This is basically a death sentence for science, when you can't research things because it becomes taboo. We went through this with religion trying to force it's way into science, now it's neoprogressives. Honestly it's depressing as hell. Glad I'm not in US.
For this reason, academic research that has political ramifications is usually unreliable and untrustworthy due to the lack of commitment towards scientific objectivity.
Yes it is toxic behaviour and its also anti- intellectual, anti- scientific and just plain old rubbish. Strangely these same women have totally embraced the nonsense that trans women are women. How submissive of them.😂😂
Many ambitious men in the 1800's (e.g., Sigmund Freud) were happy to demolish the careers of their competitors by any means available. I suppose the difference is that the most dangerous totalitarians are those who truly believe they are doing something good and right.
Yes, and it's also something that I would wager most women and most left-winger would support. Basically, society was built by right-wing men. And now it's being destroyed by left-wing women.
"Offensive scientific findings." What a bizarre phrase. If you're offended by scientific findings you're certainly no scientist, and you're irrational.
This presumes that people automatically act based off of assumptions made FROM the results of research. How ridiculous. Sam Harris (Back when he used to think) brought this up. If research came out which proved that Native Americans display a higher aptitude in Medicine than Europeans, we need to know that. We can funnel state resources to provide grants which go to the people who will use them the best, as well as create safety nets for negative outcomes which might be detected. Choosing to blind our civilization to reality because some people are afraid of what others COULD POSSIBLY do with that information is an indicator of collapse. Feminism was never harmless or just "advocating for equality". The whole patriarchy conspiracy comes to the logical conclusion that power, information, resources and support need to be taken away from men poking around in the lab. Because anything the patriarchy does will be perceived as for oppression, enslavement and sadistic ends. And guess what?! That's perfectly rational. Unfortunately men are not on a team, and many discoveries, breakthroughs and insights will remain in the dark for as long as anti academic values rule academia.
We are all irrational, and we are all some now and then offended by scientific findings, @VelkePivo. Experimental Scientists do not get a free pass from human condition, sadly, same way Philosophers and Historians never manages to get theirs. But I do share your perplexity. I think the point is not that is absurd to "feel offended by" but to act as if this feeling could or even should have the last word about what is or isn't a "scientific finding". Whenever you feel offended by a scientific finding you reexamine it. And if it holds up under the light of your best objective reasoning, you swallow your feelings. Because you know the world doesn't had any obligation to bend to your expectations, what you want to be not always is. It doesn't mean you don't feel offended by scientific findings, it only means you are not arrogant enough to put your feelings above scientific findings that offend you. No one has to know how offended you felt.
The entry of women into any previously all-male space will destroy what made it good in the first place. Whether that's universities, sports clubs, or pubs. Women need women-only spaces AND SO DO MEN.
Can we just imagine, Charles Darwin theory of evolution would have been deleted from history, Christopher Columbus would have never discovered the Americas. Much of what we take for granted today would never have happened if researchers, scientists had not gone and explored contraversial subjects and findings. We would be without vaccines.
There was an open letter in the 1890’s by male Oxford students protesting the inclusion of women in academia. They said that once a critical mass of women is reached, real debate becomes unworkable as not only do the women become easily offended by being disagreed with, but also other people become afraid of stating their opinion out of fear being ostracised or being rude and upsetting someone. Pretty damn prophetic 😂
I would be surprised if the general population is not much higher. Ask someone a question for clarification and be immediately attacked as opposed to their idea.
I was a psych prof and I left academia for two reasons: 1) I wasn't able to do the research I wanted and 2) the women in the department were extreme feminists that wanted to purge the department and the university of "toxic masculinity." It was simply unbearable.
Yes, what alot of people don't really discuss, when talking about the rise of females in academia, is that many men will find the experience of university as quite hostile.
@@stevenverrall4527 It seems the problem is you can't criticize the feminine values. Males are more aggressive but in no job are you allowed to let your aggression get out of check (possible exception for small number of top executives world famous stars)
I teach at a university in English as an adjunct, and this video essay does not even come close to the radicalization of female academics that has happened over the last 40 odd years. The studies cited do not accurately reflect the behaviour of today's female academics whose self reporting is self serving. The universities are now plagued by these authoritarian elitists whose so-called "empathy" and desire for "social justice" is just a hypocritical ploy for the accumulation of even more unearned power and wealth by deluded narcissists. Read what they actually publish; read what their departmental statements and policies are. The rise of women in universities has been a rise in authoritarian women, not women generally. They are hell bent on placing themselves at the apex of a totalitarian society of social engineers, and they use feminism/intersectionalism as their weaponized power ideology. This process is so far gone that the universities are a lost cause. We have to develop an entirely new educational system that never allows such power-mad authoritarians to take it over.
You hit the nail on the head, and well written to. I just watched a video by Pr. Edward Dutton. On exactly this craving for power which the ideology caters to. Why We Must Fight the White Supremacy of the ... Left. Sorry YT probably does not allow me personally to say the W word. (My account is targeted I am barely able to speak despite what I say is no more upsetting or rude then what you just said.)
The universities are not a lost cause if you are willing to fight for them. And I am not trying to be scandalous when I say the National Socialists proved that, and so did a few other nationalist/fascist governments in the past.
I have to agree with this statement. Women are not all more concerned with social justice than facts and logical reasoning. I know many excellent women professors and engineers that are amazing and of great benefit to technology and getting critical projects done. The problem we have is with women in positions of authority misusing their position is similar to men misusing their position of authority. Some people just want to be in charge and boss people around. These people do not focus their learning and influence on what is best for society and their organization. Instead they focus on obtaining power and injecting some chaos so they can weaken the fundamental strengths and goodness of the organization and then build power and push an alternate agenda. These people feal a rush of power and strength in manipulation and subversion of the organization. Most people both men and women who want to contribute and make the world a better place are not seeking positions of authority. These people are focused on being involved in the actual production of value. Often the least desirable most self centered people with counterproductive goals rise to the highest levels of authority while the best leaders focus on making the process better and trying to make the system work despite the extremely poor leadership from above.
5:00 is straightup dishonest. Responding men didn't oppose reporting. They opposed ANONYMOUS reporting, where someone can end your career without owning the complaint. The right to face one's accuser is FUNDAMENTAL to due process. And with all the fake claims recently revealed, anonymous reporting simply cannot continue.
It's so funny how they lie about caring about "inclusion" but still INSIST that women get special access to college, even though they are the majority of students for over 2 decades.
Well its simply making up for all the time they were excluded from Uni or looked down at and disparaged by their male professors. I can assure you that both male and female educators are perfectly capable of acting like dimwits , I've worked with both and they have different styles and priorities, and both sexes can be irrational and prejudiced .
"It was always the women, and above all the young ones, who were the most bigoted adherents of the Party, the swallowers of slogans, the amateur spies and nosers-out of unorthodoxy." Orwell 1984
I remember attending an interview for a role I was perfectly qualified for at Loughborough University some years ago. The panel of no less than 6 women was hostile from the outset, and I quickly realised that my chances of being successful as a male candidate were zero. Knowing this, I decided to go on the offensive, too. For example, I asked each of the interview panel members to identify themselves and their roles since they hadn't, which is a question of protocol. The panel leader responded that she didn't see the reason or relevance of my question. I responded it was important for me to evaluate the credentials of those assessing me as a suitable candidate. They were obviously reluctant to answer, but it turned out 3 of the panel had nothing to do with the faculty, nor were in a similar role, which immediately raised another question of why they were there in the first place. By this stage, I ended it abruptly stating I don't see how this interview is going to be fair and impartial. Suffice as to say, I didn't get the job, but later learned out of the 6 interviewees, I was the only token male candidate.
Puts me to mind of a skit on 'Kids in The Hall' in the early '90s, in which a defendant on trial objects to the verdict on the basis that the jury is made up entirely of his ex-girlfriends. Seriously though, I know what you mean: at one point I took the step of generating a gender blind version of my CV so that I could at least get my foot in the door for an interview.
It starts in elementary school. The elementary school environment is designed to be toxic and punishes normal male behavior by boys while rewarding docile traits by girls.
It helps to remember that the "e" in HR is silent and invisible... it takes an Empath to see and hear it. Since its presence can only be measured indirectly, science refers to it as "dark privilege".
A story: my female full-professor-of-psychology-at-UCSD friend was horrified that her son is dropping out of college to become a firefighter. I am so happy for him.
Its bad though. It means that even more Knowledge jobs go to women. That means they start to control social norms (which they most already do), they will control journalism (the mostly already do), and possibly control government, while men are left doing "real" mens work. Its a net negative.
Those institutions are doomed. Just like Disney, there's no "too big to fail." But they will cause problems in the meantime while they're in the process of failing.
I did my PHD im physics. My believe is: There should be only one goal in science: facts and only facts. It scares me to see what is made ON PURPOSE with science and that women tend to suppress facts, if they do not meet their moral goals. Best wishes from Germany
@@lancebarnes3970You don’t have to worry about hard science because women will never have any interest in the field no matter how many women only scholarships you throw at them. The proliferation of women on campus has been confined primarily to worthless humanity degrees, nursing/nurse practitioner degrees, and “STEM” disciplines like hospital administration. Engineering, mathematics, physics, chemistry, etc. are still dominated by men because success in those fields is determined by objective criteria and not their “feels”.
There is a 2,400 year old comedy play called Assemblywomen by Aristophenes. It tells a story of women gaining the right to vote. Taking advantage of the laziness of the men, they proceed to ban men from voting, vote in both economic and then sexual communism, and spend their time in the senate complaining about how difficult the job is and the temperature of the room. The beginning of the play has the women dressing in old men's clothing with fake beards. They then go to the Assembly and the main character uses a bunch of inspirational rhetoric and strong but empty assertions that women do many things better than men (ie fight less) in order to gain the right to vote in the first place. Apparently, the fact that no one noticed this was a women with a fake beard is Aristophenes' commentary on how their were no strong male political figures in his time, and that the Assembly was already filled out with effeminate men so there was virtually no difference between a politician and a woman in a fake beard.
This is brilliant! I love how as humans we don't really change all that much throughout the millennia. @fortunefair - Which translation would you recommend?
77% of women in journalism. 80% in teaching. 80% in psychology. The results: the most distrusted news, the most inconclusive studies, and the highest medicated cohort ever recorded. Ladies, coping isn't winning lmao
Thats like falsely stating: "93% of CEOs are men. 85% of hedge fund managers. 90% of software developers. The results: the biggest financial crises, the most unethical business practices, and the most vulnerable IT infrastructure we've ever had." Both statements falsely imply that correlation equals causation, oversimplifying complex issues by attributing problems to gender rather than considering broader systemic factors.
4:20 So 44% of men and 64% of women think academic institutions should protect their students from harmful ideas?.... Ffs, the fact that kind of belief in a professor at the highest level of education isnt immediate grounds for dismissal kind of says it all....
@p3827 seriously?🤦♂️ its 44% to 56% in men, 44% of men prioritize fee fees over truth, 56% prioritize truth over fee fees And its 64% to 36% in women, 64% of women prioritize fee fees over truth, 36% prioritize truth over fee fees.
Yup. Every Latin slogan universities have for the pursuit of truth should be replaced with “Your feelings don’t care about facts, and neither does this university.”
I know . I can remember feminist lectures from the 1970s as well . When women are in charge the likelihood of war is less . Trouble is if men remain in charge of some cultures and some countries then the likelihood of war may be even greater because they perceive (rightly) that women are soft and weak and , when it comes to opposing military violence , rather inept . So with women more in charge the whole world is , paradoxically , less safe.
... or maybe 80 years too late. We crossed the philosophical Rubicon on the role and scope of the federal government during WW II. We haven't dialed it back, since.
And made by a wmn who, of course, only gives the mildest of truths. Wife to Hubby: "I forgot to fill up gas in the car, so you might want to sort that out before your trip" Car: smashed up on every side, all windows broken, fluids leaking, smoke coming out of the engine and the heat from a fire us melting the asphalt
8:20 Never mind the sex differences, why do so many academics think it’s appropriate for someone to be punished for doing research? What happened to ‘follow the science’?
Supplanted by ideology, beginning in the 1960s. People like Thomas Sowell and Harvey Mansfield have lived it. Financial interests direct research in most other cases. Sabine Hossenfelder talks about this.
Part of the differences comes from respondents of dissimilar faculties. “Moral judgement” for example is rarely if never relevant in metallurgy or maths.
My mother stated this in the 1980's... she said that little boys are being forced to learn like little girls... and that boys do not learn through intangible concepts as well as girls do, they learn through interacting with things, little girls interact with people.
Yes, I totally agree with your mother! She saw it then and it is so much more forced on the children now. I've seen it handicap boys so much. In most of the state schools in the UK, boys are cruelly mistreated, blamed and demoralised. Sometimes this is deliberately achieved by the evil political activists who have become teachers in our schools but also because the school classroom structure of learning tends to favours the girls. The extreme feminists dominate many schools and indoctrinate our children with ideas such as femininity is always good and masculinity is always bad. No wonder the boys grow up to be under confident and apologetic young men, often with mental health issues and poor qualifications, whilst girls are being encouraged to look down on the boys and hate "maleness", whilst also being over-confident and harbouring a belief in the superiority of females. This is terrible for the children themselves and also for the future of our society. Working class white males are the lowest achievers in UK schools and yet all the extra help, investment and scholarships etc still goes to ethnic minorities (even though UK Indian Asians are the HIGHEST achievers in terms of academic qualifications) and on females (who now dominate UK university courses in most subjects). As I said, I'm female. I love my female friends and my thirty year old daughter who is a lawyer. But I also love my engineer husband who can repair my old car using scrap metal and loves building things and can repair burst pipes and blocked drains! I also love my son-in -law who is a graphic designer,. Each to their own. We need both male and female traits in society. I think we must all be ready to fight for this, the right for boys to be accepted as boys and to feel happy for who they are.
Your mother was ahead of her times. She could identify the problem early on. The schooling system is about feminizing men. Men are supposed to exist at the edge, take high risk and advance civilization, whereas women should be the one to nurture and contribute towards balance. Feminizing men is dangerous for society as these lads do not learn how to regulate emotions, nor perceive threat nor know how to deal with adversity at life. The determinate mode of education is detrimental to men.
