Your piece, I remember, struck a never with me; so much so that I bookmarked it because it matches so much of what I had been thinking about for a long while. I remember thinking that maybe when women are put in charge in large numbers and when men desert those positions, that it was the women’s role to destroy what they had been put in charge of. Mind you, over the years I have met a few women who were leaders and who spoke like grownups with actual grownup female voices. But have you noticed that fourth wave feminist women sound like 8th graders girls? (Vocal fry, ending sentences as though they are questions?)
I am a woman--so I'm inclined to believe that women are capable of great things. It's just that "women" (on average) have certain character traits (and instincts) that don't lend themselves well to leadership roles. There are clearly exceptions to this generalization, and there are clearly also men who make terrible leaders. It's just that, statistically, the more women you get running things, the worse things get. More emotional reasoning. More toxic empathy. Etc. I don't think the solution is to eliminate women from leadership roles. I think the solution is to stick to strict meritocracy. Some women will still rise to the top because they're awesome. But promoting them on the basis of "equity" has been a disaster.
I wrote about that exact phenomenon and called it "gynocratic technoauthoritarianism":
https://pairodocs.substack.com/p/where-have-all-the-real-men-gone-c3b
Your piece, I remember, struck a never with me; so much so that I bookmarked it because it matches so much of what I had been thinking about for a long while. I remember thinking that maybe when women are put in charge in large numbers and when men desert those positions, that it was the women’s role to destroy what they had been put in charge of. Mind you, over the years I have met a few women who were leaders and who spoke like grownups with actual grownup female voices. But have you noticed that fourth wave feminist women sound like 8th graders girls? (Vocal fry, ending sentences as though they are questions?)
I am a woman--so I'm inclined to believe that women are capable of great things. It's just that "women" (on average) have certain character traits (and instincts) that don't lend themselves well to leadership roles. There are clearly exceptions to this generalization, and there are clearly also men who make terrible leaders. It's just that, statistically, the more women you get running things, the worse things get. More emotional reasoning. More toxic empathy. Etc. I don't think the solution is to eliminate women from leadership roles. I think the solution is to stick to strict meritocracy. Some women will still rise to the top because they're awesome. But promoting them on the basis of "equity" has been a disaster.