The Assault on Maleness: How the Great Feminisation is Undermining Civilisation, By Mrs Vera West and Peter West
Lurking in the shadows of modern society is a silent revolution that's far more insidious than any political uprising or economic shift. It's the Great Feminisation, a demographic takeover where women have flooded traditionally male-dominated institutions, imposing feminine norms that stifle competition, rationality, and progress. This isn't just about equality; it's an outright attack on maleness, orchestrated through anti-discrimination laws, cultural shaming, and institutional biases that favour emotional consensus over objective truth. The result? A weakened society where "wokeness" isn't some abstract ideology but the natural by-product of feminised group dynamics run amok. Drawing on data from law, journalism, medicine, and academia, this post exposes how this shift is eroding the foundations of Western civilisation, and why reversing it is essential for survival.
The seeds of this assault were planted decades ago, but the tipping point arrived in the 2010s when women achieved majority status in key professions. Take law schools: Women first outnumbered men in 2016, reaching 56% by 2024. Nineteen of the top 20 U.S. law schools now enrol more women than men. Law firm associates flipped to majority female in 2023, and women now constitute 33% of U.S. judges, with 63% of Biden's appointees being female. This isn't organic excellence; it's engineered through quotas and lawsuits that punish "underrepresentation." Companies like Goldman Sachs and Coca-Cola have shelled out hundreds of millions in settlements for alleged gender bias, forcing employers to prioritise women to avoid legal ruin.
Journalism tells a similar tale of conquest. The New York Times staff became majority female in 2018, now at 55%. In 1974, only 10% of NYT reporters were women; today, global surveys show women as 37% of reporters worldwide, but their influence skews coverage toward victim narratives and emotional appeals. Women are more likely to be portrayed as victims in news stories, reinforcing a feminine lens that prioritises "cohesion" over hard facts. This feminisation isn't empowering, it's transforming media into an echo chamber where unpopular truths are censored to avoid offending sensitivities.
Medicine and academia are no different. Medical schools turned majority female in 2019, with women driving growth in physician supply and expanding into specialties once male strongholds. In academia, women now make up 45% of faculty, up from 38% a decade ago, and they've dominated PhD programs in fields like psychology (75% female doctorates). College enrolment shows a stark gender divide: There are 2.4 million more female undergraduates than males in the U.S. These shifts coincide with the rise of "safe spaces" and speech codes, where free inquiry bows to emotional safety.
At the heart of this transformation are innate sex differences in values and behaviours, substantiated by surveys and studies. A key example: 71% of men prioritise protecting free speech over social cohesion, while 59% of women favor the opposite. Women are socialised toward passive, rule-abiding roles emphasising compassion and consensus, while men lean toward leadership and competition. In group settings, men debate loudly and reconcile quickly, optimised for "warrior" dynamics; women focus on relationships, eye contact, and indirect conflict, suited for "worrier" protection of offspring. As institutions feminise, these traits dominate: Open conflict is replaced by ostracism, rationality by empathy, and merit by harmony.
Scholars like Noah Carl, Bo Winegard, and Cory Clark have documented this in academia, where increasing female representation correlates with prioritising "prosocial values" over truth-seeking. Winegard and Clark argue that feminisation shifts priorities toward emotional safety, explaining the rise of censorship and bias in research. On X, users echo this: One post calls progressive women and feminisation "the root of all today's evils," linking it to institutional decay. Another warns that wokeness will persist as long as demographics remain unchanged.
This isn't benign progress, it's an anti-feminist assault on maleness. Feminism, under the guise of equality, weaponises laws to suppress masculine traits. Anti-discrimination statutes ban "frat boy culture," labelling pinups or blunt speech as "hostile environments," while feminine norms like consensus-building go unchallenged. Critics decry this as an attack on manhood: "To attack masculinity is to attack our culture," one source states. Toxic masculinity rhetoric blames men for societal ills, ignoring how feminisation drives men away, once parity is reached, fields become overwhelmingly female, as in psychology. The result? Stagnant businesses, biased courts, and media that peddle feelings over facts.
The legal system faces the gravest threat. A feminised judiciary bends rules for "sympathetic" parties, as seen in Title IX tribunals that ditch due process for emotional credibility. Dahlia Lithwick celebrates female justices ignoring time limits as "girl power," treating law as a tool against "patriarchal relics." If this spreads, rule of law crumbles into tribal favouritism.
No civilisation has survived such an experiment. Feminisation isn't women "outcompeting" men, it's artificial, propped by laws that make it illegal for women to lose. Remove HR vetoes and quotas, restore masculine cultures, and watch the balance shift. As one X user puts it, "The rule of law will not survive the legal profession becoming majority female."
The attack on maleness must end. Society needs masculine drive for innovation and defence. Without it, we face a future of stagnation and fragility. The Great Feminisation isn't empowerment, it's destruction. Time to fight back.
Comments