If we intend to transition from a society that oppresses women to a woman-centered society, we should start with education. From a young age, women need to be taught the dangers of associating with men. We'd also teach them about PIV and the dangers of Trauma-Bonding to a male that come with it. They should be taught about men's toxic sexuality, the dangers of hetero-captivity, and how they need woman only safe spaces. We would also tailor men's education to helping them resist their necrophilic sexual urges (in the off chance that their violence and sexuality stems from societal conditioning instead of their flawed biology), that they never should congregate in groups, and to never speak or talk over women or invalidate their experiences.

If we continue in this for a generation or two, it's only natural that women will find the prospect of birthing a male child to be a shameful thing. So naturally, upon discovering their unfortunate turn of fate, many will likely abort them. Those that resist doing the sensible thing will be entered into a lottery to see if they are allowed to keep the bastard. Ultimately, we hope to get the male population down to approximately 10% of what it is today.

There will be no gas chambers. That's a male idea and women don't subscribe to it.

At the same time, women will begin working towards parthenogenesis which will render the male forever obsolete. Why run the risk of birthing a defective child who will one day grow up to attack and oppress women when you can have a daughter. It doesn't make sense and may be part of the reason my sister rebelled against the truth I was sharing with her. She is pregnant and I was pushing her to abort if it was a male. Her mind has been too colonized by the men in her life to see the common sense behind such an action.

We'd also only allow the most docile and non-violent of males to donate their semen; in hopes of breeding out some of the worst male characteristics.

In addition, we'd levy a tax on males and would redistribute the taxed income to women. If they lost an additional 50% of their income, their ability to coerce women financially into hetero-captivity would be significantly diminished. This would help keep women safe.

Over time, we'd begin limiting the number of men that are allowed to congregate in one place. If they are too dangerous to exist alone, they are far more dangerous in groups. I would think no more than three in one place at any time would be acceptable.

We'd remove anything that glorifies men as something that they obviously aren't. We'd smash any monuments that glorify male accomplishments, ban any media that shows them having attributes that they clearly don't (empathy, sensitivity, the capacity for love, etc). We'd also ban male participation in sports. I was in a bar drinking Monday night and realized, for example, that football is legalized male violence and as such is wholly unacceptable and needs to be banned; not only for glorifying male violence but also for elevating men to a position where they can serve as a role model (men rejoice in violence, not only against women, but also themselves).

I don't know that we'd want men to continue to be literate. It doesn't enlighten them and only serves to help them find new and more creative ways to torment women and destroy the planet.

We'd also ban men from holding public office, participating in medicine (as modern medicine is biocidal to women), and participating in commerce. I'd think that ideally we'd train them in the manual arts and let them spend their days breaking rocks, cleaning the toxins they've polluted the planet with, and unmaking those things (e.g. nuclear power plants) that threaten to harm women's harmony with nature.

FactCheckMe had a rather entertaining solution that would also work, though I'm not certain if it is feasible in the short term. Though letting them resort to their base nature and take care of their own population problem behind concrete walls does seem rather appealing. http://factcheckme.wordpress.com/2013/01/09/what-logistical-problem/