Zobel said:

---

That's the point of the article. We don't know the answer because "benefit" is determined by real competition on meritocracy. We haven't tried that. Instead we've regulated and sued male spaces into oblivion, one by one, and the outcomes suck.

---

I agree with this whole heartedly though.

Everyone here think mental health is an important issue?

Do you think treatment of mental health is an important issue?

Pretty soon the field of mental health treatment providers is going to mirror social work with ~80% being female (psychiatry being the exception).

Zobel said:

---

The recent longhousing from the young republicans leaked texts (mean words = worst thing ever to happen) makes this article timely.

https://www.compactmag.com/article/the-great-feminization/

Great quote:

Quote:

---

Women can sue their bosses for running a workplace that feels like a fraternity house, but men can't sue when their workplace feels like a Montessori kindergarten. Naturally employers err on the side of making the office softer.

---

The summary is that what we think of as "woke" - things like cancel culture etc - is really not a political movement but simply a result of institutions (law schools, medical schools, college instructors, the media, and managers in companies) becoming majority female. Canceling is just a female way of reacting to people you don't like.

This is the result of decades of social engineering, not actual benefit. And our institutions are the worse for it.

---

There are still a few industries that haven't gone soft. The amount of f-bombs and cussing that was dropped in our work meeting on Monday would make your ears bleed. And nobody gave a sh\t. O&G is the wrong industry to be in if language offends your fragile sensibilities.

On the flip side...I've also worked in foodservice distribution and medical device industries. Those have definitely gone soft.

I agree, but the test proposed by the author of the article is if there is a correlation between "gone soft" and "high female participation".

if cursing is the indicator for "gone soft"... I am not the problem. woops.

I have changed my mind recently on this idea of society undergoing a great "feminization".

Instead I posit that this is merely the natural progression of an increasingly selfish society.

A selfish society glorifies:
Hook-up culture, abortion, DINKs, materialism, rugged individualism, short term (YOLO), sexualization (only fans, porn, strip clubs)

A selfish society minimizes:
Family (kids and elderly), community, church, discipline, long term, commitment (marriage), chastity

Calling it a result of feminism is a lazy at best take of pointing blame. Generally also pointing blame at something so big you have no influence over it. But if the ill is really selfishness, I could see how it would be easy for each of us to see how we contribute to that problem. That means we have to accept we have some responsibility. But if that correctly identifies the problem it means we can actually work on a good solution.

The article isn't saying all the ills of society are caused by women. She's saying that some specific things are related to the forced change of male spaces to female spaces.

Not for nothin, but the #1 issue for female voters in the 2024 election was abortion.

So what about the idea of restoring separate class rooms and maybe even work settings so that the traits of both don't get washed out by the other? School especially might immediately benefit.

swimmerbabe11 said:

---

Owlagdad said:

---

Started with teachers being told NOT to let little Johnny answer the question, because Suzy was getting self-conscious and the reason she wasnt any good at math was because Johnny always beat her to the punch. So, we let Johhny waste away, fed him meds and told him to be super sensitive to the needs of all females.

---

If you say this, but ignore at the same time, girls were being fed hormones in the form of birth control, then you are ignoring a large piece of the puzzle.

Boys and girls were both receiving mind altering drugs in the form of adderall and birth control from young ages, making the whole population more in the middle. Why are women in their 30s and 40s all on anxiety medicine now? because they were hormonally manipulated into not having feelings through out their formative years via testosterone. SO now that they are off BC because they are having babies/reaching perimenopause, they are dealing with actually having their own personalities again. This has had sociological implications for both genders IMO.


Women are being made into a scapegoat for a problem that is far more complicated than just "women working = bad". This article has some merit, but it also is wierdly sexist in a way that I don't think it needs to be in order to prove a point.

---

"Women working = bad" is not true.

What is bad is "Men are working, and I believe what men do is fun, so I want to work too". A form of little brother syndrome.

Then what is worse is women find out that working is... well work. Not fun. So then go start movements to make work fun by pushing mandatory team events which no one over 25 enjoys. Or complaining that women are given more work, paid less, promoted less etc etc. Reality is all these problems hit men too. It is just a sliver of men who are in the lucky group and women all want to be like them. Most men's lives are miserable.

Zobel said:

---

The article isn't saying all the ills of society are caused by women. She's saying that some specific things are related to the forced change of male spaces to female spaces.

Not for nothin, but the #1 issue for female voters in the 2024 election was abortion.

