Topic: Decline of the West
I know it’s one of feminism’s most cherished myths. But if you believe that women are more empathic, inclusive and collegial than men and that they possess superior management and leadership abilities, well, you need to go back to school. High school.
To begin with this claim is a typical example of ideological schizophrenia. Feminists who preach the doctrine of gender neutrality—that there are no essential differences between men and woman—are hardly being logical when they tout female superiority in the workplace. Gender—what an ugly word it’s become!—is supposed to be socially and culturally determined, and to the detriment of women at that. But if women as a group possess the virtues listed above, is that not thanks to socially driven gender determinism? And doesn’t that suggest that society’s gender bias favors women in certain important ways?
Now of course feminists are unfazed by such contradictions. Socially constructed gender roles oppress women except when they don’t. But theories of gender have become so tangled and bizarre that now the snake is eating its own tail. At Mount Holyoke College in Massachusetts they’ve banned the performance of The Vagina Monologues—a play that only yesterday was holy writ in the eyes of feminists. Then it was discovered that TVM discriminates against a certain class of women: those not in possession of a physical vagina. After all, if Bradley/Chelsea Manning claims to be a woman, then he/she is a woman. Claims to the contrary based on the observation that Manning is not physiologically equipped for the role are sexist and oppressive. So The Vagina Monologues had to go.
What remains, then, of the claim that women as a group possess certain unique managerial and leadership attributes? Not much. Feminist theory doesn’t really support it and neither does the evidence of one’s eyes. As individuals, men and women display the full range of human virtues and vices. There are men who are bad managers and women who are inspirational leaders. One of the best leaders I encountered in my many years of Army service was a female captain. But in private conversations when they’re being honest many working women will tell you that hell is a workplace with an oversupply of women.
Cliques, tale carrying, grievance mongering, backstabbing, jealously, vendettas—in all too many instances women replicate these high-school vices in the workplace. To take a single example: Women often have a hard time working with or for someone they dislike. Of course no one enjoys dealing with an obnoxious coworker or boss but men tend not to take the situation personally. Women, on the other hand, tend to take it very personally indeed.
The smelly little orthodoxies of modern feminism are mostly concerned with papering over women’s real workplace problems while promoting phony issues like pay equality. It wasn’t always this way. Workplace sexual harassment is a genuine injustice and the women’s rights movement deserves great credit for focusing attention on it. But it seems that as the real barriers to female progress crumble, imagined and exaggerated grievances multiply. Cries of bias and discrimination have only grown louder. But at some point women who want to lead are going to have to stop whining and start leading. “We are what we habitually do,” said Aristotle. Yet even the most cautious and partial suggestion that this must happen, e.g. Sheryl Sandberg’s Lean In: Women, Work, and the Will to Lead, is denounced by feminists as “tone-deaf” and “elitist.” Though Sandberg was careful to honor all of the ideological totems of feminism—discrimination, sexism, sexual harassment, gender equality, etc., etc.—her idea that women should strive to earn leadership positions was reviled. We have affirmative action for that!
The best, most effective leaders are those who purge their minds of conventional wisdom and see the world as it truly is. So I would advise ambitious women to shun feminist ideology—and as a reminder of what high school was really like to read or re-read Stephen King’s Carrie.
