>>13766058Males are larger than females in about 45% of mammal species, and it isn't related to resource abundance or energy requirements on the male, but rather sexual selection via male-on-male competition and polygamous mating strategies.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6363729/People tend to not realize how many mammals do not have male-biased size dimorphism. Only about half of mammals have male biased dimorphsm, and it's usually do to polygamous mating strategies.
However all of this is moot for our species in the modern world, where the energy abundance of industrial farming mixed with the advantage small body size grants in modern forms of combat and labor makes female biased dimorphism better.
Also in terms of making a stable society, if we're going for male-biased dimorphism we're effectively saying we want to move away from monogamy. Such a society can't last.