---

The author to me is saying that male change to female and feminine effect on that is causing the problems. I argue that "canceling" isnt a feminist behavior but rather a selfish expression used by women. You can say that is a semantics argument. I think it is clear to note that it is not actually feminism. It is a very critical distinction.

The premise is that men and women are different, and socialize and solve problems differently. You agree with that or nah?

swimmerbabe11 said:

---

I agree with a lot of the article, but I think it could have been written in a better way.

I'm also positing that men have become more feminine (and women more masculine) as a result of what has happened in the way kids were raised once birth control and adderall became prevalent in society.

It has become a small pet peeve of mine that we pretend that women were all stay at home moms in any recent past. That's simply not true. "Homemaker" has always been a privilege of the upper middle class and beyond. Women have been nurses, teachers, laundrywomen, factory workers, nannies, cooks, maids, seamstresses, etc in the lower middle class and below forever. What changed was the opportunity to be more than just that. It's hard to think "more opportunity = bad"

---

I agree with the part in bold.

I have a good number of friends who are very feminized. This one guy (a close friend) calls their wives "boss" and says he never disagrees with her. It was probably his way of avoiding conflict with his wife, but now she bosses all over him in public, and in front of company. They both work in good tech jobs but he is afraid to make money decisions without asking the wife. He once gave up on a VP role in a foreign country because his wife did not want to move. Now his wife blames him for them struggling to pay tuition for both their kids in medical school and saving for retirement.

The men who make a big show of having their wives lead them almost always are slackers in the man-department.

As a whole, yes, men have become more fem and women have become more masc (though I believe they hate it).

Any shot that he's given her reasons not to trust him with finances?

I'm gonna say if you are considering a job in a foreign country, both people need to be pretty 100% about the idea..that's not like moving from Houston to DFW.

MouthBQ98 said:

---

It does fit many of the observed conditions as an explanation and it seems to be reflected by basic observations of human sociology. The emergence of a cultural gynocracy mirrors many of the group dynamics of female dominated groups on a smaller scale. The danger is the smothering caretaker.dominating public action. We will be oppressed for our own good and so those who are doing it can feel more satisfied with themselves. Hyper-empathy.

---

Roger Waters wrote a song about this...






Mother, do you think they'll drop the bomb?
Mother, do you think they'll like this song?
Mother, do you think they'll try to break my balls?
Ooh, aah, mother, should I build the wall?

Mother, should I run for president?
Mother, should I trust the government?
Mother, will they put me in the firing line?
Ooh, aah, is it just a waste of time?

Hush now, baby, baby, don't you cry
Mama's gonna make all of your nightmares come true
Mama's gonna put all of her fears into you
Mama's gonna keep you right here under her wing
She won't let you fly but she might let you sing
Mama's gonna keep baby cozy and warm

Ooh, babe, ooh, babe, ooh, babe
Of course mama's gonna help build the wall

Mother, do you think she's good enough for me?
Mother, do you think she's dangerous to me?
Mother, will she tear your little boy apart?
Ooh, aah, mother, will she break my heart?

Hush now, baby, baby, don't you cry
Mama's gonna check out all your girlfriends for you
Mama won't let anyone dirty get through
Mama's gonna wait up 'til you get in
Mama will always find out where you've been
Mamma's gonna keep baby healthy and clean

Ooh, babe, ooh, babe, ooh, babe
You'll always be a baby to me

Mother, did it need to be so high?

swimmerbabe11 said:

---

Any shot that he's given her reasons not to trust him with finances?

I'm gonna say if you are considering a job in a foreign country, both people need to be pretty 100% about the idea..that's not like moving from Houston to DFW.

---

It's not that she does the finances either. This person seems to be one of those types who is afraid of conflict and avoids the drama to maintain the peace. But the issue I find problematic for them is he has lost his manhood and has been so feminized that he has to ask his wife for things that is traditionally his job. I recently bought my wife an Audi Q7 SUV for our milestone anniversary (their milestone anniv passed a few years ago). I met them both at a wedding last week and the wife found out about it (she is my wife's friend also and we gave them a ride home) and she was full of praise for me and said in her words "I am proud of you". Now I could sense that she was taking a shot at her husband in front of us and saying without words that he should be a man. Her husband had tried to buy the same vehicle about 3 years ago but could not afford it and bought a Honda CRV instead. The only difference is he does not take up the responsibility of investing for the family and is afraid of conflict and needs her permission for everything.

My other friend's wife has a finance degree and some finance experience while he is an engineer turned purchase manager. I went out for drinks with the 2 of them last night. His wife does all the finances and they both seem happy with the arrangement. This guy doesn't put up with any bs from his wife and visibly so.

texagbeliever said:

---

I have changed my mind recently on this idea of society undergoing a great "feminization".

