“Feminism means men will have less power.”

Gotta love the ladies at Slate. It’s hard for them to face facts.

Yesterday, the Heritage Foundation held a panel in honor of Women’s History Month called “Evaluating Feminism, Its Failures, and Its Future.” At the front of the room, a slate of female conservative journalists and activists evaluated feminism, and concluded that it has not been so good for women. Not good at all. “Millions of women have taken feminist advice,” conservative columnist Mona Charen lamented. “And it’s led to unparalleled misery.”

But feminism had also made men miserable, the panelists were quick to note. Men are now less likely to graduate from high school than women (though both boys and girls are graduating at significantly higher rates than they were just five years ago).

Women outnumber men on college campuses, Network for Enlightened Women president Karin Agness noted (though women have to reach a higher education level to match men’s earnings once they enter the workforce—female high school grads make about as much as male dropouts, for example). Male wages are falling, Charen said (but not so far that men are actually making less than women).

“Women and girls are not failing to thrive,” Charen concluded. “We have a problem with men and boys. Men’s participation rates in the workforce are declining alarmingly.” They’re even “seeing declining percentages of supervisory and administrative posts.”

It’s easy to pick out a few data points that point to female supremacy at the expense of male power. At this woman-themed Heritage Foundation panel, for example, men constituted an underrepresented demographic—young male interns were confined to the audience while successful women held court at the front of the room.

During the Q-and-A period, one Heritage intern asked the panelists how to deal with the fact that debates about women’s issues on his campus were dominated by female students. “How can we talk to women without being discounted right off the bat?” he asked. Whenever he tries, he’s told, “You’re not a woman, so obviously, your opinion doesn’t matter.” Agness advised him to “forward columns from female conservative columnists” to doubting women to nudge them toward the right.

What the women on the panel are describing as a decline in male power is, in many cases, true, but it’s not all feminism’s fault—we can shift some of the blame to drops in union membership and the decline of American manufacturing. But in some instances, taking power away from men is a part of the feminist agenda.

Men will necessarily see “declining percentages” of supervisory roles at work as women climb the ladder. If we ever do reach gender parity in powerful roles in the workplace, 50-50 will represent a serious compromise of men’s representation at the upper rungs. You may have also noted that male representation in Congress has been falling slowly yet steadily since 1917, or that the power of men to rape their wives has declined markedly since the 1970s.

These are positive developments for society, whether or not they compel women to report being “happier” than previous generations did. After all, men didn’t report to be very happy before feminism interfered. As The Federalistsenior editor Mollie Hemingway noted, “Women used to report far higher happiness levels than men, but we’re on the same level now.” Hemingway calls that “a problem,” but I see it as something else: equality.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized and tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink.

5 Responses to “Feminism means men will have less power.”

  1. Amfortas says:

    As a human being, a father, a psychologist (as well as being a King and Tavern-Keeper and Hermit) I applaud the increased participation of women in all walks of life. But as with men’s participations, the quality of the person and the warmth or coldness of their hearts are of higher importance and effect.

    It is warming – slightly – to the heart and intellect to see some deep searching going on amongst the ‘Ladies who Conference’ and some recognition that great damage has been done to both women and men by feminism.

    But bald statistics belie the real situation. We live in a continuum of past, present and future. The Feminist aims to avenge themselves on men for the fantasies of past ‘oppression’ take no account of the effect that their cold-hearted mendacities are having on the future. The present difficulties of men in college and the workplace are real enough and serious but the attitudes of men in the future are already being written. Where feminists had no real complaint about oppression, men certainly will have.

  2. Ulf T says:

    If we ever do reach gender parity in powerful roles in the workplace, 50-50 will represent a serious compromise of men’s representation at the upper rungs.

    This is is strange. How do we achieve gender parity specifically in ‘powerful roles’, but not elsewhere? If this is achieved by stacking the deck, essentially compensating for the apparent fact that much fewer women are even interested in going for these positions*, or attrite at higher rates**, then we don’t have gender parity at the levels where the majority of men and women are found***.