It's more complicated. It's still boys that excel at maths, which are fully abstract. The difference is in the method of teaching. Indeed, the school today (excluding competition, effort, and requiring repetitive routines) is tailored for girls, not boys.
Companies and universities abandon reason to appease emotion, and label this cowardice as "inclusivity". The fields and businesses least grounded in reason are often the loudest in showcasing their virtue.
If I were an idiologue who's ideology was that we must never wear gloves and I succeeded at forcing this upon society, either some fields such as high voltage electrical work, microbiology, sandblasting would become very dangerous or would cease to exist. When you put your ideology that's not based upon logic before logic in fields that must be fundamentally logical, either those fields decline or they cease to exist.
Fascinating statistics. So essentially the culture war is largely a gender war? Having recently worked in a large government department which steadily became more feminized over the years, I noticed a steady move towards risk aversion and corresponding inability to get things done.
This gender war has been going on for 50 years. It has been working on a number of fronts, the feminization of all strategic work places, schools, universities, government, medical, sciences, MSM, HR. The second front is the destruction of the family unit through the demonization of men, pornography, and the normalization of non heterosexuality and the demonization of heterosexual relationships. I think they are doing pretty good so far.
No point at this stage. Men should advance their studies outside these organizations and build new institutions… where the pursuit of truth reigns. Probably need a societal collapse for that but it looks like it’s well underway.
I did and I got ‘not renewed’. Also funding in academia is very competitive and subjective. If you even dare criticising ‘the message’ you are ostracised. Ended up having to change fields after 15 years of working on my passion.
One problem though. No matter how masculine and abusive a woman acts, it's in the nature of men to be protective of any woman. So even when you stand up against that behaviour, it's likely you'll find your own acting against you too.
I recall leading an IT team meeting and the consultant expert appeared to present on the topic but clearly failed to prep, deciding to waste the meeting time on feel good team building exercises. I stopped her mid presentation, pointing out that this was not her role now what was asked of her. The meeting ended with a request fornthe IT firm to regroup. Her leader met with me afterwards. She did not disagree with me about the fact the her subordinate was unprepared, but to chastize me about my tone and for putting the consultsnt on the spot mid meeting which made her look bad and hurt everyone's feelings. SMH I was like lady, this is a business...get your team's collective excrement together...
The reason universities should pursue truth instead of Societal well being is that societal well being is subjective. The fact that so many women were not able to see that and chose societal progress is itself troubling and does not bode well for the future of academia. I think we shall soon see the demise of academia anyway.
The universities do NOT prioritise societal wellbeing, on the contrary, they fail & gets worse in every single measure. The universities only promotes the social wellbeing of wmn, by reducing it fir men, as a zero sum game. They do the same thing in all the other dimensions, and thus create an American Caste System. This appeals to wmn because it reflects the way they see other people, ie not as people but as Castes.
We're witnessing before our very eyes the dismantling of our trust in science. Now people who once doubted scientists would have a more credible ground to stand on if science is to be corrupted by those who practice it because they have a vested interest in pursuing "Societal justice" (An utterly meaningless term) over objective truth.
In the past societal well being and truth were the same. That’s why science, called natural philosophy, was studied along side philosophy and theology. But modern philosophy destroyed truth and religious taught subjectivity.
@@OrwellsHousecatBy your own logic, original poster is correct. Aiming for some centralized control over societal wellbeing should not be the goal because no group of people is capable of getting such a thing right. Aim for the truth and everything gets better. Aim for making society better and it will almost always get worse. The founding fathers tried to make it so we could all live with as much individual freedom, restrained by property rights, as possible because they saw the truth of tyranny. These well-meaning women think some level of tyranny is ok because it’s for “the greater good”.
Well, there may be discoveries. Expect even more suppression and non-reporting of results, if they don't fit the desired social narrative, or hurt feelings.
There is already less technological innovation, as measured by patents. It began as long ago as 1870. The most demanding of the sciences, physics, has made little progress since the 1960s. The reasons for this are complex, but feminization probably has played only a small part. Feminization, however, has killed the social sciences, where little credibity remains.
And it is already happening. Science funding is being increasingly directed towards projects with "societal impact" and which deal with "trendy topics", instead of being purely based on the substantive quality and innovation of the ideas. We will pay the price...
And MORE Cozy Government Jobs where you can "Look like you are working on something important" - Basically the Government is the new "Husband" who has no time to check upon you, but puts down the money and goes out to work again !!
Nah, I think some of the universities will peel away STEM and stand on their own. We shouldn't be paying people to get useless degrees. If people want a humanities education they should pay for it themselves.
Having just completed my fifth gender studies unit, in which all my lecturers and tutors have been female, and having engaged with several feminist academics directly, I have seen first-hand the willingness to put ideologically-driven/approved views ahead of truth and rigour - to the extent of failing to correct clear factual errors in teachings when they were pointed out. It is disturbing.
@@Abernis Haha yeah surely he's pulling our leg.. I suppose we need an insider to see how deep the rabbit-hole goes? Or is Tom just doing it for the chicks? (That I can also understand).
Nearly every school I go, there's free scholarships exclusively for women and every work place in Academia has special initiatives to increase the number of women, even if they are already more than 50%.
Nursing is over 90% female, yet there are countless scholarships and assistance programs for female nursing students and zero for males. It isn't about equality or equity. It is about dominance and "winning" what they believe is some sort of "gender war."
My daughter was the strongest math student in her high school and represented the school at math contests around the state. She got over twenty full-ride scholarship offers. Her fiancé was the strongest math student at his high school (just fifteen miles away) and also represented his school in math contests. He got ZERO scholarship offers and had to take out student loans to finish college. Obviously, there are many, many scholarships available for women in STEM these days, far more than are available to men.
Scholarships based on gender should only be allowed for fields that are very skewed towards one gender. If there are too few women in hard sciences, there should be scholarships for them in that area. Conversely, there should be scholarships for men in traditionally female dominated fields, such as nursing.
That's diversity right?😢 The cold hard truth is in general men want to get physical stuf done and women in general want to not do a lot of physical labor. Unfortunately this is skewing our academic leadership towards a culture of social thinkers and away from paying attention to getting fundamental physical necessitates accomplished. I am not blaming women specifically although some are guilty. Many men in academia and leadership are more guilty than women. The ratio of women enabled the social focused men to rise to power. Do we need to produce minerals in America? No let's just think our way to success. Do we need to process and make metals in America. No let's just think our way to success. Do we need to produce consumer goods in America. No let's just think our way to success. Do we need to make solar panels, wind turbines and electrical infrastructure necessary for the green revolution? No let's just think our way to success. While academia is focusing on society and what people should think and do. Most people of action are alienated by the lack of focus on actual productivity and often choose a different path. Many men are just giving up on education, joining the working class, or giving up on our feminized society entirely. It is critical for the leadership in society to be more balanced between maintaining the critical industry of a country while basing decisions on the fundamentals of reality and meeting the needs of the people. We must remove magical thinking, and a host of other logical fallacies as well as counterproductivity and corruption and the leaders that use them from our system or we will reap the consequences; the squandering of our resources, destruction of our ability to do work, our true economy, our quality of life, our mental health, our positive national identity, and our souls.
Satan, through lies and perversion of the truth, has been warring on civilization since creation. Satan has sought the destruction of the family through many destructive means since then, including the highly successful and divisive tactics employed by modern "progressives" and "feminists" today: one of which is the "war of the sexes". Both men and women have been tools used by Satan to that end, unfortunately. We need to reject this "war of the sexes", and get back to God and His ways before it is too late!
The conclusion from this video piece is that societal collapse can be laid out the feet of women. When equity trumps meritocracy then western society is in terminal decline.
Equity doesn't exist in nature. Trying to emulate it in the workplace and other social constructs is an exercise in folly. There's more than enough vocations for humans that both males and females excel in respectively. Forcing square pegs into round holes is getting tiresome.
Academia does not rule the world. Finance and big business does. More women in academia is a symptom, not the cause. On average they will not _really_ challenge power, but take a 'soft' left position based on feelings. That is why they are allowed in those positions. It keeps out actual rebels (hard left).
It's not collapsing because equity is prioritized over meritocracy, but rather the belief that wanting equity is the same as achieving it. The road to hell is paved with good intentions. What they've achieved is not equity, but rather the villification of acknowledging the reality of the world. "Stop talking about the problem and it will go away."
4:51 As this list of differences was read, I became increasingly alarmed. One only has to look up the definition of fascism, to understand why. As a civil engineer, I haven’t noticed these changes too much at my home university. I didn’t realise that the situation was this bad. In other words: the modern day Copernicus is going to have an increasingly difficult time to voice his hypotheses.
I'm German and Italian. Let me assure you of one thing and remember it for life: *_Women voted for Hitler more than men did._* And women supported socialism and fascism more than men in Italy. Groups who opposed the Nazis, like the White Rose, only few were women. Sophie Scholl was the only woman among the White Rose. When it came to her trial, the men, especially her brother Hans, were even willing to sacrifice themselves so they'd let Sophie go, but the Nazis weren't fooled so easily, also because they had a mentality of better executing her despite possible innocence than not doing so despite her involvement. Resistance to Italian fascism was different because the Mafia wasn't fond of Mussolini and the fascists didn't actually intrude much into people's lives compared to national socialists, reducing the felt need for women even more to resist.
This is a mild point of view. Its way worse in many places. I believe its generally power driven, meaning that just Like comm*nism, helping the less fortunate is just a front for the authoritarian gain of undeserved power. The Low and mid Tier academics might believe this ist about equity but the peoplenat the actual top are hardcore authoritarians and wield this biased perversion of equity like the weapon it was designed as.
The rise of fascism was specifically to counter this Marxist subversion that the United States is going through right now! Look up Yuri Bezmenov, his speeches, and also his books - he explained it.
Single-sex universities would not address the root cause of the problem, which is the mindset. As seen in the data it is not a male vs. female issue but that on average there are different values with considerable minorities on both sides. This means the solution would be two different kinds of universities, separated by a different code of conduct. A lot like it was in the past. There were the universities based on the ideas of the enlightenment while there were religious institutions heavily involved in education and to a certain degree science (e.g. people like Gregor Mendel) which were bound to their moral framework. This separation in a fact based approach and a belief based approach could also work in the future.
@@barrysheridan9186 That's okay. The single-sex universities would arrange balls for eligible members of the opposite sex to attend. This is how things happened in the past.
@@Lacey13-i3b He said he believes that most women are inherently irrational. He would not be wrong, as most humans are. It's so much easier to see irrationality in the other than in yourself.
If humanity actually cared about technological progress, why don't we instead focus our efforts on things like Alchemy, alongside resurrecting people such as Bernhard Riemann and Nikola Tesla from the dead.
I'VE SAID FOR DECADES WE SHOULD RETURN TO SINGLE-SEX SCHOOLS, SECONDARY AND COLLEGE. I'm a male secondary-school teacher, and over the year, everyone I have told this to said I was wrong.
There are some pros and some cons for this idea that you mooted. On the one hand, boys are falling behind in schools because they are effectively being told they are irrelevant because it is apparently becoming a women's world, and because they have fewer male role models. This is a big problem that has been pointed out a lot. On the other hand, when I did my compulsory national service in the armed forces, I noticed that the young men in my cohort who had been to boys-only schools did generally not know how to relate to women. Boys definitely need male role models. Sometimes having a few girls in a male-dominated class is a civilising influence on the men in the class. However, having a few boys in a female-dominated class results in the boys feeling alienated. I sympathise with your suggestion. The fact that it arises at all is an expression of the problems that have evolved from female- dominated schooling.
Indeed some rebels a little while ago decided to show how absurd universities were and wrote fake papers for peer review. They found as long as the papers were heavily biased toward feminist dogma they would be accepted. It also why there is a lot of government funding being wasted on ridiculous feminist based research and not something practical.
Well... yes, but not directly. Since the incorporation of women into academic positions, salaries have gone down..... and now few academics (independently of the gender) have a decent salary. Much less one that would allow men to continue being "providers" for their families. As a consequence, many men are leaving academia... thus increasing the number of women and generating a vicious cycle.
No, but it is a factor. The primary reason is racketeering. Schools get paid per student graduated, the students get substantial loans from the government, so the more students you can pass as quickly as possible the more of that government money you can get. So you end up with dozens of bullshit courses about subjects that appeal to women that are easy to pass, simply to get more money.
@@doltBmB That is correct, and explains a lot about what is wrong with the modern university, but it doesn't explain everything. The degeneracy is ideological in origin, not cynical.
Economist and professor of 30+ years here. All degrees are not the same. In a real economics program(not political economy), mathematics is the filter. If you can't do advanced math you can't be an economist. American women (not including foreign students) as a strong stereotype generally can't do the math, and the ones that perhaps can do it lack the interest to pursue it. A black female in mathematical economics (again, not political economy) is a unicorn. Currently , in our economics department, there is one woman and she's from India. No if I walk the halls in sociology, to some degree even psychology, and especially the fake subjects like general, gender, African, etc. studies… It's almost always women. Specifically, American women.
I agree. How do we shine a light on these distinctions so that the public can understand? For instance the media will call you an economist regardless of whether or not you actually have a grasp with mathematics sufficient to understand economics. If some sort of organization were created to label people, the other issues with this aside, that organization would be susceptible to subversion just like any other and we would end up labeling political economists as economists again. What is the solution to the intentional fog between the public and the truth?
I must disagree with your dismissal of political economy as not "real" economics. The division between politics and "pure" economics is artificial and false. The great pre-20th century economists (Adam Smith, David Ricardo, Thomas Malthus, Karl Marx, and as late as the 20th century John Maynard Keynes) were all political economists. "Pure" mathematical economics only emerged in recent decades. As you correctly write, great competency in mathematics is a filter for persons in this field. Compared to the earlier political economists who were thinkers truly attempting to understanding society, the overwhelming majority of these "pure" economists are equation jugglers whose conclusions have little if anything to do with reality. You don't have to be Isaac Newton or Albert Einstein to be strong in political economy, which remains the subject with real worth.
I am an applied mathematician who almost drifted towards Economics before realizing how garbage and poorly unfounded the state of the field really is. A field based on unnecessary rigor and poor empirical basis is vaporware, not science. 95% of strongly mathematical Economics could be disappeared and nobody would know the difference. You could not have a more useless job yet are full of hubris.
