Unintended Consequence of the Feminisation of Institutions and Companies

[DrMorbius]

Is there an unintended consequence of the feminisation of institutions and companies?
Recently I have been reading/watching more and more about the relatively recently occurred, imbalance of women in companies and institutions (when in positions of power). This increase and the subsequent culture shift it brings, being what is driving the "woke" culture explosion.
Where there is a high proportion of women in high positions (and HR), for example; NHS, academia, parts of the public sector, media, we can see a shift in the culture and the way all of these institutions operate. There has been a definite change towards "wokeness", you only have to see the mess at the NHS or universities.
If this is the case, what is the solution?

Did you actually think this to yourself and then actually decide to type it out?

If you define "woke" as meaning that women now occupy a tiny minority of leadership positions and influence institutions to want fairer and more equal opportunities for everyone, then yes, workplaces now have a more "woke" culture.

I can understand why, for someone as misogynistic as you, that would be a problem.

I was eating a sandwich. But I probably should have used examples.
It was promted after reading about the Royal College of Nursing building flying a pro trans flag. FYI by woke I mean pro trans (anti woman).

Right, so you think more women in leadership is leading to greater acceptance of trans-people and that's anti-woman so you've come to here to save women from feminisation as obviously the rest of us don't know what's good for us and need you to teach our silly little selves to stop attacking ourselves. And somehow, you think you're not the anti-woman person in this story.

It does seem that a very big percentage of the 'tiny' amount of women in positions of power and influence are the one's who are well behind the #BeKind and lets erase women's rights while were at it movement.

I’m loathe to but I agree with pro trans gaining traction in more woke sectors but I’d argue whether that is due to feminisation.

The nursing example is an example perhaps where more women are definitively in leadership and it is a pretty stark example where there might be some truth to what you are saying.

The university sector however, where I work, is a misapplication of your theory, the common denominator is not women it is blind liberalism. The men are all over the woke stuff where I work and the women are not.

Have you been asleep for the last 5 years?

For what it's worth, following the employment tribunals has shown me that trans activism in our institutions flourishes happily both on a subsoil of "feminine" Be Kind and on one of old-fashioned laissez-faire "masculine" sexism. Neither sticks up for women's needs and rights in the face of unreasonable demands.

I don't think this can be dismissed as easily as the first reply suggests.

To steel-man the argument:

1. One of the main objections to men dominating leadership positions is that, intentionally or not, those institutions then defer to and prioritise male interests and values.
2. Female leadership rose significantly in many sectors in recent decades. That's generally good. So (unless we no longer believe 1), we should expect to see institutions bend less to male values and more to female ones.
3. So what are distinctively female values? "Woke" is loaded, but polls show women significantly more accepting of trans-rights arguments, more left-leaning, more likely to believe that some speech should be suppressed on grounds of harm, etc.
4. Anecdotally it does seem that sectors that are more female-dominated (cultural, health, education) are amongst the most TRA.
5. And when you look at key individuals, there do seem to be a large number of women making the key decisions.

No, I'm one of those "woke" women working in management in the public sector and not hating transpeople. We even have gender-neutral bathroom options now in the office.

If there were more women (and people who aren’t white and male) in higher up positions in academia we might not be in the mess we’re in because there’d be a lot more (or even some) diversity and arguably better decision-making from university executive boards. Women are not the problem here or elsewhere.

This.

Funnily enough, it’s always the hapless bekind women who are beclowning themselves in the media while being cross examined in these tribunals, only very rarely the sexist men involved.

I think the OP is advancing the theory that is described in this magazine article:

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

"Female group dynamics favor consensus and cooperation. Men order each other around, but women can only suggest and persuade. Any criticism or negative sentiment, if it absolutely must be expressed, needs to be buried in layers of compliments. The outcome of a discussion is less important than the fact that a discussion was held and everyone participated in it. The most important sex difference in group dynamics is attitude to conflict. In short, men wage conflict openly while women covertly undermine or ostracize their enemies. "

I'm aware that when women enter a profession in any numbers what happens is the status and wages of said profession go down.

I'm also aware that any men in said profession are more likely to be managers. Remember a stat heard radio years ago 80% of social workers are women but 80% of social woker mangers are men - no idea if true now but see similar in teaching.

I think woke stuff been imported from US - and had US money often backing it.

As Heggettypeg eloquently puts in it woke activists use modern be kind guff often target at women and girls and old fashion sexism to flourish.

Maybe reflect on that @ImImmortalNowBabyDoll

I don't think the two are in any way connected.

Here is another quote from that article. It's US-based, obviously, but I wonder if anyone sees parallels in the treatment of GC women in the UK?

"The field that frightens me most is the law. All of us depend on a functioning legal system, and, to be blunt, the rule of law will not survive the legal profession becoming majority female. 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.
A feminized legal system might resemble the Title IX courts for sexual assault on college campuses established in 2011 under President Obama. These proceedings were governed by written rules and so technically could be said to operate under the rule of law. But they lacked many of the safeguards that our legal system holds sacred, such as the right to confront your accuser, the right to know what crime you are accused of, and the fundamental concept that guilt should depend on objective circumstances knowable by both parties, not in how one party feels about an act in retrospect. These protections were abolished because the people who made these rules sympathized with the accusers, who were mostly women, and not with the accused, who were mostly men.
These two approaches to the law clashed vividly in the Brett Kavanaugh confirmation hearings. The masculine position was that, if Christine Blasey Ford can’t provide any concrete evidence that she and Kavanaugh were ever in the same room together, her accusations of rape cannot be allowed to ruin his life. The feminine position was that her self-evident emotional response was itself a kind of credibility that the Senate committee must respect.
"

Sure, or I could just continue to enjoy working in a happy workplace where women, trans people, and minorities all have good progression opportunities and are treated with respect by their colleagues and leave you all to continue your moral panic and protection of women, by suggesting that we're not fit for leadership because we might be nice to trans people. That will really show the patriarchy!

The US education system(s) doens't priotise critical thinking and their poltical arena does like to run on emotions - so Joe Public doens't realise both parties screw them.

But I do agree the use of emotions to try and stifle rational arguments and facts has been tried in the UK. I do think that was a game plan in the west exported from US shores.

However I don't think it's to do with femization of workplaces - I think that blaming group who likely suffered most by the polices and with least power to speak out/most easily silenced rather than group who benefited most.

Feel free to be “nice” to them, just don’t discriminate against women who want single sex spaces in line with the law 🤷‍♀️

Then you won’t be made to look like a complete fool when your “private” work WhatsApp chats are read out in a court and published in the media while your sexist male colleagues get off scot free 🤷‍♀️

I actually think women like rigid rules and fairness , which has come out in the weaponisation of woke.i think purity spirals are an example. Although I think men come on here to try and start them off.

What’s also hilarious is that if this male poster popped on a dress you’d be falling over yourself to agree with whatever dull brainfart about his “womanhood” he came out with.

Why would I do that? I don't agree with many observations people make about womanhood. I don't ask to see their genitalia before I decide if I think their opinion is stupid or not.

Nor do I, hence disagreeing with you.