The Great Feminization

The Nags have wrung all the fun out of work relations between men and women. This afternoon TK and I were reminiscing about the old days on the LAPD, when we first knew each other in the early '70s. I was a morning-watch record clerk for Central Division when it was housed on the ground floor of Parker Center. TK was a traffic cop working late PMs who booked at Central Jail. One of his first remarks was about my nickname among the cops, "Legs", in reference to my three-inch heels and short skirts that accentuated my unusually long legs. (I'm 5'7" and way over half my height are my legs!) I was flattered and had great fun with it. The guys used to stand around the Xerox machine waiting for me to bend over to get the copies out of the sorter. They were always disappointed with my lady-like stoop with bended knees! We gals bantered back-and-forth with the guys, and we all had a good time. After a few stories TK and I said at the same time, "That could never happen today." Feminism has destroyed the natural dynamic between men and women. The author of this article points to the artificial "standards" that had to be devised to boost women into higher positions for which they were not suited. The results of pushing women forward at an unnatural pace is a looming threat to our whole society. Now that women have "parity", so to speak, I believe it's past time for the "special points" for just having breasts and nothing dangling between our legs be set aside. Specific professions like medicine, law, engineering, science, teaching, big business need to be based on objective standards that members of either sex must meet. Much like Secretary of War Hegseth has implemented in our military. A majority-female led country, buy its business and government, would only bring disaster for all.

This may be the scariest thing that I have ever read. I think she's onto the facts of what is wrecking EVERYTHING.

A MAN would not be allowed to say this out loud.

This essay is a profound reflection.

This is a terrific read, and a brilliant thesis. It is also rooted in undeniable---by intelligent, sincere readers only---fact and experiences. FTA: 'Psychology, once a predominantly male field, is now overwhelmingly female, with 75 percent of psychology doctorates going to women. Institutions seem to have a tipping point, after which they become more and more feminized.' Like a ship with a gaping hole in its hull, they will continue to descend. Women have become 'The Unfairer Sex'.

I used to teach my children to understand, respect, and appreciate the differences between men and women by metaphorically using two chess pieces. I avoided using the queen, since she is “too” powerful. Nor did I use the king, who is “too” valuable. His imminent and unavoidable loss will cost you the game. Instead, I used pieces that still had very different strengths and weaknesses, but were equal in value: The knight and the bishop (chess value = 3 points apiece). I used the knight as the metaphorical female and the bishop as her male counterpart. Each has strengths and weaknesses that the other doesn’t, yet they are equal in value. And they serve their king best, not by competing with each other but by cooperating. Their relationship is complementary. In fact, they MUST work together to checkmate the opposing king, when they are the only pieces their own king still has available to do so. I wish more people could understand and respect the differences between men and women, without having to rank them as superior or inferior to each other.

Outstanding analysis. This article and the one yesterday about young men avoiding women with nose rings are the two best articles I have read this year.

"The rule of law is not just about writing rules down. It means following them even when they yield an outcome that tugs at your heartstrings or runs contrary to your gut sense of which party is more sympathetic." And through feminization, we have KJB, Sotomayor, and Kagan who demand the right to set aside the written law in favor of preferred outcomes. Yet, such outcomes are no law at all because no one can know whether what they do is illegal until it gets into a court. Further, there is no permanency of such decisions since what is decided today may be changed tomorrow. In fact, there may be multiple rulings on similar issues that turn on the whim of the judge on the day the decision was issued. It is retrospective chaos. It could also swamp the court system. Now, most cases that come to court are clear cut. There was an abuse and people are held accountable. Smart people avoid taking actions that they know they will get them in trouble and once convicted by a clear ruling, they know they cannot win an appeal. Under feminized justice, people would not be deterred from bad actions because it would depend on the judge's opinion who might be sympathetic. Appeals could look for sympathetic judges. All this opens the court to FAR more cases and FAR more appeals. The rest of the article makes GREAT points and provides a clear path to one solution, focusing on meritocracy. This is already been discussed in other areas of hiring distortions, like the number of Blacks, or other minorities. Shouldn't hiring decisions be based on merit in achieving business goals AND shouldn't business goals be linked to the profitability of the company. There is, after all, a fiduciary responsibility to the stockholders to create profitability. There are many ways to do that but arbitrarily hiring more women or minorities is NOT one of them. As long as business goals are applied equally to all employees, it shouldn't matter who is fulfilling those goals. After fulfilling that top goal, if you want a secondary goal of a more diverse workforce, that's great.

This is much broader than issues with women. The problem is that people no longer use logic, and they have rejected absolute truths, especially when truth means they will be held accountable or when it contradicts one of their "pet" projects. The end result is that more and more people (women AND MEN) are being led around by their emotions. Therefore, you can't fault women as the only ones who push feminization. They may have started it, but many men today live by their emotions, too. At heart, this is a spiritual issue.

Outstanding article. Consider the evidence we see in some quarters where so many mayor and city/county council positions are being filled by women. Most of these women are strongly pro-feminist. They make decisions more on an emotional basis than an objective performance basis. In my city, our feminist female mayor appoints women to significant positions within the city, while the mayor herself makes few strong steps toward say, a stronger police force and mostly shows up to be seen at public appearances to smile and make speeches, while her appointees run the city. Look at Los Angeles Mayor Bass, who appointed a lesbian woman to run the Los Angeles fire department. The fire chief focused more on DEI compliance than readiness to fight fires and to keep the fire engines and fireplug water systems in good repair. We all have seen the curious Trump-support statistics in which many more African American men voted for Trump than did African American women. And women vote in greater numbers than men, at the same time more women support the dems than they do the Republicans. Yes, there are many contrary outliers, but the statistics reflect the pro-feminization societal trends, and they are not positive for our society. Does anyone think Nancy Pelosi would be able to go unpunished for her insider-trading fortune if she were a disagreeable male rather than a disagreeable female?