I started out in academia about 10 years ago, and it is miserable. My concern with truth and merit are obsolete, apparently. Everything is surface-level now, and the way to get ahead is to get in with the cliques of women professors who protect all young women and regard men as the enemy. No wonder the impact of our work has gone to shit.
My conclusion is that this women are not worried about other's feelings, because they are not worried about the feelings of people who they doesn't allow to freely speak. In my opinion they only think about what is the most political correct at the time they lives for saving their social apereance.
People don't realize that without free speech, you can't be inclusive, instead you are being exclusionary to everyone the bosses happen to disagree with. This is baby logic, yet so many just can't see that because they happen to share the popular/most vocal unpopular position.
The problem is not with social justice itself, however far left has made the concept a bit ridiculous. The problem it is being pushed dogmatically and stupidly, not based on facts, but triing to hammering facts to fit into the ideology.
@@yoramgt No. If social justice were the constitutional aim of the nation, the motto inscribed in the pediment of the Supreme Court Building, "Equal Justice Under Law," would instead read "Equality, By Law."
I remember having a debate with some ladies about a controversial topic. I was told that science needed to catch up with their ideas. I think women, in general, do not give a toss about truth. What matters is their feelings, and making sure feelings are never risked.
There's a glaring omission here. This whole piece focuses on faculty members, as though they were the ones running universities. But academics have progressively abdicated their hold over the university to the administrative class (in which I include the bloated service sector it has ushered in: writing support, educational developers, accessibility, counselling, puppy-petting de-stress centres...) which is female dominated. This, it strikes me, is more significant than preferences or priorities of actual academics, which count for very little in the way modern universities are managed.
This is excatcly true. I know this first hand via a close family member, female, that works 'high' admin positions (in 2 different Uni). And she discussed this problem with me many times. But, social-colleague pressure being, she raised some concerned on some occasions, but sadly could never really tip the balance in any other way. Cheers
I left my job in Health and Safety at a major university because making people follow the rules to keep them healthy and safe has now become a low priority compared to never making someone uncomfortable by pointing out they are behaving in a manner that could get someone killed. Feeling unsafe is considered more dangerous than actually being unsafe. I couldn't take any more condescending struggle sessions forced on me based on uncomfortable feelings generated by me simply doing the basics of my job.
Health and Safety is a horrible career. Both my wife and my best friend are senior H&S managers and they've been in a losing battle their whole careers. Executive and Management never supports you so you're swimming up stream the whole time. Its been like that at every company they've worked at.
@@kyleme9697 Absolutely agree it is a terrible career. The comparative pay is crap, administrative support is almost nonexistent, and for the past 10 years the situation has been rapidly deteriorating to a prioritization of avoiding fines and cutting costs rather than actual safety. I actually took a huge pay cut to move into health and safety largely because the hospital I was working for was so lacking in the health and safety arena. My priorities have always been others, and it was worth it to me at the time. But I can't handle it any longer. I just can't allow myself to be destroyed any longer for caring about others for a living.
"...uncomfortable feelings generated by me doing the basics of my job..." Exactly. That was the cardinal sin I committed in a similar situation, where it was proof of insubordination if I outperformed any female colleagues or had thoughts deemed above my "station." Frankly infuriating when you're watching incompetence rule.
@@schmidtbrosband early on in my career I recall a meeting with a female leader where at the end she requested feedback or suggestions. As a noob to the dept. I made a few to the assembled group. She thanked me but afterwards my boss cornered me and was like what did you saybin the meeting my colleague just ripped me a new one saying you were aggressive and undermined her authority. I couldnt beleive it I said to him dude she asked for suggestions and I gave a few WTF man?? That was my intro to this dynamic.
I am a PhD student . I feel so alienated i am the only male PhD student in a department of 24 phd student ! Most of the fundings are also for female students only in our department. I feel like they overcompensated or took revenge if percentage if men here .
I think it's also the TYPE of women who are drawn to work in n academia, who aren't neccesarily representative of women, overall. The same way that top-level executives may be mostly male, but they probably have different traits to just the average man in the street. Because you don't just randomly end up in a certain job; Different jobs appeal to different personality types And sex is a pretty big factor in personality type. Men and women behave differently. But that's not the same thing as saying "ALL men have personality type X, and ALL women have personality type Y". So academic jobs may favour women (whether thru biased recruiting, or because the sexes have different aptitudes, on average), but that's probably only a SPECIFIC personality-type, in women, which isn't the same as women, overall.
@@harrymills2770 wrong. The OP is saying that the feminization of everything IS HAPPENING. I.e., that’s the trend. It’s not that everything has already become totally feminized. Besides, there’s a class and culture component to all this, and it’s liberal institutions (academia) and urban professional areas (big cities) where this is happening most. But the majority of US voters are not in academia and don’t work in big cities or in professional fields.
I'm a high school teacher. These days, there is A LOT of complaining - about everything!. The amount of homework, the type of homework, the difficulty of homework, the explanations in class, the activities in class, the tests, the grades,.... My point: The girls do 98% of this complaining (the parents do the remaining 2%). It is as if they have been brought up to believe that they know better, that they have as much right to make decisions as the teachers, and that complaining is a normal way to get what you want. I hate it! And this just continues in academia and probably everywhere else.
@@Tommy_007 Yes Tommy, at the local business school. I was so disappointed. Where I am, there is a legal department and the students complain about this and that after each exam. Lawyers are handling the cases. It's ridiculous. Whenever something is against their judgement, they go after you. Admittedly also the guys, although my impression is that the girls are worse, as if they want compensation for standing on their own two feet or shouldn't have to do that.
@@christian-s1i1w I'm sorry to hear that. It's terrible. At our school (and probably many other schools), management is afraid that the students will go to other schools because the school's funding is based on the number of students. This means that they are afraid to tell the students what is right or wrong; they just let them complain, and the teachers have the burden of proof. I find it humiliating to be part of such a system.
@Tommy_007 Yes we have something similar here, and it is indeed humiliating. When they complain, you have to write a long, formal defense, to be delivered within two weeks, and they have the right to complain about anything, to comment on your reply but not the other way around, deadlines don't apply to them only to you. In addition, here they are told that exams shouldn't ask detailed questions (in order to reduce their stress), we have bathrooms for three preferences and the walls are in baby colours.
5:13 Peter Turchin, a leading writer in the field of cliodynamics, writes about the father son cycle which refers to war/catastrophic events not being repeated until the population is no longer inocculated from making a repeat mistake. The numbers being shown here would seem to support his theories and actually accelerate the decline of this “inoculation”. Without being challenged by ‘offensive’ ideas, a population is more easily radicalized by concepts that would easily have been cast out if they were more readily prepared. I might be making some leaps here, but i doubt it.
The problem with not allowing "potentially harmful" ideas to be shared is that ALL ideas are potentially harmful! And this absolutely includes many ideas that are dear to the hearts of most academics and especially female academics.
It’s mommy behavior, “I don’t see any reason why you need that, therefore.” They really don’t give a fuck about the harm, it’s just that they like to watch the crying when sharp toys are taken away.
@@m_a_i_l_l_i_w that is not a good thing, and if they were more energetic they would focus on the job at hand and not some fake justice in their heads.
@@m_a_i_l_l_i_w I'd recommend reading through the comments again. It's not about empathy, in fact, they lack it for an entire gender. It's always been about power, control, jealousy, and unearned benefits. What happens in a divorce court is not some fringe element of society. They argue in favour of male circumcision for aesthetic reasons, they don't actually subscribe to. It's all much darker than you think. Philosophers knew it, and that's why philosophy is no longer a first year requirement in universities.
Maybe we have changed the definition of merit You know different people have different opportunities and different circumstances right from birth I know shocking revelation but it’s true
“Stopping a battle is much harder than starting it. Starting it only requires you to shout ‘Attack!’ but when you want to stop it, everyone is busy.” ― Terry Pratchett, Monstrous Regiment
There are some gaps. Your statement that men are less interested in moral consequences is only sound if moral consequences are defined as serving DEI goals. Discernment and teaching of truth is clearly a higher moral goal.
@@shaneusher2042 I read it as more interested in "social engineering". "Morality" is how you make it palatable for the masses to maximize coziness and minimize push back.
Well said. There should be NO conflict between seeking truth and being moral. In fact, seeking truth IS the moral thing to do. What kind of morality that is against seeking truth? That is NOT morality. A "morality" that suppresses truth is NOT moral, it is EVIL. If the pursue of DEI and "social justice" requires one to deny truth, then they are EVIL! Without truth and a lesser degree facts, there are no morality! A truly moral system cannot be based on lies. It is a Marxists and Communists schemes to co-op the word "morality" to mask their true intentions.
I'm not sure that egalitarianism is the best word to use here. Most of the academics you're speaking of are anything BUT egalitarian. They are incredibly over invested in the prescribed "victim hierarchy". Maybe "equity-seeking" ?
They're simply behaving in a manner to fulfill the narratives their brains have been bathed in. A self fulfilling hivemind hellscape while reality keeps smacking them in the face to wake up. Feminists are nightmare fuel that will bring down the west. Then will be replaced with cultures that value having kids.
That's because it isn't. You cannot tell the cow you are going to slaughter it. You must cajole it and convince it, guide it, get it to walk itself into the factory.
l was going to listen to the whole video but when you described the reason women were increasing in numbers at universities and to some degree excelling you only gave the reason as just women out performing men. You failed to mention that women, as in most areas, are being given more places due to DEI, affirmative action, and quite literally bursary's etc are being offered ONLY to women. This is not exactly a sign of women outperforming men. Indeed this is just plain gender bias. Since some schools are beginning to remove some, if not all, of these biases the numbers go back to almost where they were. Universities are run by feminists and as such are a very hostile environment to men, particularly with such things a supposed rape culture and plain old man hating. The fact you do mention this leaves me with some doubt about what else you have to say.
i believe that womens do have some psychological traits which give them edge over men in test. you know thinks like more patience which enable them to study longer on avarage
@@MilosVuksanovic-sj8kjI haven't found that to be the case in mathematics at all. Men are much more willing to face the long and lonely hours of confusion. Women want to do it as a kind of social gathering, but the most difficult math really requires you to be in a quiet room by yourself.
I think you are wrong; male brains take significantly longer to develop than female ones. Moreover, the greater ability of girls to sit passively and do what they are told is an advantage in education. However, when women were struggling against men, society made great efforts to balance things more fairly. Now, women are doing better, society doesn't give a monkey's.
Women are also the gatekeepers for hiring. We needed someone with a strong physics education and background, but HR had an army of people in between the screening of candidates and the interviews. I knew 2 exceedingly well qualified candidates who applied but who were rejected by HR with no input from the department (and the 3 people doing the screening for that position all happened to be women). Instead, we got a slate of 6 candidates (all women) who were mediocre (to put it mildly). We couldn't hire any of them and made HR start again. Took us a year and a half to finally find a person qualified enough to do the job (a woman from India).
You simply can not have justice without holding the truth as an ultimate value. The suppression of truth, even and perhaps especially if done in the name of some purportedly moral purpose, is itself a terrible injustice. One that perpetrates an endless stream of ever greater injustices and renders the pursuit of justice impossible until rectified.
It is ABSOLUTELY NOT EGALATARIANISM. It does not emphasize equality among people. It does not advocate that all humans should be treated equally, have the same political, economic, social, and civil rights, and enjoy equal opportunities. It absolutely emphasises the need to bias one group in favour of another group - and in many cases to "make up for perceived losses or slights" To say it emphasises "egalitarianism" minimises the real objectives and BEHAVIOUR of women in universities as a group operation.
@hariseldon3786 You're absolutely right. It's a naked power grab that uses egalitarianism as its cover story, yet another example of a wolf in sheep's clothing.
Yeh selection interviews should simply use a id number instead of a name & have the person in a booth with a curtain with a machine that creates a genderless voice when the person answers questions so there’s no way the selectors can tell the gender, race or age of the person in the booth. Then there’s no choice but selection by merit.
I think you may be confusing equity with equality One is mathematical....empirical....3 is greater than 2 The other philosophical...A subjective expression of value..."Ford trucks are better than Chevys" A "justified true belief" And as Solon observed in 400BC..."equal is not fair...fair is not equal" So, a disabled parking space near the front door of a shopping mall offends the principle of equality But supports the principle of equity And, as a society we generally accept and tolerate that, and may even defend that inequity against transgressors
The trouble is that the left heiffers will protest to get the all-male rule removed while strongly insisting on their rights to all-female organisations. This has happened over the last several decades.
I think the essay misses the point that a moral frame work built on falsehoods is not moral. Avoiding worrying research is in effect saying we would prefer to live in a pretend world, than find out how the world really works and then adapt our behaviours in a way that improves the moral out come. Truth and morality are NOT incompatible. But working hard based on a false understanding of how things are is very likely to lead to failed outcomes that leave people disadvantaged. To prefer that way of working IS immoral.
To be fair, it’s not ALL women, it’s the women who have been indoctrinated into Critical Theory, Postmodernism, Marxism and intersectionality. The only one of the ideas above that was created by a woman was intersectionality. The others by European men.
Honestly. It sounds like men and women each want a different institution here. As a man, I do not wish to adhere to the policies preferred by women. I would prefer to let them do their own thing away from me, elsewhere.
The struggle against social justice and DEI is the greatest social issue of the modern era. We either choose feelings, or we choose truth. Truth must win.
@@lancebarnes3970 do it and let the cream rise to the top is what jem is saying. I deally probably run the experiment as co-ed v male v female I assume.
This is interesting research but as a former university teacher for me it does not really address the most important long-term trend, which is the creation of whole new subjects designed from the outset to be dominated by women. From that perspective, the original sin is Women's Studies, which, like Business Studies, has practically no academic content, but is purely ideological. This means that there are no standards by which contributions can be judged; so tenure is awarded to friends of those in power, and the whole thing spirals into an intellectual black hole, with no attempt at logic or rationality or fact, and in many cases with explicit hostility to those values, described by large groups of women who all automatically agree with each other in terms of the patriarchy, toxic masculinity, rape culture, etc. etc. This project was so successful that other female-dominated 'grievance studies' subjects were invented and institutionalized, and at the same time departments of education were churning out university administrators with the same kind of beliefs. So this has allowed these values to be extended not just to history and psychology and so on, but even to such subjects as astronomy and mathematics. The one new element, which has caused this to backfire on its original perpetrators, is that it is now the students rather than the staff who have the most radically idiotic views, and the comfortably-off tenured feminists have seen themselves re-branded as TERFs. The only ones who have escaped it were those who were wise enough to make their writings and lectures so totally incomprehensible that nobody, whether friend or foe, could tell what they had ever been talking about in the first place.
