Unintended Consequence of the Feminisation of Institutions and Companies

Emotional response in the place of rational argument is a feature of the trans side, not the GC side - it's always about souls and feelings and being kind and comfort and preference, whereas we, being reasonable and conspicuously law abiding women, are satisfied for the law to protect our human rights and nothing less, while granting transpeople their human rights, and nothing more.

Emotional appeals rather than logical arguments and facts.

The don't question attitude of no debate.

The getting offended on other people's behalf - or creating problems ( that's what peaked DH in his workplace).

The wanting to be seen as a victim/oppressed.

That all says American culture to me not feminisation.

From them bankrupting France and blaming Marie Antoinette for it - from Trump getting in because democartes put in weak candiates who happened to be women - for low birth rates not the high cost of having kids - finding ways to blame women for wider cultural or economic issues also seems very american.

While plenty of women who should know better have gone along with this and bullied their female colleagues when they should have had their backs, I think it’s men who have driven it – particularly powerful men with lots of money. Women generally just don’t have the wealth and influence needed to embed something like this at all levels of society – it’s why it’s taken someone like JKR to fight back against it. And when it comes to workplaces, the theory falls down when you look at the likes of the BBC and the civil service – both v male dominated and both in total thrall to trans activists.

Yes I am sure we have all seen that, but that isn't what we are talking about, we are talking about population behaviours.

There is a good deal of research that suggests that female power hierarchies tend to work somewhat differently than male ones. Tendencies to certain hrou

In any case, whether men or women are doing it, that really does not tell us whether the nature of modern workplaces is prone to that kind of behaviour, which was my comment.

I’m afraid this is incoherent to me. Anyway, time to sleep now. Have a good night.

Well you're the lemming, you tell me.

What’s a cliff edge of coherence?

Nahhh, more of a bemusement at the cliff edge of coherence for a purported women's rights forum, really.

Big fan of Helen Andrews, eh?

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

Do you have one single original thought in your head?

So it’s more a moral objection? As in, it shouldn’t be said or entertained in this forum, whether true or not?

(Obviously you can’t believe that women-dominated institutions couldn’t in principle have negative effects. Unless you have some unicorn theory of women under which there can never be any ill effects of something if it came from women. Which would be silly).

I personally think the 'bit that's wrong' (as you put it) is that the OP considers women in leadership positions problematic and posters on this Mumsnet Feminism and Women's Rights board are clapping along to them.

But insults aside, which bits do you think are wrong and why?

That institutions with male dominated leadership may tend
to prioritise male values and priorities?

That institutions with more women in leadership would do at least some things differently? (Kind of follow from the above)

That women when polled tend to be more pro-trans rights, more left-wing, more likely to support speech suppression on harm grounds than men?

That female-leader-heavy sectors have tended to be amongst the most pro trans rights?

That a large number of the most prominent decision makers who institutionalised gender ideology have been women?

I think you must be reading a different thread to me.

Though I do find the different expressions of power allowed to men and women within patriarchy very interesting.

The key Feminist insight, as ever, is not "Woman good, Man bad!" it is "Do women behave like this because they want to, or because society doesn't accept behaviour/styles of interaction from women that it does accept from men?"

Fascinating to see how far Feminism and Women's Rights on Mumsnet has come, that the OP can post such misogynistic tripe and find fertile ground for it.

Trans people ARE PART OF the patriachy.

Trans identities cannot exist unless you accept a background context where certain mental characteristics are seen as belonging to one sex or the other. You literally cannot believe trans identities are real unless you believe this, because without this framework there are no trans identities. Trans identities are the pressure valve that allows patriachy to accomodate the reality that humans are not the sexist chariactures we are supposed to be while leaving the overall sexist framework in place.

Oh, and FYI, the phrase "moral panic" is one of those phrases that tries to imply a specific argument without doing the heavy lifting of actually making it. Better to make the point you want to make directly - what "moral panic" do you think you see?

My own & my daughter's experience with women in positions of power is they are just as cut throat than men in terms of work place abuses & even more so because they have to 'prove' they are to ascend the ladder so the idea they are 'kinder' in terms of 'woke' implementation would need to be evidenced in research. 'Feels' just doesn't cut it I'm afraid.

Corporations & large institutions notoriously embraced 'woke culture' because they thought it helped their bottom line & branding by appealing to the younger generation's patronage not for 'kindness'.

I think you will find with what ever trends/moral values are in the cultural sphere will be reflected in large organisations for reasons of $. So don't worry yourself, 'masculinisation' still reigns supreme.

Absolutely. It's just not as simple as more women = more 'woke'.

It would be interesting to know why some women (and indeed men) do stand up, while others unthinkingly follow 'be kind', and why others are true believers. You find all thee of these in each sex.

It is women, some of whom are in very feminised workplaces (e.g. nursing), who are initiating most of the tribunals.

I think that a key aspect is a lack of diversity of thought and demonising those who have different ideas.

When you have people in a workplace with a specific set of values - especially something as rigid and self-righteous as TRSOH and that version of EDI where it's great that everyone looks different, but they should all think the same - when new people are hired, they pick the ones who agree with that stance. Over time, diversity of thought reduces, and those who disagree are cowed by this environment. The employment tribunals demonstrate what speaking up means. We have all seen the bullying that stepping out of line results in, documented by tribunal tweets.

You might not be that far from OP's position, except you think this is a good thing while OP thinks it's bad.

You've said you think having more women in leadership positions is part of a cultural shift towards fairness and inclusion (albeit you think a small one). And is it fair to say that you see supporting trans rights as being part and parcel of fairness and inclusion? And are you an outlier in your views amongst senior women?

I think we’ve elevated victimhood to a form of social capital and theres a reflected glory in being in the “victims” corner. Weirdly keeps happening with rapists. Unless they are a middle aged white man ofcourse.

I’m not sure, I think theres an element of it yes, I hate that but I think women are more likely to work from a position of trying to foster co-operation and make space for different types of people. The problem is they see it as being kind but actually it’s often just lying. I think a lot of women try to make themselves “smaller” and when they get to go on a crusade it makes them feel like it’s ok to be “big”. Some of the nastiest and most stupid takes I’ve heard on the rape of Israeli women have come from other women tbh. It’s disappointing.

Something went wrong, I’m not sure it’s ever really been fashionable to be an old fashioned feminist who’s solely concerned by the wellbeing of women above and beyond anything else. See the people being so understanding about child rape in Afghanistan. I see a lot of women trying to avoid sounding racist whilst throwing children under the bus. The truth suffers. The trans thing is not so different, some have identified transwomen as a minority and therefore they must be suffering from oppression, the idea that abuse could be coming from them is automatically dismissed. Look at whats said about gc women, it must be bigotry rather than just a very string grip on reality.

Trust me when I say that I've seen men be passive-aggressive, bully, and use subtextual behaviour too, against me. Never underestimate the ability of a man to outright ignore a question that he doesn't want to answer. The workplace is a hellscape for autistic people.

So I have wondered if this way of trying to gain dominance is particularly effective in this day and age, and I think it is.
Outright aggression isn't the most relevant in most institutions today. Even bullying is frowned upon .

But passive aggressive mean girl tactics can be devastatingly effective in a modern workplace. It does sometimes seem like they are almost designed to enable that behavior.

Thank you for adding those admirable women's names

Other shit-hot female lawyers upholding the rule of law include: Anya Palmer, Harriet Wistrich, Akua Reindorf, and Allison Bailey.

It's been mainly women taking legal action to defend sex-based rights on both sides of the Atlantic.