Instead I posit that this is merely the natural progression of an increasingly selfish society.

A selfish society glorifies:
Hook-up culture, abortion, DINKs, materialism, rugged individualism, short term (YOLO), sexualization (only fans, porn, strip clubs)

A selfish society minimizes:
Family (kids and elderly), community, church, discipline, long term, commitment (marriage), chastity

Calling it a result of feminism is a lazy at best take of pointing blame. Generally also pointing blame at something so big you have no influence over it. But if the ill is really selfishness, I could see how it would be easy for each of us to see how we contribute to that problem. That means we have to accept we have some responsibility. But if that correctly identifies the problem it means we can actually work on a good solution.

---

The bolded is a virtue that must be encouraged in our society like it once was.

infinity ag said:

---

swimmerbabe11 said:

---

Any shot that he's given her reasons not to trust him with finances?

I'm gonna say if you are considering a job in a foreign country, both people need to be pretty 100% about the idea..that's not like moving from Houston to DFW.

---

It's not that she does the finances either. This person seems to be one of those types who is afraid of conflict and avoids the drama to maintain the peace. But the issue I find problematic for them is he has lost his manhood and has been so feminized that he has to ask his wife for things that is traditionally his job. I recently bought my wife an Audi Q7 SUV for our milestone anniversary (their milestone anniv passed a few years ago). I met them both at a wedding last week and the wife found out about it (she is my wife's friend also and we gave them a ride home) and she was full of praise for me and said in her words "I am proud of you". Now I could sense that she was taking a shot at her husband in front of us and saying without words that he should be a man. Her husband had tried to buy the same vehicle about 3 years ago but could not afford it and bought a Honda CRV instead. The only difference is he does not take up the responsibility of investing for the family and is afraid of conflict and needs her permission for everything.

My other friend's wife has a finance degree and some finance experience while he is an engineer turned purchase manager. I went out for drinks with the 2 of them last night. His wife does all the finances and they both seem happy with the arrangement. This guy doesn't put up with any bs from his wife and visibly so.

---

I was on board with you until this statement..which is a wierd way to talk about your spouse like they need to be housetrained like a puppy.

(my question was because you don't necessarily know what crazy stuff he has pulled in the background in the past.. sports gambling or impulse buys or whatever..there could be a reason why she feels the need to white knuckle around finances)

My Dad literally had this conversation with me and said history is always written by the upper class so that's why that vision of history exists.

Both my grandparents and great grand parents worked.

Zobel said:

---

The premise is that men and women are different, and socialize and solve problems differently. You agree with that or nah?

---

I disagree that that is the premise.

Tom Fox said:

---

texagbeliever said:

---

I have changed my mind recently on this idea of society undergoing a great "feminization".

Instead I posit that this is merely the natural progression of an increasingly selfish society.

A selfish society glorifies:
Hook-up culture, abortion, DINKs, materialism, rugged individualism, short term (YOLO), sexualization (only fans, porn, strip clubs)

A selfish society minimizes:
Family (kids and elderly), community, church, discipline, long term, commitment (marriage), chastity

Calling it a result of feminism is a lazy at best take of pointing blame. Generally also pointing blame at something so big you have no influence over it. But if the ill is really selfishness, I could see how it would be easy for each of us to see how we contribute to that problem. That means we have to accept we have some responsibility. But if that correctly identifies the problem it means we can actually work on a good solution.

---

The bolded is a virtue that must be encouraged in our society like it once was.

---

Self-reliance is a good goal to strive for but not seeing your role in helping others less fortunate is bad and not virtuous.

AGinHI said:

---

Everyone here think mental health is an important issue?

Do you think treatment of mental health is an important issue?

Pretty soon the field of mental health treatment providers is going to mirror social work with ~80% being female (psychiatry being the exception).

---

There's already a joke that seeing a mental health professional is mostly just a corruption of the sacrament of confession. But instead of seeing a priest and discussing the roots of sin and repenting, you pay to have a woman who voted for Joe Biden be your friend for an hour and cheer on the lifestyle that brought you to them in the first place.

texagbeliever said:

---

Zobel said:

---

The premise is that men and women are different, and socialize and solve problems differently. You agree with that or nah?

---

I disagree that that is the premise.

---

Texagbeliever outed as a woman.

well, that's literally the OP's beginning and noncontroversial premise in her own words.