@@Theoreme.de.Gudule That's true but the reason is that it's now been established that you don't even need to pretend to have arguments. All that matters is keeping up with fashion, and teenagers are naturally better at that than adults.
Prioritising "social justice" over "truthfulness" is exactly what the Church did when it reigned over universities in Galileo's time. It is 100% hindering of the "public square" at the heart of science and moreover of learning.
Galileo ran afoul of politics, not because the church opposed “truth.” For the past two thousand years, the Catholic Church was a primary investor of scientific research. Science was seen as studying God’s creation in order to know Him better. So speaking of “truth” question secular narratives about religion and the church
@@lordjim3109 not as we know it today but nonetheless it was about reinforcing answers to the meaning of existence rather than preserving the questioning of it, such as in the format of a public square, which is really what lies at the heart of the scientific method, of deliberative democracy, of a separation of Govt powers in a judiciary etc.
I don’t have a huge amount of sympathy tbh… most still refuse to hold women to basic standards for the sake of sanctimonious ego masturbation. They would rather talk about “incels” on the internet than the corrosion of institutions.
76 yr old , California architect , father of 4 , experiencing toxic “ Family Estrangement Dysfunction “ with two PhD 40+ daughters , and 35 yt toxic divorced ( 3x ) ex wife . The End of Western Civilization .
Hi sir, I am a construction management professional with BIM background and glad to know someone from our industry is over here. I would request to answer my 3 questions if possible. Q1.Is there any reason why you would attribute this toxic dominant faction of feminism majorly to western civilization? Because, it is high here in India in the AEC industry with the most venomous ready to sting female senior architects to junior female apprentices. The junior females i come across especially in architecture domain and management are highly egoistic and draw conclusions easily on a scenario or a person than trying to observe, absorb , adapt and finally react. Most of them go straight to adapt and react( only body language in terms of adapt I mean). Q2.Is the AEC industry in west dominated by female designers? Q3. If so, Can asian males survive the same onslaught from western females ( including western educated women of other races) or will it be very difficult? Asking the last 2 questions because I am planning to shift over to Europe or canada. I do have few relatives into IT jobs in Europe and America's. But none into construction except, for middle East. It would be informative if u reply sir.
Interesting how the priority is for financial resources to be directed to social programs - programs that typically don't generate economic benefits. Has anyone turned their mind to the economic benefits developed by these feminine priorities? Or is there some other reason most of the western nations are experiencing rising debt an productivity declines? It couldn't possibly be due the feminisation of academia? But how would we ever know if no one is permitted to research this truthfully?
To be fair, billionaires are buying colleges and turning them into private for profit money making machines rather than public institutions there with the sole purpose to facilitate learning and development for all of man kind.
90,000 students per year graduate with a degree in GENDER STUDIES. There is essentially zero demand for someone with such a degree, other than teaching Gender Studies at a college.
I think I'd be more impressed about women patting themselves on the back for domination of higher learning, if it had been solely off merit. I'm sure there are many women who deserve their positions but, I am also aware of things like "grade inflation", having taken place. Things like governmental quotas etc.
There are literally zero women who deserve their positions. None. All women passively benefit from massive positive discrimination. It's true even here in the Middle East. (Look up female college student statistics in Iran / Saudi Arabia / Turkey)
The way these types overlook the fact they received literal crutches is quite something. It is the shamelessness of it all that gets to me, how can you have so little honour?
The same phenomena happened to the press, as the number of women increased, the value and quality of the press fell. Now most people, with great justification, do not trust the mainstream media at all.
The irony of DEI is that it goes directly against what it claims to support. By far the most important diversity in academia is diversity of rational viewpoints so society can learn from discussion and debate among people with different viewpoints. It is outrageously inequitable to manipulate access to opportunities in ways that are based on group identities instead of looking at people fairly as individuals. And excluding people based on disagreement with how they look at controversial issues is the opposite of being inclusive.
It’s because it’s based off of Marxist theory. They want to force equality of outcome, NOT equality of opportunity. Equity is forced equality of outcomes.
Western Society is dying a slow death.... One of the reasons is "Tokenism"... Recruiting people not on their achievements or intelligence, rather on meeting quota's from certain groups... It is in all of the institutions... Education, Public Service, Armed Forces...
The alarming thing about the results here is not that there are so many women going to college and becoming faculty. It's the fact that these women overwhelmingly put traditional female values like agree-ability, inclusion, and avoiding problems over the values that allow people to pursue the truth. If academia isn't pursuing the truth then it can't produce anything of value for society and is thus worthless. I'm not sure how to get this fundamental truth across to women, or academia, I suspect getting them to accept the message's truth instead of retreating into self protective defensiveness would be the problem, but if the general public continues turning against academia and supporting it's de-funding they should at least not be surprised.
These women may not be capable of understanding the concept of objective universal reality-centered truth. Many women can't tell a fact from a feeling.
This is why women and men historically went to different schools. We don’t think the same and we don’t inherently value the same things, both towards the universe around us and how we value each other. The beginning of this video mentions something important. She said women didn’t receive education for centuries as if education is a resource like water that should be given to everyone. However, from my perspective men didn’t get educated because it was something fun.. the world around men has been hostile and difficult to navigate since the beginning of our species. In other words, men had to go out and risk their lives to figure out how the elements around them worked. They had to figure these things out because everything from wild animals to bad weather, to bacteria on uncooked food, disease being transferred to us by a mere insect bite etc… we were forced in a literal sense to learn how the world around us functioned so our civilization didn’t collapse in a generation… So, if women truly wanted to educate themselves, was there a need for feminism? No, all they needed to do was walk outside and spend a few thousand years risking their own lives to figure out the laws of the universe around them. Didn’t want to do that huh? Instead wanted to be educated on the things men risked themselves to figure out? That’s fine, but then why are you now trying to change the base expectations we built into our society and education systems (like free speech and the pursuit of truth over feelings)? If you wanted educational systems that favored how women operate why not just go design and build your own institutions and just invite women who thought like you to attend them?
Yes! And they can start their own businesses also if they don't like the options available, but somehow that doesn't seem to happen, no, quotas are necessary.
The issue with "why didnt women just go outside and learn about the world or go and build their own institutions" is that they were usually killed by men and prevented from doing so in the first place.
If I'm summing this up correctly, women promote the collective and men promote individualism. Sounds about right especially since women are the ones that have the most power now and want to get more. Thanks for sharing!
Working in a prior role as an assessment analyst, I would often read male students' course feedback complainting about the multiple "diversity" courses they were required to take and the unwelcoming culture this created for male students. State and federal funding to universities should be cut to schools that fail to maintain balance. Thus extends to employing incompetent people in roles to gain credit in identity politics.
![Lp. Сердце Вселенной #60 РОЖДЕНИЕ ЛОЛОЛОШКИ [Финал] • Майнкрафт](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/YoR0pAV9FVQ/mqdefault.jpg)
Wanting your colleague fired because he publishes conclusions that disagrees with you is truly toxic behaviour.
This is basically a death sentence for science, when you can't research things because it becomes taboo. We went through this with religion trying to force it's way into science, now it's neoprogressives. Honestly it's depressing as hell. Glad I'm not in US.
For this reason, academic research that has political ramifications is usually unreliable and untrustworthy due to the lack of commitment towards scientific objectivity.
Yes it is toxic behaviour and its also anti- intellectual, anti- scientific and just plain old rubbish. Strangely these same women have totally embraced the nonsense that trans women are women. How submissive of them.😂😂
Many ambitious men in the 1800's (e.g., Sigmund Freud) were happy to demolish the careers of their competitors by any means available. I suppose the difference is that the most dangerous totalitarians are those who truly believe they are doing something good and right.
Yes, and it's also something that I would wager most women and most left-winger would support.
Basically, society was built by right-wing men. And now it's being destroyed by left-wing women.
"Offensive scientific findings." What a bizarre phrase. If you're offended by scientific findings you're certainly no scientist, and you're irrational.
The level of insanity is shocking…
100%
the religion of feminism.
This presumes that people automatically act based off of assumptions made FROM the results of research.
How ridiculous.
Sam Harris (Back when he used to think) brought this up.
If research came out which proved that Native Americans display a higher aptitude in Medicine than Europeans, we need to know that.
We can funnel state resources to provide grants which go to the people who will use them the best, as well as create safety nets for negative outcomes which might be detected.
Choosing to blind our civilization to reality because some people are afraid of what others COULD POSSIBLY do with that information is an indicator of collapse.
Feminism was never harmless or just "advocating for equality".
The whole patriarchy conspiracy comes to the logical conclusion that power, information, resources and support need to be taken away from men poking around in the lab. Because anything the patriarchy does will be perceived as for oppression, enslavement and sadistic ends.
And guess what?! That's perfectly rational.
Unfortunately men are not on a team, and many discoveries, breakthroughs and insights will remain in the dark for as long as anti academic values rule academia.
We are all irrational, and we are all some now and then offended by scientific findings, @VelkePivo. Experimental Scientists do not get a free pass from human condition, sadly, same way Philosophers and Historians never manages to get theirs. But I do share your perplexity.
I think the point is not that is absurd to "feel offended by" but to act as if this feeling could or even should have the last word about what is or isn't a "scientific finding".
Whenever you feel offended by a scientific finding you reexamine it. And if it holds up under the light of your best objective reasoning, you swallow your feelings. Because you know the world doesn't had any obligation to bend to your expectations, what you want to be not always is. It doesn't mean you don't feel offended by scientific findings, it only means you are not arrogant enough to put your feelings above scientific findings that offend you.
No one has to know how offended you felt.
"dismissing a colleague whose research reached a contraversial conclusion" that is really really very scary.
It reminds me of Roland Fryer. Fortunately, he has tenure. ua-cam.com/video/ruYXzlzoU_A/v-deo.html&ab_channel=Triggernometry
It's anti-truth, with all that implies.
The entry of women into any previously all-male space will destroy what made it good in the first place. Whether that's universities, sports clubs, or pubs. Women need women-only spaces AND SO DO MEN.
Can we just imagine, Charles Darwin theory of evolution would have been deleted from history, Christopher Columbus would have never discovered the Americas. Much of what we take for granted today would never have happened if researchers, scientists had not gone and explored contraversial subjects and findings. We would be without vaccines.
Which makes me wonder: are they really so social, people oriented, caring, compassionate, all the things attributed to women as a group.
There was an open letter in the 1890’s by male Oxford students protesting the inclusion of women in academia. They said that once a critical mass of women is reached, real debate becomes unworkable as not only do the women become easily offended by being disagreed with, but also other people become afraid of stating their opinion out of fear being ostracised or being rude and upsetting someone.
Pretty damn prophetic 😂
5:22 51% of women said that supporting a person’s right to make an argument is the same as supporting the argument. That’s crazy.
Wonders of the feminine brain... 😧
That's women.
I would be surprised if the general population is not much higher. Ask someone a question for clarification and be immediately attacked as opposed to their idea.
@normkeller2405 Да. 😧
Well logic doesn't come naturally to many of my sex. Realized this in grade 6.
I was a psych prof and I left academia for two reasons: 1) I wasn't able to do the research I wanted and 2) the women in the department were extreme feminists that wanted to purge the department and the university of "toxic masculinity." It was simply unbearable.
I had similar experiences in a physics department. I retired as early as I was able to.
We should be allowed to discuss "toxic femininity."
Yes, what alot of people don't really discuss, when talking about the rise of females in academia, is that many men will find the experience of university as quite hostile.
from what i have noted...... psychiatrists and social studies grads r most toxic fmnists out there.
@@stevenverrall4527 It seems the problem is you can't criticize the feminine values. Males are more aggressive but in no job are you allowed to let your aggression get out of check (possible exception for small number of top executives world famous stars)
I guess they got rid of the toxic masculinity then 😏
I teach at a university in English as an adjunct, and this video essay does not even come close to the radicalization of female academics that has happened over the last 40 odd years. The studies cited do not accurately reflect the behaviour of today's female academics whose self reporting is self serving. The universities are now plagued by these authoritarian elitists whose so-called "empathy" and desire for "social justice" is just a hypocritical ploy for the accumulation of even more unearned power and wealth by deluded narcissists. Read what they actually publish; read what their departmental statements and policies are. The rise of women in universities has been a rise in authoritarian women, not women generally. They are hell bent on placing themselves at the apex of a totalitarian society of social engineers, and they use feminism/intersectionalism as their weaponized power ideology. This process is so far gone that the universities are a lost cause. We have to develop an entirely new educational system that never allows such power-mad authoritarians to take it over.
You hit the nail on the head, and well written to. I just watched a video by Pr. Edward Dutton. On exactly this craving for power which the ideology caters to. Why We Must Fight the White Supremacy of the ... Left. Sorry YT probably does not allow me personally to say the W word.
(My account is targeted I am barely able to speak despite what I say is no more upsetting or rude then what you just said.)
The universities are not a lost cause if you are willing to fight for them.
And I am not trying to be scandalous when I say the National Socialists proved that, and so did a few other nationalist/fascist governments in the past.
It is antihuman and it will collapse just like communism - give it time.
yes
I have to agree with this statement.
Women are not all more concerned with social justice than facts and logical reasoning. I know many excellent women professors and engineers that are amazing and of great benefit to technology and getting critical projects done.
The problem we have is with women in positions of authority misusing their position is similar to men misusing their position of authority.
Some people just want to be in charge and boss people around. These people do not focus their learning and influence on what is best for society and their organization.
Instead they focus on obtaining power and injecting some chaos so they can weaken the fundamental strengths and goodness of the organization and then build power and push an alternate agenda.
These people feal a rush of power and strength in manipulation and subversion of the organization.
Most people both men and women who want to contribute and make the world a better place are not seeking positions of authority. These people are focused on being involved in the actual production of value.
Often the least desirable most self centered people with counterproductive goals rise to the highest levels of authority while the best leaders focus on making the process better and trying to make the system work despite the extremely poor leadership from above.