    * See e.g. A Comparison of the Career Attainments of Men and Women Healthcare Executives December, 2006: Among those who aspired to becoming CEO, the ratio of women to men was 0.57 (40% vs 70%); within a given sampling interval, the ratio of women to men who became CEO was 0.63 (12% vs 19%). That is, fewer than half of the women wanted the top position, but for those who did, it was likely easier to get there.

    ** Are There Glass Ceilings for Female Executives? (Gayle et al 2009)

    Given executive rank and background, women are paid more than men, experience less income uncertainty, and are promoted as quickly. Amongst survivors, being female increases the chance of becoming CEO. Hence the gender pay gap and job rank differences are primarily attributable to female executives attriting at higher rates than males in an occupation where survival is rewarded with promotion and higher compensation.

    ** My educated guess is that these men and women (especially the men) don’t care that much about what gender the CEO of their company has, as long as they are competent.

  3. My educated guess would be that feminism is all about the displacement of men. And the obsequious male counterparts are part of it.

    I’ve known several competent and capable women thoughout my life. In education, 90% of the teachers are women. In real state, 90% of the Realtors are women. My mother made so much money selling real estate that she bought to comany. There was a time in the late 80s when my father’s entire salary couldn’t pay the taxes on what his wife earned, and he was president of a computer company. So he semi-retired and became a consultant.

    I took a course in business once that said that women earn less than men. I asked my mother about it, and she said, “Women who earn less than men are stupid.” But when my father was sick and dying of cancer, she was right there by his side, taking care of him.

    That’s the difference between a strong woman and a feminist. It’s just like with Margaret Thatcher; she was the most powerful woman in Britain, but she stopped by the store and bought bacon for her husband every day after work. She wouldn’t allow an assistant to do that; she knew what kind of bacon her husband liked and she brought it home to him every day.

    See, this is the difference. Strong women respect men. They love men. Feminists intend to subjugate men and have no love for them. It’s not about equality between the sexes, and it never has been and never will be. It’s about subjugation and ostracization.

    Feminists are weak women. They pretend to superiority because obsequious men allow them to. Strong women just go about their jobs, and they certainly can earn as much if not more than any man.

    One of my father’s coworkers once aske him, “How does it feel to know that your wife makes more than you?” He responded, “How does it feel to know that my wife makes more than you?” My father didn’t care; he knew that it was all community property and community funds. He didn’t concern himself; he simply let his wife did what she did, which was make money.

    When he was dying, I resigned from teaching to help my mother take care of him and run the company. It’s a lot of work, and I cook dinner for her every night. Responsibilities of the first born son, and all that. I don’t really enjoy it, but I accept my responsibilities without question.

    Ask my mother what the title is of the book she’s reading. She reads a book every day. Ask her the author’s name. She doesn’t know. Ask her the square footage on some house we have listed, and she will give you all the details on that property that you need to know. You can even ask her about a house she sold thirty years ago, and she will give you all the details. It’s incredible, really. She can remember every detail about every house she’s ever listed or sold, going back 40 years, but she can’t remember the title of the book she read this morning? It’s insane. I can’t even remember the address of the house I went to yesterday, but I can tell you the title of the book I’m reading and the author–A Tear and a Smile, by Kahlil Gibran.

    The point is that she’s a strong woman, and she really knows her business. She loved my father, she took care of my father, I tried to help her as best I could, but she can’t remember the title of the last book she read, yesterday or today.

    And she hates feminists. She’s a strong, successful woman who doesn’t accept blame. She’s more conservative than you can know. It’s taken me a few years to get her around to my way of thinking. I’m an old Libertarian, so it took a while. But now she hates every politician, Republican and Democrat. She won’t vote for a Libertarian, but she won’t vote for a Republican or Democrat either, so I don’t know what she’s going to do.

    This is a pridicament that I cannot fathom.

    • David says:

      I agree with you wholly. I only need to add that feminism is also about their own power. These feminist are making a lot of money from taxpayers and private donations. As a police officer I had a rule, judge by actions, not words. If these feminist truly cared about women’s rights, they wouldn’t be in front of congress or the tv camera bitching about women’s rights in the U.S. They’d be in front of the U.N, the Saudi, and Iranian embassies, where there’s real women’s suffrage.

  4. Wayne says:

    NO. Feminism means men have no agency, but all of the responsibility and blame, while women have no accountability for whatever they hell they want to do.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s