- men and women are different and therefore socialize and solve problems differently
- as institutions become more female they change according to those differences

she adds two more
- the feminization of many of our important institutions (ie the law, academia) is a bad thing
- it is not possible to have demographic feminization of institutions without the substantive feminization

The whole world started to go to hell at the invention of Line Dancing

Ciboag96 said:

---

The whole world started to go to hell at the invention of Line Dancing

---

There are people on this board who probably only exist because dad learned to line dance a generation prior.

texagbeliever said:

---

Tom Fox said:

---

texagbeliever said:

---

I have changed my mind recently on this idea of society undergoing a great "feminization".

Instead I posit that this is merely the natural progression of an increasingly selfish society.

A selfish society glorifies:
Hook-up culture, abortion, DINKs, materialism, rugged individualism, short term (YOLO), sexualization (only fans, porn, strip clubs)

A selfish society minimizes:
Family (kids and elderly), community, church, discipline, long term, commitment (marriage), chastity

Calling it a result of feminism is a lazy at best take of pointing blame. Generally also pointing blame at something so big you have no influence over it. But if the ill is really selfishness, I could see how it would be easy for each of us to see how we contribute to that problem. That means we have to accept we have some responsibility. But if that correctly identifies the problem it means we can actually work on a good solution.

---

The bolded is a virtue that must be encouraged in our society like it once was.

---

Self-reliance is a good goal to strive for but not seeing your role in helping others less fortunate is bad and not virtuous.

---

If we are talking about national defense service or public service, then I could not agree more.

If we are talking about paying for individual family needs, we will have to agree to disagree. Each family should take care of themselves or resort to charity. I am fully prepared to step in and help my friends and extended family. The government should have zero role in that endeavor.

one MEEN Ag said:

---

texagbeliever said:

---

Zobel said:

---

The premise is that men and women are different, and socialize and solve problems differently. You agree with that or nah?

---

I disagree that that is the premise.

---

Texagbeliever outed as a woman.

---

It is obvious that we are different outside of extreme outliers.

Tom Fox said:

---

texagbeliever said:

---

Tom Fox said:

---

texagbeliever said:

---

I have changed my mind recently on this idea of society undergoing a great "feminization".

Instead I posit that this is merely the natural progression of an increasingly selfish society.

A selfish society glorifies:
Hook-up culture, abortion, DINKs, materialism, rugged individualism, short term (YOLO), sexualization (only fans, porn, strip clubs)

A selfish society minimizes:
Family (kids and elderly), community, church, discipline, long term, commitment (marriage), chastity

Calling it a result of feminism is a lazy at best take of pointing blame. Generally also pointing blame at something so big you have no influence over it. But if the ill is really selfishness, I could see how it would be easy for each of us to see how we contribute to that problem. That means we have to accept we have some responsibility. But if that correctly identifies the problem it means we can actually work on a good solution.

---

The bolded is a virtue that must be encouraged in our society like it once was.

---

Self-reliance is a good goal to strive for but not seeing your role in helping others less fortunate is bad and not virtuous.

---

If we are talking about national defense service or public service, then I could not agree more.

If we are talking about paying for individual family needs, we will have to agree to disagree. Each family should take care of themselves or resort to charity. I am fully prepared to step in and help my friends and extended family. The government should have zero role in that endeavor.

---

This relies on the belief that an individual can just work hard and be self-reliant. While true in most cases it fails in many.

It is interesting when you consider the words history. Made famous by Herbert Hoover on the eve of the great depression. A time in which large monopolies effectively created indentured servants. A seamstress working 12 hours a day wasnt ever going to pull herself out of her poverty experience.

So for many, working hard actually was not a solution for personal success or progress. Which is obvious, opportunity and fortune play a big role in both of those as well.

Yes it is good for someone to work hard and to desire to be productive but rugged individualism goes too far and is a lie. Being dependent on someone in old age is not a bad thing. It is a stage of life. Being dependent on a spouse or kid is not a bad thing. Humans are relational and as such a philosophy that is a-relational goes against the basic human DNA.

Zobel said:

---

well, that's literally the OP's beginning and noncontroversial premise in her own words.

- men and women are different and therefore socialize and solve problems differently
- as institutions become more female they change according to those differences

she adds two more
- the feminization of many of our important institutions (ie the law, academia) is a bad thing
- it is not possible to have demographic feminization of institutions without the substantive feminization

---

Yeah that is not feminization. That is selfishness from a female apparatus. Which looks different then male selfishness. Both of which create bad but often different problems.