5:00 is straightup dishonest. Responding men didn't oppose reporting. They opposed ANONYMOUS reporting, where someone can end your career without owning the complaint. The right to face one's accuser is FUNDAMENTAL to due process. And with all the fake claims recently revealed, anonymous reporting simply cannot continue.
It's so funny how they lie about caring about "inclusion" but still INSIST that women get special access to college, even though they are the majority of students for over 2 decades.
Because it’s never been about that for the feminists. It’s a giant power grab. Just ask Erin Pizzey.
In a world where special privileges are the norm, equality is considered oppression.
Well its simply making up for all the time they were excluded from Uni or looked down at and disparaged by their male professors. I can assure you that both male and female educators are perfectly capable of acting like dimwits , I've worked with both and they have different styles and priorities, and both sexes can be irrational and prejudiced .
@@reverendbarker650 That's like saying because of the north Atlantic slave trade it's time for other races to be slaves now.
@@reverendbarker650
So you admit that Feminism is about revenge, not equality...
"It was always the women, and above all the young ones, who were the most bigoted adherents of the Party, the swallowers of slogans, the amateur spies and nosers-out of unorthodoxy."
Orwell 1984
George really knew what he was talking about and no surprise really that it applies today since Communism and Feminism are almost the same.
@@TimBitts649 a mother
The Devil preferred to tempt Eve instead of Adam and that was for a good reason
😼
I didn't know Julia stood out so much. The irony is . . . she turned out to be a thought criminal.
I remember attending an interview for a role I was perfectly qualified for at Loughborough University some years ago. The panel of no less than 6 women was hostile from the outset, and I quickly realised that my chances of being successful as a male candidate were zero. Knowing this, I decided to go on the offensive, too. For example, I asked each of the interview panel members to identify themselves and their roles since they hadn't, which is a question of protocol. The panel leader responded that she didn't see the reason or relevance of my question. I responded it was important for me to evaluate the credentials of those assessing me as a suitable candidate. They were obviously reluctant to answer, but it turned out 3 of the panel had nothing to do with the faculty, nor were in a similar role, which immediately raised another question of why they were there in the first place. By this stage, I ended it abruptly stating I don't see how this interview is going to be fair and impartial. Suffice as to say, I didn't get the job, but later learned out of the 6 interviewees, I was the only token male candidate.
Well done! More people need to do this.
I would then contact a lawyer and sue the piss out of them.
Puts me to mind of a skit on 'Kids in The Hall' in the early '90s, in which a defendant on trial objects to the verdict on the basis that the jury is made up entirely of his ex-girlfriends. Seriously though, I know what you mean: at one point I took the step of generating a gender blind version of my CV so that I could at least get my foot in the door for an interview.
This happens to women who do not 'fit' as well... A race to the bottom generally.
I applaud you, sir.
Finally, an academic essay that agrees with what men have known for a very long time.
It is also happening in corporations. HR departments are dominated by women. And it’s dreadful.
Any environment with female humans will face the same fate. It's biology.
It isn't dreadful. It's a chance to exit stage left, and start one's own enterprise.
It starts in elementary school. The elementary school environment is designed to be toxic and punishes normal male behavior by boys while rewarding docile traits by girls.
It helps to remember that the "e" in HR is silent and invisible... it takes an Empath to see and hear it. Since its presence can only be measured indirectly, science refers to it as "dark privilege".
They have no tangible skill either. Just an Adult daycare that puts you on payroll
A story: my female full-professor-of-psychology-at-UCSD friend was horrified that her son is dropping out of college to become a firefighter. I am so happy for him.
He's running from hell away from her.
I want to say that if she understood psychology she would not have been so horrified.
@@bricaaron3978💯
He is probably more brilliant and intelligent than his mother.
Its bad though. It means that even more Knowledge jobs go to women. That means they start to control social norms (which they most already do), they will control journalism (the mostly already do), and possibly control government, while men are left doing "real" mens work. Its a net negative.
Feelings over facts. We're doomed
Hasn't that always been the case for people in general?
@@normkeller2405 people are socially liberal
Those institutions are doomed. Just like Disney, there's no "too big to fail." But they will cause problems in the meantime while they're in the process of failing.
@@normkeller2405 it’s heavily one sided
No
Never been
If u feel u don't need seat belt vs stats say u need. Would u pr would u not wear
I did my PHD im physics. My believe is: There should be only one goal in science: facts and only facts. It scares me to see what is made ON PURPOSE with science and that women tend to suppress facts, if they do not meet their moral goals.
Best wishes from Germany
I mean aren't you in the same pink shit stained boat?
Is it the same in Germany or is this confined to the US?
@Zeni-th. we have the same problems. Additionally professors are fired, because of misgerndering or climate skepticism. It is a global phenomenon.
Don't bother to question the narrative of this video. Is it possible this chick is a ball palmer with an agenda?
@@Zeni-th. its the same everywhere. Talking from my experiences in Greece and Cyprus!
So as women gain influence, academia gets more expensive, less merit based and infested with DEI. What could possibly go wrong 😂
PhDs in "Feelings" 🇦🇺🇬🇧🇺🇸🇧🇻🇳🇿etc
@@jayclark8284 I worry for "hard science".
Feminism Ruins Everything
See Elon. 😊
@@lancebarnes3970You don’t have to worry about hard science because women will never have any interest in the field no matter how many women only scholarships you throw at them. The proliferation of women on campus has been confined primarily to worthless humanity degrees, nursing/nurse practitioner degrees, and “STEM” disciplines like hospital administration. Engineering, mathematics, physics, chemistry, etc. are still dominated by men because success in those fields is determined by objective criteria and not their “feels”.
There is a 2,400 year old comedy play called Assemblywomen by Aristophenes. It tells a story of women gaining the right to vote. Taking advantage of the laziness of the men, they proceed to ban men from voting, vote in both economic and then sexual communism, and spend their time in the senate complaining about how difficult the job is and the temperature of the room.
The beginning of the play has the women dressing in old men's clothing with fake beards. They then go to the Assembly and the main character uses a bunch of inspirational rhetoric and strong but empty assertions that women do many things better than men (ie fight less) in order to gain the right to vote in the first place. Apparently, the fact that no one noticed this was a women with a fake beard is Aristophenes' commentary on how their were no strong male political figures in his time, and that the Assembly was already filled out with effeminate men so there was virtually no difference between a politician and a woman in a fake beard.
That's amazing! I've got to check this out, predicted the future!
en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assemblywomen
This is brilliant! I love how as humans we don't really change all that much throughout the millennia. @fortunefair - Which translation would you recommend?
@@Alaneberhard humans or gender roles
😂
77% of women in journalism. 80% in teaching. 80% in psychology. The results: the most distrusted news, the most inconclusive studies, and the highest medicated cohort ever recorded. Ladies, coping isn't winning lmao
you hit the nail on the head FACTS
So are we done with this horrible experiment and ready to put the men back in charge?
Thats like falsely stating: "93% of CEOs are men. 85% of hedge fund managers. 90% of software developers. The results: the biggest financial crises, the most unethical business practices, and the most vulnerable IT infrastructure we've ever had."
Both statements falsely imply that correlation equals causation, oversimplifying complex issues by attributing problems to gender rather than considering broader systemic factors.
They're not "ladies".
@@mustangmikep51 That don't prove more than women live in a lop sided labour market. Very few female oligarchs.
And Hypergamy is having the last laugh as modern women sorrowfully lament the ever growing absence of College educated men from the dating pool 😥😓
4:20 So 44% of men and 64% of women think academic institutions should protect their students from harmful ideas?.... Ffs, the fact that kind of belief in a professor at the highest level of education isnt immediate grounds for dismissal kind of says it all....
I always wonder if these professors also don't trust themselves to hear "harmful" ideas?
So how much is 44 + 64? Hahahaha😅
@@p382742937423y4You laugh, but need to rethink that.
@p3827 seriously?🤦♂️ its 44% to 56% in men, 44% of men prioritize fee fees over truth, 56% prioritize truth over fee fees
And its 64% to 36% in women, 64% of women prioritize fee fees over truth, 36% prioritize truth over fee fees.
Yup. Every Latin slogan universities have for the pursuit of truth should be replaced with “Your feelings don’t care about facts, and neither does this university.”
I'm so old, I remember being told that when women achieved positions of power, everything would be so much better. How's that workin' out for ya?
I know . I can remember feminist lectures from the 1970s as well .
When women are in charge the likelihood of war is less . Trouble is if men remain in charge of some cultures and some countries then the likelihood of war may be even greater because they perceive (rightly) that women are soft and weak and , when it comes to opposing military violence , rather inept .
So with women more in charge the whole world is , paradoxically , less safe.
It ain't.
I have heard that too when I was young.
I don't believe that anymore. It may be even worse when women have all the power.
Remember Madeleine Albright (Jew) claiming that half a million dead Iraqis was worth it?
It is better. For them.
This video is 40 years to late
Right on point. You beat me to it!!!! I said "30 years" too late, but I think YOU nailed it!!!
... or maybe 80 years too late. We crossed the philosophical Rubicon on the role and scope of the federal government during WW II. We haven't dialed it back, since.
And made by a wmn who, of course, only gives the mildest of truths.
Wife to Hubby: "I forgot to fill up gas in the car, so you might want to sort that out before your trip"
Car: smashed up on every side, all windows broken, fluids leaking, smoke coming out of the engine and the heat from a fire us melting the asphalt
No wonder going to university became useless
Yes,the damage has already been done
I would like to be on record as saying that this cannot possibly end well.
8:20 Never mind the sex differences, why do so many academics think it’s appropriate for someone to be punished for doing research? What happened to ‘follow the science’?
It became “follow my science”. Same as what happened to the truth.
Supplanted by ideology, beginning in the 1960s. People like Thomas Sowell and Harvey Mansfield have lived it. Financial interests direct research in most other cases. Sabine Hossenfelder talks about this.
Feminism
@@bangthehankers1985Jews
Part of the differences comes from respondents of dissimilar faculties. “Moral judgement” for example is rarely if never relevant in metallurgy or maths.
You can have diversity or you can have standards, but you can’t have both.
My mother stated this in the 1980's... she said that little boys are being forced to learn like little girls... and that boys do not learn through intangible concepts as well as girls do, they learn through interacting with things, little girls interact with people.
collective learning in 'groups' doesn't suit boys at all and it's everywhere
Yes this problem has worsened over the decades
Yes, I totally agree with your mother! She saw it then and it is so much more forced on the children now. I've seen it handicap boys so much. In most of the state schools in the UK, boys are cruelly mistreated, blamed and demoralised. Sometimes this is deliberately achieved by the evil political activists who have become teachers in our schools but also because the school classroom structure of learning tends to favours the girls. The extreme feminists dominate many schools and indoctrinate our children with ideas such as femininity is always good and masculinity is always bad. No wonder the boys grow up to be under confident and apologetic young men, often with mental health issues and poor qualifications, whilst girls are being encouraged to look down on the boys and hate "maleness", whilst also being over-confident and harbouring a belief in the superiority of females.
This is terrible for the children themselves and also for the future of our society.
Working class white males are the lowest achievers in UK schools and yet all the extra help, investment and scholarships etc still goes to ethnic minorities (even though UK Indian Asians are the HIGHEST achievers in terms of academic qualifications) and on females (who now dominate UK university courses in most subjects).
As I said, I'm female. I love my female friends and my thirty year old daughter who is a lawyer. But I also love my engineer husband who can repair my old car using scrap metal and loves building things and can repair burst pipes and blocked drains! I also love my son-in -law who is a graphic designer,. Each to their own.
We need both male and female traits in society. I think we must all be ready to fight for this, the right for boys to be accepted as boys and to feel happy for who they are.
Your mother was ahead of her times. She could identify the problem early on. The schooling system is about feminizing men. Men are supposed to exist at the edge, take high risk and advance civilization, whereas women should be the one to nurture and contribute towards balance. Feminizing men is dangerous for society as these lads do not learn how to regulate emotions, nor perceive threat nor know how to deal with adversity at life. The determinate mode of education is detrimental to men.
It's more complicated. It's still boys that excel at maths, which are fully abstract. The difference is in the method of teaching. Indeed, the school today (excluding competition, effort, and requiring repetitive routines) is tailored for girls, not boys.
“Supporting the right to make an argument is not the same as endorsing it.”
Half of people disagreeing with this is insane.
Companies and universities abandon reason to appease emotion, and label this cowardice as "inclusivity". The fields and businesses least grounded in reason are often the loudest in showcasing their virtue.
indeed
This is what we call the Fiminisation of schools and society as a whole
For funding?
If I were an idiologue who's ideology was that we must never wear gloves and I succeeded at forcing this upon society, either some fields such as high voltage electrical work, microbiology, sandblasting would become very dangerous or would cease to exist. When you put your ideology that's not based upon logic before logic in fields that must be fundamentally logical, either those fields decline or they cease to exist.
yup
Fascinating statistics. So essentially the culture war is largely a gender war? Having recently worked in a large government department which steadily became more feminized over the years, I noticed a steady move towards risk aversion and corresponding inability to get things done.
This gender war has been going on for 50 years. It has been working on a number of fronts, the feminization of all strategic work places, schools, universities, government, medical, sciences, MSM, HR. The second front is the destruction of the family unit through the demonization of men, pornography, and the normalization of non heterosexuality and the demonization of heterosexual relationships. I think they are doing pretty good so far.
Yes. It's all about risk aversion. That's what got them in up to their necks in DEI so fast and why they'll abandon DEI just as fast.
@@harrymills2770 One can only hope that is true.
race*
the discrimination always goes one way i've noticed.
As stated in the video, the issue is not gender. It is the weightings that gender psychological profiles give to social situations.
Men need to respond to this trend the same way Feminists responded to male sexism: push your values without regard for what opposition thinks.
No point at this stage. Men should advance their studies outside these organizations and build new institutions… where the pursuit of truth reigns.
Probably need a societal collapse for that but it looks like it’s well underway.
I did and I got ‘not renewed’. Also funding in academia is very competitive and subjective. If you even dare criticising ‘the message’ you are ostracised. Ended up having to change fields after 15 years of working on my passion.
That will never happen. Most men actually like most women, while the reverse is not true.
One problem though. No matter how masculine and abusive a woman acts, it's in the nature of men to be protective of any woman. So even when you stand up against that behaviour, it's likely you'll find your own acting against you too.
