<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
I\u2019ve been in the habit of citing one of my 2019 essays, \u201cThe Great Feminization<\/a>\u201d or \u201cThe Day the Logic Died<\/a>,\u201d as an introduction to the idea of cultural feminization. Since those pieces were written, though, I\u2019ve posted other essays on this topic, expanding this \u201cidea space\u201d a bit more with each one. So it might be useful now, to those coming to this for the first time, to have an updated short summary of the whole picture as I see it.<\/p>\n In a Nutshell<\/strong><\/p>\n Women, because of their different ways of thinking and behaving on average, and their new, strong influence over culture and politics, are the principal drivers of modern social change, including all aspects of wokeness.<\/p>\n From Home to Office<\/strong><\/p>\n American women\u2014whose sociocultural circumstances are very similar to those of other Western women\u2014obtained full equality in voting rights by constitutional amendment more than a century ago. That had significant cultural and political consequences, but it was only a small part of the story of women\u2019s modern empowerment. The big change occurred in the period 1950-2000, when women shifted, en masse<\/em> and on a durable, peacetime basis, from being dedicated homemakers to participating more or less equally alongside men in the working world and public life. The labor force participation rate charts below (the first for American men, the second for women) clearly show this shift.<\/p>\n As I wrote in \u201cThe Great Feminization<\/a>\u201d:<\/p>\n The historic significance of this migration on its own appears to have been underappreciated. Women never made such a move, to such a degree, in any large human society in the past. It significantly altered the structure of ordinary life.<\/p>\n But women in the late 20th century didn\u2019t just move into the workforce. They moved into its upper ranks, to professions that strongly influence societal culture and policy. They became journalists, public relations specialists, lawyers, academics, novelists, publishers, filmmakers, TV producers, and politicians, all to an unprecedented extent. In some of these culture-making professions, by the 1990s and early 2000s, they had achieved parity or even dominance (e.g., writers, authors, and public relations specialists) with respect to men. Even where they fell short of full parity, they appeared to acquire considerable \u201cveto\u201d power over content. A 2017 report by the Women\u2019s Media Center noted evidence that at the vast majority of media companies, at least one woman is among the top three editors.<\/p>\n Women Think Differently About Cultural and Political Matters<\/strong><\/p>\n Women\u2019s ascension to power in culture- and policy-making professions has been followed by extensive cultural and political changes. Why? Because women, on average, think differently than men do about cultural and political issues. This should not be surprising: The bodies and minds of women and men were shaped long ago by biological and cultural evolution for their distinct traditional roles in life. Women\u2019s distinct roles obviously have required certain psychological traits or tendencies that are different from male traits. I think most of us would agree that these innately feminine traits include:<\/p>\n Probably most of these traits are interrelated. In any case, when one considers these broad aspects of \u201cinnate femininity,\u201d it isn\u2019t hard to see that the very sudden extension of their dominance\u2014from women\u2019s traditional domestic domain to all areas of public life\u2014would help account for the dramatic social changes of the past half-century or so.<\/p>\n It also isn\u2019t hard to see that women tend to support these social changes more than men do\u2014although it’s important to understand that by altering the culture, women have influenced not only their own but also men\u2019s<\/em> thinking and behavior.<\/p>\n Social changes likely to have been driven by the ascendancy of female traits<\/strong><\/p>\n Obviously, not every woman out there likes or is driving these changes. The differences between men\u2019s and women\u2019s mindsets are differences on average<\/em>.<\/p>\n Moreover, the mindset underlying these shifts\u2014a mindset that, in some of these cases, seems sensitive to the point of neuroticism\u2014might not even be that of the average<\/em> woman. I suspect it more closely represents the attitudes of the single, childless activists who have been most energetic in pushing these social changes. For them, perhaps, society and its \u201cdisadvantaged,\u201d from African-Americans to Rio Grande-crossing illegal immigrants, are substitutes for the children they don\u2019t have.<\/p>\n Cultural Feminization is Problematic<\/strong><\/p>\n One sufficient and conservative reason for doubting that cultural feminization is a good thing is simply that it entails the abrupt replacement of a large set of civilizational traits that were embedded in Western people, culturally and probably biologically, over thousands of years. Not every Western trait is essential to the West\u2019s survival or is even still adaptive in the modern world. But discarding these traits at the whim of female activists seems a bit like deleting genes willy-nilly from the human genome. Could you do that without bad consequences? Yes, conceivably—but it’s far more likely to end in disaster.<\/p>\n Another good reason to oppose or limit cultural feminization is that, while men traditionally led societies and thus would have been expected to evolve attitudes and behaviors appropriate for that role, women traditionally were confined to other, more private roles, centering on maternity. In other words, why should we suppose that being a mother, or being shaped by evolution for motherhood, is a better preparation for public life than . . . serving in public life, as men have done for ages?<\/p>\n There are further reasons that have to do with specific effects of feminization. For example, feminization appears to have brought a new cultural and political emphasis on short-term, feelgood consequences, with less emphasis on\u2014I would say a blindness to\u2014long-term consequences. It should be obvious that this is unsustainable and must end badly.