factories next to their dirt yurts in "czechia" or whatever

t. western european economies

True. Of course, that does have some limitations. You would need neighbors willing to send their males to your nation, for one. That may prove difficult if you've recently waged war on them. Given the obvious crisis such a nation would be in, foreign men may be unwilling to risk their lives or well-being by working there, especially since they may well be aware of just how many young men died from overwork in this nation. It is also quite possible such a nation lacks the ready funds to import labor. After all, they've killed their entire working age male population. The things that cause that typically do not cause economic prosperity.

[1]Even if it could lead to a matriarchy why not a polygynous matriarchy since in this case polygyny would actually benefit most women (because most women want a husband)?
Also Sharifistani women mostly act submissive for cultural reasons.
[2]Military coups based on gender are rare (at least I've never heard of one).

Why would it not lead to polygyny?
[3]If a man can marry 3 women and 3 women are available to him (and he's a highly paid Army Colonel so he doesn't need to worry about the cost of supporting them) what's to say he won't want to marry them?

1: It actually wouldn't benefit most women. At least, it wouldn't benefit the women who matter. Remember, women now occupy political, military, and economic power in this hypothesized nation. The women are the ones calling the shots. Once a woman has established her social and financial position and secured one of the few remaining husbands why should she want to share? She would be accepting additional costs without real additional benefits. I suppose it isn't impossible, but it's hard to imagine women sharing a husband in this manner.

2: And I've never heard of a nation almost deliberately killing its entire male population between the ages of 15 and 54 (with the possible exception of Paraguay), but here we are.

3: All the men of an age fit to be colonels are now dead, exiled, or imprisoned either from the initial catastrophe or the revolution. The colonels are now women.

Clearly the men of this country are wildly unfit to lead or govern

No they're not, Sharifistan is influential, the deaths of those who were martyred in military service or martyred themselves through hard-work are necessary to create the beautiful society Sharifistan's monarchy wants.

I mean, yes, the ruling class always feels it is fit to rule. But the dead don't get to voice an opinion and the surviving women are rather liable to disagree with that assessment for innumerable reasons.

You can get people do things that are not in their interests if they believe they'll go to heaven (medieval peasants outnumbered nobles for example).
Also that's assuming it's not in their interests.

We are, of course, aware of the numerous examples of peasant uprisings throughout the feudal era. They were generally unsuccessful, but that's more due to the nobles possessing the means of waging effective war while the peasants were, well. Peasants. Nonetheless, some peasant revolts accomplished quite a lot and even some of the unsuccessful uprisings proved rather difficult to quash. Meanwhile, the nation in question, having lost so very many of its young fighting men, is much less prepared to deal with widespread social unrest.

Does a 2% suicide rate make sense?
I think that's a high rate,
is it?
Also: https://www.nationstates.net/nation=cha ... id=1314953

By the way Sharifistan has almost constant war,
often against more powerful nations like Israel or (in the 1990s) Russia.

Something like 1.6% of deaths in the US in 2017 were due to intentional self harm. This does not include other "deaths of despair", such as deaths caused by drug overdose, alcoholism, drunk driving, etc. It's a complex issue, but I might expect that you would want to adjust upwards. I could be wrong however. You definitely do want to contemplate how many of your people are drinking themselves to death or ODing on heroin in some alley.

Slapping works. Women won't become feminists unless they have an ability to support themselves outside of marriage, which would be hard to achieve in a traditional Islamic society (like the Taliban or ISIS) because women wouldn't be allowed to work or read, so they would be non-functional without the support of the husband.

The Taliban were not substantially worse than, say, Joseon Korea, and women did not suddenly rise up and replace the Joseon state. The Japanese did.

It took two world wars and the creeping encroachment of Western liberalism to dislodge male chauvinism in Korea. They just now decided to allow abortions a few weeks ago. It will probably swing back in the future, as the declining birth rate and the natural anti-feminist beliefs of Koreans take hold.

An interesting way to suggest that a patriarchy's or state's monopoly on violence is the primary tool enforcing certain oppressive cultural norms, but elegant nonetheless.

EDIT: Formatting.

[Gallia-]

it would be easier to import foreign males than to have females do physical labor

even better if you can buy property and dont need to import anyone when you can just build factories next to their dirt yurts in "czechia" or whatever

t. western european economies

True. Of course, that does have some limitations. You would need neighbors willing to send their males to your nation, for one. That may prove difficult if you've recently waged war on them.

I'm pretty sure the average immigrant male in Europe is from a different continent rather than the next town over lmao.

Not only do they come despite Western European military meddling in Syria/Iraq/Libyan affairs, they probably have increased their immigration because of it. Literally.

[Champagne Socialist Sharifistan]

Less than half (or half) of people have done "mate poaching"
http://ishe.org/wp-content/uploads/2019 ... _26-40.pdf

[Champagne Socialist Sharifistan]

the surviving women are rather liable to disagree with that assessment for innumerable reasons.

Are they?

[IshCong]

the surviving women are rather liable to disagree with that assessment for innumerable reasons.

Are they?

Considering almost all men between the ages of 15 and 54 died prematurely? Yes. Considering they were almost all widowed as a result of the current government's leadership? Yes. Considering roughly 1/4 of the state has died prematurely? Yes. Considering their financial and social futures are imperiled due to the above? Yes. Considering that only ~17% of men are over the age of 54 while ~38% of men are under the age of 15 (Turkey, 2020) and that this means there's even fewer men eligible for marriage than a 1 male to 3 female ratio would seem to suggest? Yes. Considering they're facing a demographic crisis unprecedented except by Paraguay (and it took Paraguay decades to even remotely sort that out)? Yes.

Just focusing on issues related to things like marriages or demographics gives them plenty of reasons to be displeased, even without delving into the various complaints they might have about the social structure.

[Austrasien]

What suicide rate would Sharifistan have:
1. Most men have been in the Army at some point.
2. Most men work dangerously long hours
3. Military doctrine emphasises protecting materiel over protecting men
4. Social mobility is uncommon

Trivial.

Suicides are usually caused by boredom or shame.

[Champagne Socialist Sharifistan]

Is this realistic for how police ranks could work:
Chief Inspector (Amir Al-Muhtasib): Upper-class rank, In charge patrols, investigation unit and guard units composed of lower ranking police officials.

Inspector (Muhtasib): second command in a patrol, investigation unit or guard unit.
Has authority over the commoner ranks (Sergeant and below) but not other Inspectors.
Can also command a small group of up to 30 uniformed officers or up to 15 detectives.
The lowest of the aristocratic ranks.

Sergeant (Havildar): Highest commoner/middle-class rank, Commands 8 to 13 police officers and mentors new officers (including new Inspectors)

Constable (Nöbetçi): Lowest rank with police powers, an entry level rank.


Police (Polis Harbiyesi): University graduate on a 1 year police training course.

[Champagne Socialist Sharifistan]

Think it's been pointed out numerous times that literally everything about Sharifistan is the death of Sharifistan. None of it works.

Well the over-representation of women benefits Sharifistan.

[Champagne Socialist Sharifistan]

What suicide rate would Sharifistan have:
1. Most men have been in the Army at some point.
2. Most men work dangerously long hours
3. Military doctrine emphasises protecting materiel over protecting men
4. Social mobility is uncommon

Trivial.

Suicides are usually caused by boredom or shame.

Wouldn't survivors' guilt come under shame?