@Bartholomew1572 best option I'd say
I recall leading an IT team meeting and the consultant expert appeared to present on the topic but clearly failed to prep, deciding to waste the meeting time on feel good team building exercises. I stopped her mid presentation, pointing out that this was not her role now what was asked of her. The meeting ended with a request fornthe IT firm to regroup. Her leader met with me afterwards. She did not disagree with me about the fact the her subordinate was unprepared, but to chastize me about my tone and for putting the consultsnt on the spot mid meeting which made her look bad and hurt everyone's feelings. SMH I was like lady, this is a business...get your team's collective excrement together...
The reason universities should pursue truth instead of Societal well being is that societal well being is subjective. The fact that so many women were not able to see that and chose societal progress is itself troubling and does not bode well for the future of academia. I think we shall soon see the demise of academia anyway.
The universities do NOT prioritise societal wellbeing, on the contrary, they fail & gets worse in every single measure.
The universities only promotes the social wellbeing of wmn, by reducing it fir men, as a zero sum game. They do the same thing in all the other dimensions, and thus create an American Caste System.
This appeals to wmn because it reflects the way they see other people, ie not as people but as Castes.
We're witnessing before our very eyes the dismantling of our trust in science. Now people who once doubted scientists would have a more credible ground to stand on if science is to be corrupted by those who practice it because they have a vested interest in pursuing "Societal justice" (An utterly meaningless term) over objective truth.
@@OrwellsHousecat Yes, in fact it became a negative sum game...
In the past societal well being and truth were the same. That’s why science, called natural philosophy, was studied along side philosophy and theology. But modern philosophy destroyed truth and religious taught subjectivity.
@@OrwellsHousecatBy your own logic, original poster is correct. Aiming for some centralized control over societal wellbeing should not be the goal because no group of people is capable of getting such a thing right. Aim for the truth and everything gets better. Aim for making society better and it will almost always get worse. The founding fathers tried to make it so we could all live with as much individual freedom, restrained by property rights, as possible because they saw the truth of tyranny. These well-meaning women think some level of tyranny is ok because it’s for “the greater good”.
Expect less innovation, fewer discoveries. Less risk taking.
Well, there may be discoveries.
Expect even more suppression and non-reporting of results, if they don't fit the desired social narrative, or hurt feelings.
There is already less technological innovation, as measured by patents. It began as long ago as 1870. The most demanding of the sciences, physics, has made little progress since the 1960s. The reasons for this are complex, but feminization probably has played only a small part. Feminization, however, has killed the social sciences, where little credibity remains.
And it is already happening. Science funding is being increasingly directed towards projects with "societal impact" and which deal with "trendy topics", instead of being purely based on the substantive quality and innovation of the ideas. We will pay the price...
And MORE Cozy Government Jobs where you can "Look like you are working on something important" - Basically the Government is the new "Husband" who has no time to check upon you, but puts down the money and goes out to work again !!
Nah, I think some of the universities will peel away STEM and stand on their own. We shouldn't be paying people to get useless degrees. If people want a humanities education they should pay for it themselves.
Having just completed my fifth gender studies unit, in which all my lecturers and tutors have been female, and having engaged with several feminist academics directly, I have seen first-hand the willingness to put ideologically-driven/approved views ahead of truth and rigour - to the extent of failing to correct clear factual errors in teachings when they were pointed out.
It is disturbing.
'just completed my fifth gender studies unit' .. Wow, talking about walking through the minefields..
@@Abernis Haha yeah surely he's pulling our leg.. I suppose we need an insider to see how deep the rabbit-hole goes? Or is Tom just doing it for the chicks? (That I can also understand).
@@phattjohnson "unit"
@Abernis ...and paying for it.
Women lie to themselves and each other all the time.
It's literally a female trait.
Food for thought... what is true remains true, whereas morals change.
Nearly every school I go, there's free scholarships exclusively for women and every work place in Academia has special initiatives to increase the number of women, even if they are already more than 50%.
Nursing is over 90% female, yet there are countless scholarships and assistance programs for female nursing students and zero for males. It isn't about equality or equity. It is about dominance and "winning" what they believe is some sort of "gender war."
My daughter was the strongest math student in her high school and represented the school at math contests around the state. She got over twenty full-ride scholarship offers. Her fiancé was the strongest math student at his high school (just fifteen miles away) and also represented his school in math contests. He got ZERO scholarship offers and had to take out student loans to finish college. Obviously, there are many, many scholarships available for women in STEM these days, far more than are available to men.
The goal has always been dominance. "Appear as the flower but be the serpent beneath it.", as it were.
Scholarships based on gender should only be allowed for fields that are very skewed towards one gender. If there are too few women in hard sciences, there should be scholarships for them in that area. Conversely, there should be scholarships for men in traditionally female dominated fields, such as nursing.
That's diversity right?😢
The cold hard truth is in general men want to get physical stuf done and women in general want to not do a lot of physical labor.
Unfortunately this is skewing our academic leadership towards a culture of social thinkers and away from paying attention to getting fundamental physical necessitates accomplished.
I am not blaming women specifically although some are guilty. Many men in academia and leadership are more guilty than women. The ratio of women enabled the social focused men to rise to power.
Do we need to produce minerals in America? No let's just think our way to success.
Do we need to process and make metals in America.
No let's just think our way to success.
Do we need to produce consumer goods in America. No let's just think our way to success.
Do we need to make solar panels, wind turbines and electrical infrastructure necessary for the green revolution? No let's just think our way to success.
While academia is focusing on society and what people should think and do. Most people of action are alienated by the lack of focus on actual productivity and often choose a different path. Many men are just giving up on education, joining the working class, or giving up on our feminized society entirely.
It is critical for the leadership in society to be more balanced between maintaining the critical industry of a country while basing decisions on the fundamentals of reality and meeting the needs of the people.
We must remove magical thinking, and a host of other logical fallacies as well as counterproductivity and corruption and the leaders that use them from our system or we will reap the consequences; the squandering of our resources, destruction of our ability to do work, our true economy, our quality of life, our mental health, our positive national identity, and our souls.
So it was women all along fighting against the truth.
Satan, through lies and perversion of the truth, has been warring on civilization since creation. Satan has sought the destruction of the family through many destructive means since then, including the highly successful and divisive tactics employed by modern "progressives" and "feminists" today: one of which is the "war of the sexes". Both men and women have been tools used by Satan to that end, unfortunately. We need to reject this "war of the sexes", and get back to God and His ways before it is too late!
Women disregard truth. The only truth is are their feelings.
Always has been, friend. Always has been...
☕️
Something something, you need two W witnesses for one M witness in a certain holy book.
The conclusion from this video piece is that societal collapse can be laid out the feet of women. When equity trumps meritocracy then western society is in terminal decline.
Equity doesn't exist in nature. Trying to emulate it in the workplace and other social constructs is an exercise in folly. There's more than enough vocations for humans that both males and females excel in respectively. Forcing square pegs into round holes is getting tiresome.
Bingo.
Or the men that allow it
Academia does not rule the world. Finance and big business does. More women in academia is a symptom, not the cause. On average they will not _really_ challenge power, but take a 'soft' left position based on feelings. That is why they are allowed in those positions. It keeps out actual rebels (hard left).
It's not collapsing because equity is prioritized over meritocracy, but rather the belief that wanting equity is the same as achieving it. The road to hell is paved with good intentions. What they've achieved is not equity, but rather the villification of acknowledging the reality of the world. "Stop talking about the problem and it will go away."
4:51 As this list of differences was read, I became increasingly alarmed. One only has to look up the definition of fascism, to understand why. As a civil engineer, I haven’t noticed these changes too much at my home university. I didn’t realise that the situation was this bad.
In other words: the modern day Copernicus is going to have an increasingly difficult time to voice his hypotheses.
I'm German and Italian. Let me assure you of one thing and remember it for life:
*_Women voted for Hitler more than men did._* And women supported socialism and fascism more than men in Italy.
Groups who opposed the Nazis, like the White Rose, only few were women. Sophie Scholl was the only woman among the White Rose. When it came to her trial, the men, especially her brother Hans, were even willing to sacrifice themselves so they'd let Sophie go, but the Nazis weren't fooled so easily, also because they had a mentality of better executing her despite possible innocence than not doing so despite her involvement.
Resistance to Italian fascism was different because the Mafia wasn't fond of Mussolini and the fascists didn't actually intrude much into people's lives compared to national socialists, reducing the felt need for women even more to resist.
This is a mild point of view. Its way worse in many places. I believe its generally power driven, meaning that just Like comm*nism, helping the less fortunate is just a front for the authoritarian gain of undeserved power.
The Low and mid Tier academics might believe this ist about equity but the peoplenat the actual top are hardcore authoritarians and wield this biased perversion of equity like the weapon it was designed as.
The rise of fascism was specifically to counter this Marxist subversion that the United States is going through right now!
Look up Yuri Bezmenov, his speeches, and also his books - he explained it.
Feminism has destroyed academia
it destroys EVERYTHING
Why though?
Female academia killed academia.
You’re not being inclusive enough.
Yes it is over.
Time for Western countries to establish single-sex universities.
Agreed, but women would want to come to the male ones.
We need Elon to launch his own univversity chain to save America.
Single sex universities yep that's what you got now
Single-sex universities would not address the root cause of the problem, which is the mindset. As seen in the data it is not a male vs. female issue but that on average there are different values with considerable minorities on both sides. This means the solution would be two different kinds of universities, separated by a different code of conduct. A lot like it was in the past. There were the universities based on the ideas of the enlightenment while there were religious institutions heavily involved in education and to a certain degree science (e.g. people like Gregor Mendel) which were bound to their moral framework. This separation in a fact based approach and a belief based approach could also work in the future.
@@barrysheridan9186 That's okay. The single-sex universities would arrange balls for eligible members of the opposite sex to attend. This is how things happened in the past.
It was a surprise to no man that once women dominated academia it became inherently irrational.
What?
@@Lacey13-i3b He said he believes that most women are inherently irrational. He would not be wrong, as most humans are. It's so much easier to see irrationality in the other than in yourself.
You don't speak for me dude
Yep, 100% evident.
Oh ja, men are sooo much more rational. I see that every day 😂😂😂
This is probably the most balanced and comprehensive overview of this topic.
Excellent job!
What she's really saying that the boot that Orwell predicted "would stamp on a human face... forever" will be pink.
orwell made some remarks about that in the book as well...
A high heel, stamping on a human face forever...
😺
it is not a boot it is a rainbow stiletto :)
"Give women the vote and they will become your masters" - Cato the Elder, arguing before the Roman Senate
The downfall of our society is well and truly underway.
Rome has fallen so to speak. Men will be less likely to defend this type of society with their lives, and a civilization will start to unravel.
Sadly
Academia is losing all credibility. Recent events at Scientific American seem very relevant.
If humanity actually cared about technological progress, why don't we instead focus our efforts on things like Alchemy, alongside resurrecting people such as Bernhard Riemann and Nikola Tesla from the dead.
The first article on the homepage of Scientific American is 'Why ‘Brain Rot’ Is 2024’s Word of the Year' lol.
Yes only in daddy Peterson's alt tears we trust.
@@locinolacolino1302 Blimey. You have high hopes for technology.
what recent events are you referring to besides the below comment about brain rot.
I'VE SAID FOR DECADES WE SHOULD RETURN TO SINGLE-SEX SCHOOLS, SECONDARY AND COLLEGE. I'm a male secondary-school teacher, and over the year, everyone I have told this to said I was wrong.
I honestly think that's irrelevant
There are some pros and some cons for this idea that you mooted. On the one hand, boys are falling behind in schools because they are effectively being told they are irrelevant because it is apparently becoming a women's world, and because they have fewer male role models. This is a big problem that has been pointed out a lot. On the other hand, when I did my compulsory national service in the armed forces, I noticed that the young men in my cohort who had been to boys-only schools did generally not know how to relate to women. Boys definitely need male role models. Sometimes having a few girls in a male-dominated class is a civilising influence on the men in the class. However, having a few boys in a female-dominated class results in the boys feeling alienated. I sympathise with your suggestion. The fact that it arises at all is an expression of the problems that have evolved from female- dominated schooling.
It would be better to educate everyone on why some of these thought processes are wrong-as the debates and mindsets spill out into the real world
I completely agree with you.
What? How is this a good idea?
So, that is why the quality of a University education has gone to hell. Yes?
Indeed some rebels a little while ago decided to show how absurd universities were and wrote fake papers for peer review. They found as long as the papers were heavily biased toward feminist dogma they would be accepted. It also why there is a lot of government funding being wasted on ridiculous feminist based research and not something practical.
Well... yes, but not directly. Since the incorporation of women into academic positions, salaries have gone down..... and now few academics (independently of the gender) have a decent salary. Much less one that would allow men to continue being "providers" for their families. As a consequence, many men are leaving academia... thus increasing the number of women and generating a vicious cycle.
Its been proving that today's Universities education is equal to 1950s High-school education
No, but it is a factor. The primary reason is racketeering. Schools get paid per student graduated, the students get substantial loans from the government, so the more students you can pass as quickly as possible the more of that government money you can get. So you end up with dozens of bullshit courses about subjects that appeal to women that are easy to pass, simply to get more money.
@@doltBmB That is correct, and explains a lot about what is wrong with the modern university, but it doesn't explain everything. The degeneracy is ideological in origin, not cynical.
Economist and professor of 30+ years here.
All degrees are not the same. In a real economics program(not political economy), mathematics is the filter. If you can't do advanced math you can't be an economist.
American women (not including foreign students) as a strong stereotype generally can't do the math, and the ones that perhaps can do it lack the interest to pursue it. A black female in mathematical economics (again, not political economy) is a unicorn.
Currently , in our economics department, there is one woman and she's from India.
No if I walk the halls in sociology, to some degree even psychology, and especially the fake subjects like general, gender, African, etc. studies… It's almost always women. Specifically, American women.
I agree. How do we shine a light on these distinctions so that the public can understand? For instance the media will call you an economist regardless of whether or not you actually have a grasp with mathematics sufficient to understand economics. If some sort of organization were created to label people, the other issues with this aside, that organization would be susceptible to subversion just like any other and we would end up labeling political economists as economists again. What is the solution to the intentional fog between the public and the truth?