The problem is selfishness. I bet most ambulance chasing lawyers are men. I bet that many of the sleeziest but successful lawyers are also men. That gets a pass because it has been happening for a long time. All the author is counting are the problems coming from women in the workforce change. Which is fine. But it leads to a wrong diagnosis.

You're not even tangentially addressing any of the substance here. Do you disagree with any of the claims?

Are there differences between men and women?
Do those differences include how they socialize and solve problems?

Zobel said:

---

You're not even tangentially addressing any of the substance here. Do you disagree with any of the claims?

Are there differences between men and women?
Do those differences include how they socialize and solve problems?

---

Yes and yes. Those questions arent this great gotcha you think they are. I didn't answer because of how stupidly obvious it was. If you ask if humans need oxygen to live, the answer to that is yes as well.

AJ02 said:

---

Zobel said:

---

The recent longhousing from the young republicans leaked texts (mean words = worst thing ever to happen) makes this article timely.

https://www.compactmag.com/article/the-great-feminization/

Great quote:

Quote:

---

Women can sue their bosses for running a workplace that feels like a fraternity house, but men can't sue when their workplace feels like a Montessori kindergarten. Naturally employers err on the side of making the office softer.

---

The summary is that what we think of as "woke" - things like cancel culture etc - is really not a political movement but simply a result of institutions (law schools, medical schools, college instructors, the media, and managers in companies) becoming majority female. Canceling is just a female way of reacting to people you don't like.

This is the result of decades of social engineering, not actual benefit. And our institutions are the worse for it.

---

O&G is the wrong industry to be in if language offends your fragile sensibilities.

---

Yeah, I can pretty much confirm this. I've worked in O&G as a I&C tech for the last ten years. Our saying is you better not come to work with feelings because you'll be destroyed by the day's end.

They're not gotchas, they're building blocks. I'm glad you've crawled down from your galaxy brain perspective to talk us slacked jawed idiots for a sec.

Do you agree with the next premise, that as formerly masculine institutions change and become more feminized, they change according to those differences?

texagbeliever said:

---

Tom Fox said:

---

texagbeliever said:

---

Tom Fox said:

---

texagbeliever said:

---

I have changed my mind recently on this idea of society undergoing a great "feminization".

Instead I posit that this is merely the natural progression of an increasingly selfish society.

A selfish society glorifies:
Hook-up culture, abortion, DINKs, materialism, rugged individualism, short term (YOLO), sexualization (only fans, porn, strip clubs)

A selfish society minimizes:
Family (kids and elderly), community, church, discipline, long term, commitment (marriage), chastity

Calling it a result of feminism is a lazy at best take of pointing blame. Generally also pointing blame at something so big you have no influence over it. But if the ill is really selfishness, I could see how it would be easy for each of us to see how we contribute to that problem. That means we have to accept we have some responsibility. But if that correctly identifies the problem it means we can actually work on a good solution.

---

The bolded is a virtue that must be encouraged in our society like it once was.

---

Self-reliance is a good goal to strive for but not seeing your role in helping others less fortunate is bad and not virtuous.

---

If we are talking about national defense service or public service, then I could not agree more.

If we are talking about paying for individual family needs, we will have to agree to disagree. Each family should take care of themselves or resort to charity. I am fully prepared to step in and help my friends and extended family. The government should have zero role in that endeavor.

---

This relies on the belief that an individual can just work hard and be self-reliant. While true in most cases it fails in many.

It is interesting when you consider the words history. Made famous by Herbert Hoover on the eve of the great depression. A time in which large monopolies effectively created indentured servants. A seamstress working 12 hours a day wasnt ever going to pull herself out of her poverty experience.

So for many, working hard actually was not a solution for personal success or progress. Which is obvious, opportunity and fortune play a big role in both of those as well.

Yes it is good for someone to work hard and to desire to be productive but rugged individualism goes too far and is a lie. Being dependent on someone in old age is not a bad thing. It is a stage of life. Being dependent on a spouse or kid is not a bad thing. Humans are relational and as such a philosophy that is a-relational goes against the basic human DNA.

---

I agree with this. You just should not be dependent on the government and therefore other people's tax money. It it is your family's responsibility or voluntary giving from private citizens. Entitlements must end.

Zobel said:

---

They're not gotchas, they're building blocks. I'm glad you've crawled down from your galaxy brain perspective to talk us slacked jawed idiots for a sec.

Do you agree with the next premise, that as formerly masculine institutions change and become more feminized, they change according to those differences?

---

Have fun. Im not going to play by your rules of debate and answer your gotcha yes/no questions. That isnt a pursuit of intellectual discovery but controlling to win an argument.