Announcement: The blog just reached 10,000,000 page views since I started it in January 2009. So, leave me a comment on Facebook, Twitter or below this post, if you want me to keep going! I’m thinking about scaling back the blog and the podcast and the YouTube channel, since I am ready for early retirement! Maybe I will just scale back the blogging to days when I really am bursting to speak out.

The article I want to comment on is written by Helen Andrews. It might be the best thing you read all year, it’s certainly the best thing I’ve read this year. Better than anything you will hear from popular Christian authors and podcasters, who tend to shy away from policy and controversy. This article is about what is really going on in big woke corporations, outside of the happy Christian bubble.

Here is her article in Compact Magazine.

And here is the excerpt:

Everything you think of as wokeness involves prioritizing the feminine over the masculine: empathy over rationality, safety over risk, cohesion over competition. Other writers who have proposed their own versions of the Great Feminization thesis, such as Noah Carl or Bo Winegard and Cory Clark, who looked at feminization’s effects on academia, offer survey data showing sex differences in political values. One survey, for example, found that 71 percent of men said protecting free speech was more important than preserving a cohesive society, and 59 percent of women said the opposite.

This part was my favorite:

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.

She doesn’t mention domestic violence laws and family courts, perhaps strategically, but these both are nothing like traditional legal processes. Many intelligent men are avoiding relationships out of caution about false accusations and divorce. It’s called the “marriage strike”, and it is just the rational response to the feminization of the police force and family courts. Especially for men of means who have more to lose.

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.

If the legal profession becomes majority female, I expect to see the ethos of Title IX tribunals and the Kavanaugh hearings spread. Judges will bend the rules for favored groups and enforce them rigorously on disfavored groups, as already occurs to a worrying extent. It was possible to believe back in 1970 that introducing women into the legal profession in large numbers would have only a minor effect. That belief is no longer sustainable. The changes will be massive.

Her article is based on a speech that she gave at NatCon5: a national conference of conservative thought.

Please read her article, and watch the video if you like. Send it to all your friends. Post it on social media. Share the video with all of your friends. I found the article cathartic. It really moved me. I did cry for a bit because I have experienced what she is talking about, in corporate America. It really was not easy to get through.

It’s great to see Helen Andrews take up this issue of institutional feminization, which I think is the core danger of our time. Except for a very small minority, nobody seems to have the balls to say that we need to roll back things like single mother welfare, no-fault divorce, student loans for worthless degrees, anti-discrimination laws for businesses, me-too false accusations at work, etc. Most social conservative Christians, for example, claim to be pro-life and pro-marriage, but they are terrified about confronting women about their role in causing those problems. Similarly, they don’t want to confront women about their support for leftist policies.

Well, Helen Andrews has said something about one of the problems, and we all need to follow her lead. And the best part is, she doesn’t think that blaming and shaming men is the answer. She thinks the answer is changing laws and policies. That’s rare.

You can find more of her articles here.

My time in woke corporations

I wanted to add a few more words about my experience working in woke Big Tech corporations while fighting for my green card and early retirement.

The company that eventually sponsored me for my green card was a Platinum partner of the Human Rights Campaign. So, they are a far far far left woke company. They would push me hard to do many secular left actions that I disagreed with. When you are not a permanent resident, you can’t go to Human Resources, or sue the company. You have to lay low and avoid threats and find another way to speak your mind. This is something that many Christian leaders who were born in the USA don’t understand about aliases.

Here’s a few things I encountered in the 16 years before I got my permanent residency (green card):

• was asked to wear a rainbow ribbon to support gay rights by my female manager
• was called into my female manager’s office after a Muslim complained about my disagreement with Islam
• had my blog leaked to Human Resources by a Muslim who found out about it somehow, and was called in to explain it
• gay male co-workers would try to get me to disagree with LGBT in front of people so them could send me to HR
• had to use vacation days to avoid woke training, and then was asked why I did that
• was badgered incessantly to donate to the United Way, a woke non-profit
• was called into a meeting with a Director because I spoke to a CHRISTIAN woman about apologetics at work (she was offended because I made her feel bad about her fideism)
• was passed over for IT promotions for female candidates who did not even have STEM degrees, or in one case ANY degree or IT work experience
• hauled into Human Resources after a Hindu communist complained because I asked him why he didn’t stay in India if he was so opposed to free market capitalism
• was called onto the carpet by my female manager for making the no-degree and no-experience lady feel bad when she declined to reply to my e-mails about requirements for an entire week
• was denied a letter of reference from the Human Resources lady at a previous employer that I needed for my application for Permanent Residency, (she knew I was a conservative and Christian because I slammed their woke policies in my exit interview)

And I could go on and on, but this is the kind of thing that I had to put up with, mainly from cry-baby feminists and LGBT activists, in corporate America.

Not just in woke corporations

I don’t expect Christian leaders who have given me flack for my alias to understand this, since none are legal immigrants by employer sponsor and few have worked in a woke Fortune 100 IT shop. But even outside of woke IT corporations, I have seen many “conservative” Christians throw out the Bible and side with crying women against men who were in the right Biblically and morally. I have seen “pro-child” “Mama Bear” Christians urge women to initiate divorce over money, and lie about their husbands in family court in order to get custody of kids, even though the divorce was completely unBiblical and immoral.

Many very “manly” looking Christian leaders fold up like origami for women, too. Many years ago, a very famous masculine-looking Christian apologist told my 30-year-old girlfriend that she should feel free to go to Europe to do TWO NON-STEM DEGREES, and that I would be here waiting for her to marry her when she returned. She returned to America at age 34. She didn’t work when she was in Europe, just lived off of donations and debt. And she never used those extra degrees for work. No one had the boldness to confront her about her crazy choices, not even that male “masculine” apologist. And in fact two other male apologists were so desperate to be liked by her, that they also told her that going to Europe at age 30 was a great idea. Do you ever wonder why so many aging Christian women are struggling to get married? Many of them wasted their 20s chasing worldly happiness, to the applause of weak Christian men who merely appeared masculine.

A famous woman apologist once told me that I should not reject women who had tens of thousands of dollars of debt as a wife candidate, because “if Jesus forgives her sins, then who are you to judge her? You need to lower your standards”. We just don’t have Christian leaders who are tough enough to confront women about the lies they believe, and their poor decision-making.

Last point from me. I’ve mentored several women who went through a wild phase as non-Christians. I teach them apologetics and economics, and build up their resume and finances. Once they get their lives on track, the most frequent phrase I hear from them is “everyone was lying to me when I was young”. People tell young women what they want to hear, and it causes them problems in the long run. It is a mistake to think that men exist as ATM servants who will just dispense cash and fixes when women have gotten themselves into these problems. We need to do better at telling women the truth early, even if it hurts their feelings.

Read and share Helen’s article

So, yes. It’s just so encouraging to see an article that finally takes a step into saying “maybe it’s not a good idea to have these laws that force businesses to place women into positions of authority”. Read the article. Share the article. And just consider; should we confront the threat to civilization posed by the feminization of our institutions? Or should we cower in fear of displeasing women, and just keep telling them what they want to hear, so that they will like us?