I must disagree with your dismissal of political economy as not "real" economics. The division between politics and "pure" economics is artificial and false. The great pre-20th century economists (Adam Smith, David Ricardo, Thomas Malthus, Karl Marx, and as late as the 20th century John Maynard Keynes) were all political economists. "Pure" mathematical economics only emerged in recent decades. As you correctly write, great competency in mathematics is a filter for persons in this field. Compared to the earlier political economists who were thinkers truly attempting to understanding society, the overwhelming majority of these "pure" economists are equation jugglers whose conclusions have little if anything to do with reality. You don't have to be Isaac Newton or Albert Einstein to be strong in political economy, which remains the subject with real worth.
I am an applied mathematician who almost drifted towards Economics before realizing how garbage and poorly unfounded the state of the field really is. A field based on unnecessary rigor and poor empirical basis is vaporware, not science. 95% of strongly mathematical Economics could be disappeared and nobody would know the difference. You could not have a more useless job yet are full of hubris.
@@TheInnerParty PHYSICS ENVY. MODELS ARE OVER SIMPLIFICATIONS. ECONOMICS IS A PSEUDO SCIENCE
Prof. @TheInnerParty, thank you for an interesting insight.
I started out in academia about 10 years ago, and it is miserable. My concern with truth and merit are obsolete, apparently. Everything is surface-level now, and the way to get ahead is to get in with the cliques of women professors who protect all young women and regard men as the enemy. No wonder the impact of our work has gone to shit.
Feminism functioning as it should.
Cool story, bro
My conclusion is that this women are not worried about other's feelings, because they are not worried about the feelings of people who they doesn't allow to freely speak. In my opinion they only think about what is the most political correct at the time they lives for saving their social apereance.
People don't realize that without free speech, you can't be inclusive, instead you are being exclusionary to everyone the bosses happen to disagree with.
This is baby logic, yet so many just can't see that because they happen to share the popular/most vocal unpopular position.
Tyranny is the real agenda. Once you realise the world is ruled by psycopaths everything slots into place
There is no social justice.There is just justice... Making justice 'social' makes it unjust
The problem is not with social justice itself, however far left has made the concept a bit ridiculous. The problem it is being pushed dogmatically and stupidly, not based on facts, but triing to hammering facts to fit into the ideology.
What do you mean by "making justice social"? What's non-social justice?
This
@davesprague1542 That's not an answer, just slogans. Isn't all justice about relations between people? Doesn't that make all justice social?
@@yoramgt No. If social justice were the constitutional aim of the nation, the motto inscribed in the pediment of the Supreme Court Building, "Equal Justice Under Law," would instead read "Equality, By Law."
I remember having a debate with some ladies about a controversial topic. I was told that science needed to catch up with their ideas.
I think women, in general, do not give a toss about truth. What matters is their feelings, and making sure feelings are never risked.
I think thay that might be why there were male and female occupations in society back nefore the insanity took over.
Academia is FUCKED big time. We don't have educators but activists
Thank you for clearly explaining this study and for including the outcome summaries for major collection of topics through your video.
There's a glaring omission here. This whole piece focuses on faculty members, as though they were the ones running universities. But academics have progressively abdicated their hold over the university to the administrative class (in which I include the bloated service sector it has ushered in: writing support, educational developers, accessibility, counselling, puppy-petting de-stress centres...) which is female dominated. This, it strikes me, is more significant than preferences or priorities of actual academics, which count for very little in the way modern universities are managed.
Spot on!
yes
This is excatcly true. I know this first hand via a close family member, female, that works 'high' admin positions (in 2 different Uni). And she discussed this problem with me many times. But, social-colleague pressure being, she raised some concerned on some occasions, but sadly could never really tip the balance in any other way. Cheers
Don't forget accreditation and institutional effectiveness, which are also very female-dominated.
Accessibility is in providing access to disabled people? This is what you’re complaining about?
As I get closer to retirement, I am having fun in my classes challenging the academic orthodoxy.
Please do!
@@heikejohannajahns3257 I'll continue!
You waited for how many years to start?
@@bosshog8844 I'm speaking specifically of the woke orthodoxy. Prior to wokism, there really wasn't the same pressure to conform.
Fight the powah, cister! 😊
I left my job in Health and Safety at a major university because making people follow the rules to keep them healthy and safe has now become a low priority compared to never making someone uncomfortable by pointing out they are behaving in a manner that could get someone killed. Feeling unsafe is considered more dangerous than actually being unsafe. I couldn't take any more condescending struggle sessions forced on me based on uncomfortable feelings generated by me simply doing the basics of my job.
"Feeling unsafe is considered more dangerous than being unsafe." That's huge and what you'd expect from emotionalistic dominance.
Health and Safety is a horrible career. Both my wife and my best friend are senior H&S managers and they've been in a losing battle their whole careers. Executive and Management never supports you so you're swimming up stream the whole time. Its been like that at every company they've worked at.
@@kyleme9697 Absolutely agree it is a terrible career. The comparative pay is crap, administrative support is almost nonexistent, and for the past 10 years the situation has been rapidly deteriorating to a prioritization of avoiding fines and cutting costs rather than actual safety. I actually took a huge pay cut to move into health and safety largely because the hospital I was working for was so lacking in the health and safety arena. My priorities have always been others, and it was worth it to me at the time. But I can't handle it any longer. I just can't allow myself to be destroyed any longer for caring about others for a living.
"...uncomfortable feelings generated by me doing the basics of my job..." Exactly. That was the cardinal sin I committed in a similar situation, where it was proof of insubordination if I outperformed any female colleagues or had thoughts deemed above my "station." Frankly infuriating when you're watching incompetence rule.
@@schmidtbrosband early on in my career I recall a meeting with a female leader where at the end she requested feedback or suggestions. As a noob to the dept. I made a few to the assembled group. She thanked me but afterwards my boss cornered me and was like what did you saybin the meeting my colleague just ripped me a new one saying you were aggressive and undermined her authority. I couldnt beleive it I said to him dude she asked for suggestions and I gave a few WTF man?? That was my intro to this dynamic.
I am a PhD student . I feel so alienated i am the only male PhD student in a department of 24 phd student ! Most of the fundings are also for female students only in our department. I feel like they overcompensated or took revenge if percentage if men here .
look at the bright side, plenty of chicks to date? :D
@@sumomaster5585do you really think that’s a good thing?
The problem isn't the inclusion of women, it's the accommodation of women's preferences to the detriment of actual academia.
Women are one track minded.... their needs. So the making an argument is futile
Turns out, that’s the same thing
@@ruprechtgreatrex2129 Gotdamn!
I think it's also the TYPE of women who are drawn to work in n academia, who aren't neccesarily representative of women, overall.
The same way that top-level executives may be mostly male, but they probably have different traits to just the average man in the street.
Because you don't just randomly end up in a certain job; Different jobs appeal to different personality types And sex is a pretty big factor in personality type. Men and women behave differently.
But that's not the same thing as saying "ALL men have personality type X, and ALL women have personality type Y".
So academic jobs may favour women (whether thru biased recruiting, or because the sexes have different aptitudes, on average), but that's probably only a SPECIFIC personality-type, in women, which isn't the same as women, overall.
One leads to another.. slippery slope is not a fallacy.. it is the 2nd law of thermodynamics (entropy)
The feminisation of everything has happened
Leading to inversion of youth that are vulnerable to adults of industry and ideology that wants an excuse to 'medically' intervene.
Not everything, or we wouldn't even be having this conversation and Donald Trump wouldn't be the president-elect.
Feminism Ruins Everything
@@harrymills2770I hope so
@@harrymills2770 wrong. The OP is saying that the feminization of everything IS HAPPENING. I.e., that’s the trend. It’s not that everything has already become totally feminized. Besides, there’s a class and culture component to all this, and it’s liberal institutions (academia) and urban professional areas (big cities) where this is happening most. But the majority of US voters are not in academia and don’t work in big cities or in professional fields.
I'm a high school teacher. These days, there is A LOT of complaining - about everything!. The amount of homework, the type of homework, the difficulty of homework, the explanations in class, the activities in class, the tests, the grades,....
My point: The girls do 98% of this complaining (the parents do the remaining 2%).
It is as if they have been brought up to believe that they know better, that they have as much right to make decisions as the teachers, and that complaining is a normal way to get what you want.
I hate it!
And this just continues in academia and probably everywhere else.
I can relate to that
@@christian-s1i1w Are you also a teacher?
@@Tommy_007 Yes Tommy, at the local business school. I was so disappointed. Where I am, there is a legal department and the students complain about this and that after each exam. Lawyers are handling the cases. It's ridiculous. Whenever something is against their judgement, they go after you. Admittedly also the guys, although my impression is that the girls are worse, as if they want compensation for standing on their own two feet or shouldn't have to do that.
@@christian-s1i1w I'm sorry to hear that. It's terrible.
At our school (and probably many other schools), management is afraid that the students will go to other schools because the school's funding is based on the number of students. This means that they are afraid to tell the students what is right or wrong; they just let them complain, and the teachers have the burden of proof. I find it humiliating to be part of such a system.
@Tommy_007 Yes we have something similar here, and it is indeed humiliating. When they complain, you have to write a long, formal defense, to be delivered within two weeks, and they have the right to complain about anything, to comment on your reply but not the other way around, deadlines don't apply to them only to you. In addition, here they are told that exams shouldn't ask detailed questions (in order to reduce their stress), we have bathrooms for three preferences and the walls are in baby colours.
5:13 Peter Turchin, a leading writer in the field of cliodynamics, writes about the father son cycle which refers to war/catastrophic events not being repeated until the population is no longer inocculated from making a repeat mistake. The numbers being shown here would seem to support his theories and actually accelerate the decline of this “inoculation”. Without being challenged by ‘offensive’ ideas, a population is more easily radicalized by concepts that would easily have been cast out if they were more readily prepared.
I might be making some leaps here, but i doubt it.
The problem with not allowing "potentially harmful" ideas to be shared is that ALL ideas are potentially harmful! And this absolutely includes many ideas that are dear to the hearts of most academics and especially female academics.
It’s mommy behavior, “I don’t see any reason why you need that, therefore.” They really don’t give a fuck about the harm, it’s just that they like to watch the crying when sharp toys are taken away.
You only come to these conclusions because you don't understand how to use girl math.
Water is potentially harmful but also essential. Like so many things.
So this says women are more oppressive and support forced quota and are mostly against merit based advancement
Yes, for many reasons. They’re more empathetic than men on average. This is why they gravitate to DE&I.
@@m_a_i_l_l_i_w that is not a good thing, and if they were more energetic they would focus on the job at hand and not some fake justice in their heads.
@@m_a_i_l_l_i_w I'd recommend reading through the comments again. It's not about empathy, in fact, they lack it for an entire gender. It's always been about power, control, jealousy, and unearned benefits.
What happens in a divorce court is not some fringe element of society. They argue in favour of male circumcision for aesthetic reasons, they don't actually subscribe to. It's all much darker than you think. Philosophers knew it, and that's why philosophy is no longer a first year requirement in universities.
Maybe we have changed the definition of merit
You know different people have different opportunities and different circumstances right from birth
I know shocking revelation but it’s true
This is happening in the gaming industry, and the experience is NOT good.
“Stopping a battle is much harder than starting it. Starting it only requires you to shout ‘Attack!’ but when you want to stop it, everyone is busy.”
― Terry Pratchett, Monstrous Regiment
There are some gaps. Your statement that men are less interested in moral consequences is only sound if moral consequences are defined as serving DEI goals. Discernment and teaching of truth is clearly a higher moral goal.
I 100% agree. The article presenter clearly failed to identify the hypocrisy. Equating DEI with morality is laughable.
@@shaneusher2042Yes it is the opposite of morality.
@@shaneusher2042 I read it as more interested in "social engineering". "Morality" is how you make it palatable for the masses to maximize coziness and minimize push back.
Well said. There should be NO conflict between seeking truth and being moral. In fact, seeking truth IS the moral thing to do. What kind of morality that is against seeking truth? That is NOT morality. A "morality" that suppresses truth is NOT moral, it is EVIL. If the pursue of DEI and "social justice" requires one to deny truth, then they are EVIL! Without truth and a lesser degree facts, there are no morality! A truly moral system cannot be based on lies. It is a Marxists and Communists schemes to co-op the word "morality" to mask their true intentions.
@@shaneusher2042 she proves her own point without knowing it
I'm not sure that egalitarianism is the best word to use here. Most of the academics you're speaking of are anything BUT egalitarian. They are incredibly over invested in the prescribed "victim hierarchy". Maybe "equity-seeking" ?
They're simply behaving in a manner to fulfill the narratives their brains have been bathed in. A self fulfilling hivemind hellscape while reality keeps smacking them in the face to wake up. Feminists are nightmare fuel that will bring down the west. Then will be replaced with cultures that value having kids.
That's because it isn't. You cannot tell the cow you are going to slaughter it. You must cajole it and convince it, guide it, get it to walk itself into the factory.
By George, I think you've got it.
American Caste System
(wmn on top in each Caste, of course)
Ww3 should be fought by ONLY women for equality
l was going to listen to the whole video but when you described the reason women were increasing in numbers at universities and to some degree excelling you only gave the reason as just women out performing men. You failed to mention that women, as in most areas, are being given more places due to DEI, affirmative action, and quite literally bursary's etc are being offered ONLY to women. This is not exactly a sign of women outperforming men. Indeed this is just plain gender bias. Since some schools are beginning to remove some, if not all, of these biases the numbers go back to almost where they were. Universities are run by feminists and as such are a very hostile environment to men, particularly with such things a supposed rape culture and plain old man hating. The fact you do mention this leaves me with some doubt about what else you have to say.
Agreed.
i believe that womens do have some psychological traits which give them edge over men in test. you know thinks like more patience which enable them to study longer on avarage
@@MilosVuksanovic-sj8kjI haven't found that to be the case in mathematics at all. Men are much more willing to face the long and lonely hours of confusion. Women want to do it as a kind of social gathering, but the most difficult math really requires you to be in a quiet room by yourself.
I think you are wrong; male brains take significantly longer to develop than female ones. Moreover, the greater ability of girls to sit passively and do what they are told is an advantage in education.
However, when women were struggling against men, society made great efforts to balance things more fairly. Now, women are doing better, society doesn't give a monkey's.