<\/p>\n Moreover, females’ lesser affinity, even hostility, for due process of law, free debate, unfettered scientific inquiry, and related aspects of Western, small-l liberalism, seems likely to render the West relatively static, sclerotic, and poor if allowed to run to its logical conclusion.<\/p>\n Then, of course, there is the apparent female (relative to male) embrace of mass immigration to the West from the Third World, which I think has the potential to dissolve Western societies faster than any other factor.<\/p>\n I think it\u2019s worth mentioning too, though it’s more speculative, that the apparent decades-long slide in testosterone levels in men might be an effect of cultural feminization. Testosterone levels in men (and women) are known to be regulated by social cues, such as winning or losing competitions, and so it would make sense<\/a> that cultural messaging condemning and suppressing traditional masculinity would have a T-lowering effect. Lower T means lower fertility, which below a certain threshold\u2014one that Legacy Americans sank beneath long ago\u2014leads ultimately to the extinction of the population.<\/p>\n Lastly, there is the sense of taboo<\/em> that enshrouds the idea of cultural feminization, in general but especially when it is framed negatively. The high-profile MSM types (Cowen<\/a>, Edsall<\/a>) who have touched the subject (only in the last year or so, as far as I know) have been approving or very mild in their concerns. Also, for more than a decade now, most of the short essays I\u2019ve tried to get published on this subject, including in some pretty right wing publications, have been rejected. In every case, a female editor had veto power, and I think her male colleagues also feared the hostile ululations that would ensue if they published my unvarnished take. Anyhow, an old quote (often attributed to Voltaire) seems apt here: \u201cIf you want to know who rules over you, look at whom you\u2019re not allowed to criticize.\u201d<\/p>\n Further reading<\/strong><\/p>\n “The Great Feminization<\/a>” (2019)<\/p>\n “The Day the Logic Died<\/a>” (2019)<\/p>\n “Cultural Feminization: a Bibliography<\/a>” (2021)<\/p>\n The Great Feminization: Women as Drivers of Modern Social Change<\/em><\/a> (2022)<\/p>\n * * *<\/p>\n Author\u2019s note:<\/em><\/p>\n I\u2019d appreciate it, reader, if you would link to my essays on cultural feminization (or otherwise cite them) wherever you see this topic being discussed. I\u2019ve been writing about \u201ccult-fem\u201d for more than a decade\u2014which, as far as I know, is much longer than anyone else. Some of my essays have circulated widely<\/a><\/em> in recent years, and I\u2019ve even placed one<\/a><\/em> in a moderately well-read webzine. I like to think that my contributions have helped seed what is becoming an important public discourse. Yet those contributions of mine are almost never acknowledged by the better-known opinionators who have ventured into this realm in the last year or so. Being pseudonymous and writing principally from a personal website seem to have left me in the unhappy state of being \u201cmuch read but seldom cited.\u201d (I discuss the general problem of citation in the Internet age in my short essay \u201cThe Tree of Knowledge<\/a><\/em>.\u201d)<\/em><\/p>\n Also, though I don\u2019t charge a subscription to this website, or put ads on it, or even solicit donations, you could buy a copy of my e-book (see image below, linked to its Amazon page) if you\u2019d like to support my writing.<\/em><\/p>\n <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" A quick summary for those coming to this for the first time.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":664,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":[],"categories":[5,9,14,15,20,11,2],"tags":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/thoughtsofstone.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/641"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/thoughtsofstone.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/thoughtsofstone.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/thoughtsofstone.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/thoughtsofstone.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=641"}],"version-history":[{"count":5,"href":"https:\/\/thoughtsofstone.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/641\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":706,"href":"https:\/\/thoughtsofstone.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/641\/revisions\/706"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/thoughtsofstone.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/664"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/thoughtsofstone.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=641"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/thoughtsofstone.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=641"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/thoughtsofstone.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=641"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}![\"\"](\"http:\/\/thoughtsofstone.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/08\/fredgraph-men.jpg\")
![\"\"](\"http:\/\/thoughtsofstone.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/08\/fredgraph-women.jpg\")
<\/p>\n\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
![\"\"](\"http:\/\/thoughtsofstone.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/06\/bethesdaawokening-1.jpg\")
<\/p>\n\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
![\"\"](\"http:\/\/thoughtsofstone.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/08\/boy1.jpg\")
<\/p>\n\n
\n
\n
\n
![\"\"](\"http:\/\/thoughtsofstone.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/08\/refugee.jpg\")
<\/p>\n\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
![\"\"](\"http:\/\/thoughtsofstone.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/07\/coulter-twitr.jpg\")
<\/p>\n![\"\"](\"http:\/\/thoughtsofstone.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/03\/merkel-1.jpg\")
<\/p>\n