Women are also the gatekeepers for hiring. We needed someone with a strong physics education and background, but HR had an army of people in between the screening of candidates and the interviews. I knew 2 exceedingly well qualified candidates who applied but who were rejected by HR with no input from the department (and the 3 people doing the screening for that position all happened to be women). Instead, we got a slate of 6 candidates (all women) who were mediocre (to put it mildly). We couldn't hire any of them and made HR start again. Took us a year and a half to finally find a person qualified enough to do the job (a woman from India).
You simply can not have justice without holding the truth as an ultimate value. The suppression of truth, even and perhaps especially if done in the name of some purportedly moral purpose, is itself a terrible injustice. One that perpetrates an endless stream of ever greater injustices and renders the pursuit of justice impossible until rectified.
It is ABSOLUTELY NOT EGALATARIANISM. It does not emphasize equality among people. It does not advocate that all humans should be treated equally, have the same political, economic, social, and civil rights, and enjoy equal opportunities. It absolutely emphasises the need to bias one group in favour of another group - and in many cases to "make up for perceived losses or slights" To say it emphasises "egalitarianism" minimises the real objectives and BEHAVIOUR of women in universities as a group operation.
@hariseldon3786 You're absolutely right. It's a naked power grab that uses egalitarianism as its cover story, yet another example of a wolf in sheep's clothing.
Yeh selection interviews should simply use a id number instead of a name & have the person in a booth with a curtain with a machine that creates a genderless voice when the person answers questions so there’s no way the selectors can tell the gender, race or age of the person in the booth. Then there’s no choice but selection by merit.
I think you may be confusing equity with equality
One is mathematical....empirical....3 is greater than 2
The other philosophical...A subjective expression of value..."Ford trucks are better than Chevys"
A "justified true belief"
And as Solon observed in 400BC..."equal is not fair...fair is not equal"
So, a disabled parking space near the front door of a shopping mall offends the principle of equality
But supports the principle of equity
And, as a society we generally accept and tolerate that, and may even defend that inequity against transgressors
Yes, and egalitarianism is a horrible thing anyway. Always was and always will be.
@pyepye-io4vu
Ya...who needs "justice"....right?
Sounds like we need an all Male Higher Education option
The trouble is that the left heiffers will protest to get the all-male rule removed while strongly insisting on their rights to all-female organisations. This has happened over the last several decades.
I think the essay misses the point that a moral frame work built on falsehoods is not moral. Avoiding worrying research is in effect saying we would prefer to live in a pretend world, than find out how the world really works and then adapt our behaviours in a way that improves the moral out come. Truth and morality are NOT incompatible. But working hard based on a false understanding of how things are is very likely to lead to failed outcomes that leave people disadvantaged. To prefer that way of working IS immoral.
100% i don't know why they didn't focus on that more.
Woke is simply stupid evil, and the devils that promote it are pretending to be angels of light.
@@Sarcasmarkus shes proving her point.. shes no exception.
Very good point.
@@Sarcasmarkus that’s not the audience they’re trying to focus on.😂
"The inclusion of women is a great achievement for Western liberal societies". This is the conclusion you reached at the end of this video?
Exactly. It is, rather, a disaster.
She's a woman herself though... Discrepansies and paradoxes in her speech are to be expected.
Even hen they hit 90% they will be a minority or, 'the silent majority' still 'fighting for a seat at the table'.
My thought exactly when she said that.
To be fair, it’s not ALL women, it’s the women who have been indoctrinated into Critical Theory, Postmodernism, Marxism and intersectionality.
The only one of the ideas above that was created by a woman was intersectionality.
The others by European men.
To paraphrase Dr Jordan Peterson, "In order to know the truth you must risk being offensive in order to discover it"
We need more men in academic spaces
Honestly. It sounds like men and women each want a different institution here. As a man, I do not wish to adhere to the policies preferred by women. I would prefer to let them do their own thing away from me, elsewhere.
The struggle against social justice and DEI is the greatest social issue of the modern era. We either choose feelings, or we choose truth. Truth must win.
The sad thing is that we don't have to choose. We just have to prioritize truth and fact when they conflict.
Truth always wins in the long run
If universities are to survive, we MUST have more male-only and female-only schools--and let the best succeed.
Is that "succeed" with or without programs to incentivise certain people?
Let me guess, when men’s schools succeed, women will ask for quotas.
@@lancebarnes3970 do it and let the cream rise to the top is what jem is saying. I deally probably run the experiment as co-ed v male v female I assume.
@@GrandORdEr40 Sorry, it was sarcasm
@@lancebarnes3970 oh sorry for my misinterpretation. Have a nice day.
This is interesting research but as a former university teacher for me it does not really address the most important long-term trend, which is the creation of whole new subjects designed from the outset to be dominated by women. From that perspective, the original sin is Women's Studies, which, like Business Studies, has practically no academic content, but is purely ideological. This means that there are no standards by which contributions can be judged; so tenure is awarded to friends of those in power, and the whole thing spirals into an intellectual black hole, with no attempt at logic or rationality or fact, and in many cases with explicit hostility to those values, described by large groups of women who all automatically agree with each other in terms of the patriarchy, toxic masculinity, rape culture, etc. etc. This project was so successful that other female-dominated 'grievance studies' subjects were invented and institutionalized, and at the same time departments of education were churning out university administrators with the same kind of beliefs. So this has allowed these values to be extended not just to history and psychology and so on, but even to such subjects as astronomy and mathematics. The one new element, which has caused this to backfire on its original perpetrators, is that it is now the students rather than the staff who have the most radically idiotic views, and the comfortably-off tenured feminists have seen themselves re-branded as TERFs. The only ones who have escaped it were those who were wise enough to make their writings and lectures so totally incomprehensible that nobody, whether friend or foe, could tell what they had ever been talking about in the first place.
Absolutely. There was a "prehistory of woke", and it show more now because the undergraduates are less skillful in articulating it.
@@Theoreme.de.Gudule That's true but the reason is that it's now been established that you don't even need to pretend to have arguments. All that matters is keeping up with fashion, and teenagers are naturally better at that than adults.
That's outrageous that women de-prioritize truth. That's not just an alternate priority. That's Ant-Truth, i.e, DIS-information.
One could simply call it "lies".
They'd rather be viewed as nice than honest.
Dude! Give them a break. Regardless of how much "education" they have, they will always be hampered by girl math.
Lies by omissions
It's in their nature. Always has been. Refer to the entirety of human history for verification.
Prioritising "social justice" over "truthfulness" is exactly what the Church did when it reigned over universities in Galileo's time. It is 100% hindering of the "public square" at the heart of science and moreover of learning.
There wasn`t any "social justice" in Galileo`s time.
Galileo ran afoul of politics, not because the church opposed “truth.” For the past two thousand years, the Catholic Church was a primary investor of scientific research. Science was seen as studying God’s creation in order to know Him better. So speaking of “truth” question secular narratives about religion and the church
The modern church has also been feminized with catastrophic results.
@@lordjim3109 not as we know it today but nonetheless it was about reinforcing answers to the meaning of existence rather than preserving the questioning of it, such as in the format of a public square, which is really what lies at the heart of the scientific method, of deliberative democracy, of a separation of Govt powers in a judiciary etc.
@@AliciatheCho true, but investing in reinforrcing the answers it likes, similar to the woke grip on academia
All done at the expense of men
Yeah... pretty much.
I don’t have a huge amount of sympathy tbh… most still refuse to hold women to basic standards for the sake of sanctimonious ego masturbation. They would rather talk about “incels” on the internet than the corrosion of institutions.
Greetings from the USA. Wow- Beautiful, Smart, Logical and Honest. 🎉 Great Information and delivery!
76 yr old , California architect , father of 4 , experiencing toxic “ Family Estrangement Dysfunction “ with two PhD 40+ daughters , and 35 yt toxic divorced ( 3x ) ex wife .
The End of Western Civilization .
They just projecting and using all the tools in behavioral manipulation book
Hi sir,
I am a construction management professional with BIM background and glad to know someone from our industry is over here. I would request to answer my 3 questions if possible.
Q1.Is there any reason why you would attribute this toxic dominant faction of feminism majorly to western civilization?
Because, it is high here in India in the AEC industry with the most venomous ready to sting female senior architects to junior female apprentices. The junior females i come across especially in architecture domain and management are highly egoistic and draw conclusions easily on a scenario or a person than trying to observe, absorb , adapt and finally react. Most of them go straight to adapt and react( only body language in terms of adapt I mean).
Q2.Is the AEC industry in west dominated by female designers?
Q3. If so, Can asian males survive the same onslaught from western females ( including western educated women of other races) or will it be very difficult?
Asking the last 2 questions because I am planning to shift over to Europe or canada. I do have few relatives into IT jobs in Europe and America's. But none into construction except, for middle East. It would be informative if u reply sir.
Maybe you should've chosen your partner better.
Frankfurt School Cultural Marxism and "the long march through the institutions"
@@imagomagus yes he should have married an asian
Interesting how the priority is for financial resources to be directed to social programs - programs that typically don't generate economic benefits. Has anyone turned their mind to the economic benefits developed by these feminine priorities? Or is there some other reason most of the western nations are experiencing rising debt an productivity declines? It couldn't possibly be due the feminisation of academia? But how would we ever know if no one is permitted to research this truthfully?
look up "Yuri Besmenov ideological subversion", it's the long global power game.
Expect ever increasing calls for "loan forgiveness", as more and more degrees are churned out, in fields that don't pay well.
To be fair, billionaires are buying colleges and turning them into private for profit money making machines rather than public institutions there with the sole purpose to facilitate learning and development for all of man kind.
And the blue collar workers will be paying for the college educations of other people.
90,000 students per year graduate with a degree in GENDER STUDIES. There is essentially zero demand for someone with such a degree, other than teaching Gender Studies at a college.
that's why rollo tomassi calls student loan forgiveness a woman's issue. they major in things that don't pay well.
@@Morrisfactor And these people are very toxic to society.
Conclusion = Men prioritise facts, Women prioritise feelings. 🤷🏽♂️
I think I'd be more impressed about women patting themselves on the back for domination of higher learning, if it had been solely off merit. I'm sure there are many women who deserve their positions but, I am also aware of things like "grade inflation", having taken place. Things like governmental quotas etc.
There are literally zero women who deserve their positions. None. All women passively benefit from massive positive discrimination. It's true even here in the Middle East. (Look up female college student statistics in Iran / Saudi Arabia / Turkey)
Exactly. They didn't earn it.
The way these types overlook the fact they received literal crutches is quite something.
It is the shamelessness of it all that gets to me, how can you have so little honour?
Same applies to the press… with an enduring effect on how facts are presented and therefore perceived.
The press is arguably worse, or at least, more blatant.
@ - indeed.
The same phenomena happened to the press, as the number of women increased, the value and quality of the press fell. Now most people, with great justification, do not trust the mainstream media at all.
The irony of DEI is that it goes directly against what it claims to support. By far the most important diversity in academia is diversity of rational viewpoints so society can learn from discussion and debate among people with different viewpoints. It is outrageously inequitable to manipulate access to opportunities in ways that are based on group identities instead of looking at people fairly as individuals. And excluding people based on disagreement with how they look at controversial issues is the opposite of being inclusive.
Like most left wing concepts.
It’s because it’s based off of Marxist theory. They want to force equality of outcome, NOT equality of opportunity.
Equity is forced equality of outcomes.
The left wants everyone to look different but think the same.
Western Society is dying a slow death....
One of the reasons is "Tokenism"...
Recruiting people not on their achievements or intelligence, rather on meeting quota's from certain groups...
It is in all of the institutions...
Education, Public Service, Armed Forces...
"Masculine republics give way to feminine democracies, and feminine democracies give way to tyranny."
- Aristotle
I fear we're steadily on our way there.
Wow, that’s an amazing quote!
Also, just gonna leave this here, “The victor will never be asked if he told the truth.”
The alarming thing about the results here is not that there are so many women going to college and becoming faculty. It's the fact that these women overwhelmingly put traditional female values like agree-ability, inclusion, and avoiding problems over the values that allow people to pursue the truth. If academia isn't pursuing the truth then it can't produce anything of value for society and is thus worthless. I'm not sure how to get this fundamental truth across to women, or academia, I suspect getting them to accept the message's truth instead of retreating into self protective defensiveness would be the problem, but if the general public continues turning against academia and supporting it's de-funding they should at least not be surprised.
These women may not be capable of understanding the concept of objective universal reality-centered truth. Many women can't tell a fact from a feeling.
We can't change it because it's happening by design
This is why women and men historically went to different schools. We don’t think the same and we don’t inherently value the same things, both towards the universe around us and how we value each other.
The beginning of this video mentions something important. She said women didn’t receive education for centuries as if education is a resource like water that should be given to everyone.
However, from my perspective men didn’t get educated because it was something fun.. the world around men has been hostile and difficult to navigate since the beginning of our species.
In other words, men had to go out and risk their lives to figure out how the elements around them worked. They had to figure these things out because everything from wild animals to bad weather, to bacteria on uncooked food, disease being transferred to us by a mere insect bite etc… we were forced in a literal sense to learn how the world around us functioned so our civilization didn’t collapse in a generation…
So, if women truly wanted to educate themselves, was there a need for feminism? No, all they needed to do was walk outside and spend a few thousand years risking their own lives to figure out the laws of the universe around them.
Didn’t want to do that huh? Instead wanted to be educated on the things men risked themselves to figure out? That’s fine, but then why are you now trying to change the base expectations we built into our society and education systems (like free speech and the pursuit of truth over feelings)? If you wanted educational systems that favored how women operate why not just go design and build your own institutions and just invite women who thought like you to attend them?
Yes! And they can start their own businesses also if they don't like the options available, but somehow that doesn't seem to happen, no, quotas are necessary.
The issue with "why didnt women just go outside and learn about the world or go and build their own institutions" is that they were usually killed by men and prevented from doing so in the first place.
If I'm summing this up correctly, women promote the collective and men promote individualism. Sounds about right especially since women are the ones that have the most power now and want to get more. Thanks for sharing!
Working in a prior role as an assessment analyst, I would often read male students' course feedback complainting about the multiple "diversity" courses they were required to take and the unwelcoming culture this created for male students. State and federal funding to universities should be cut to schools that fail to maintain balance. Thus extends to employing incompetent people in roles to gain credit in identity politics.
There IS NO higher goal than THE PURSUIT OF TRUTH. Any who fail to realize this have NO PLACE in university.