The Estrogen Revolution

It has been clear for at least forty years that Sweden is the leader when it comes to the feminization of the culture. Norway and Denmark are close behind, followed by the rest of Western Europe and Canada, and then by the United States.

Gender equity in the armed forces can only be imposed without consequence as long as the feminized military does not have to confront an all-male enemy on an actual battlefield. When that happens, the female (and genderqueer) corpses will pile up rapidly, with political consequences that are difficult to predict in advance.

Many thanks to LN for translating this essay from the Swedish blog Invandring och mörkläggning:

Efficiency-optimal choices

by Professor Emeritus Karl-Olov Arnstberg
May 22, 2022

The Dutch social psychologist Geert Hofstede is known for his studies of national values. On two occasions he collected extensive data from IBM employees in 53 countries, first in 1968 and again in 1972. He received 116,000 responses to questions about attitudes and preferences. In the 1970s, he organised the material into five themes and summarised them in a “cultural dimension theory”. Hofstede then scored the countries and compared them with each other. His study has attracted a lot of attention, mainly because the conclusions are based on such a large body of material. Hofstede is one of the 100 most-cited social scientists in the world.

On the basis of his vast material, Hofstede established no fewer than 76 criteria for male and female. Japan came first among the masculine countries. Both the United States and Germany are also high on the ranking list. Among the most feminine countries, he placed Sweden in first place, with Norway second.

Note that the data is now a half-century old and that Sweden has since become even more feminised. In most universities and colleges, women are in the majority among teachers and researchers. Six out of eight parliamentary parties have female leaders. We have a female prime minister and there are twelve women and eleven men in the government.

In the media, the imbalance is probably even greater. I have not looked for studies that show this, because it is so obvious both to me and to others who follow Swedish news reporting. Women, women and more women both report and are interviewed on every conceivable subject. This female expertise covers everything from football and ice hockey to advanced and male-dominated high technology to gang crime, which is almost 100% a male activity. We find out how women think, what they find interesting and how they want to solve various social problems.

One of the traditionally most male-dominated professions, policing, is represented in the Police Federation by a woman. This is only right. In 2019, 33% of Sweden’s police officers were women. In total, 44% of all police employees are women. Among civilian employees, women are in the majority, a whopping 67%. When 43% of those admitted to the police training programme in Malmö were women last year, Caroline Mellgren, who oversees the unit for police work and police training at the university, was very happy and hoped that the trend of more and more female police officers would continue.

A couple of years ago, a young, beautiful female police officer explained that when she and other female officers took the metro home from late-night duty in Rinkeby’s new police station, they needed an escort. If there had been only male police officers there, would they have made that demand? Hardly; they would realise it was ridiculous. If they felt unsafe on their own, they would have to arrange to protect each other. But for a graceful and good-looking female police officer, the question of an escort was certainly relevant, and I don’t think she would then feel entirely comfortable being escorted by another young and attractive female officer.

Recruitment films for the Armed Forces are another example. In the American ones, it is crystal clear that the military is a male profession and also a very physically demanding one. In the Swedish ones, either the main characters are women or they are gender-neutral.

Now, war is not just any activity. It’s about killing your opponents, winning. A country that does not recruit optimally efficient soldiers, but deliberately reduces efficiency for ideological reasons, will be responsible in war for more soldiers dying, both men and women. The reason is that these mixed corps of soldiers are likely to fight against opponents who are all men. In that case, it is a question of not really wanting to win, which is the same as losing, and since it is a question of war, it can be said to be a form of social suicide. Nor should it be forgotten that in war people are injured. Women are less able than men to cope with injuries.

The Swedish armed forces do not reason in the above way. For example, Sweden’s Nordic Battle Group of elite soldiers had a standing lion with a not very prominent erect penis in its coat of arms for many years. Outraged by this symbol of masculinity, a group of female soldiers complained to the European Court of Justice. Swedish politicians listened and removed the offending member. Swedish heralds protested, but were not heard. The lion was literally castrated.

In the autumn of 2016, the Swedish Armed Forces released a new handbook for Swedish military personnel. It makes it quite clear that in Sweden the Armed Forces prefer political correctness to efficiency. There are several so-called gender advisors in Swedish units. The goal, according to Jan Thörnqvist, who is responsible for the Swedish Armed Forces, is to be far ahead of other countries. As the book says: “Swedish units can also contribute to raising awareness within multilateral organisations of the importance of the gender perspective. This can be done by developing gender-inclusive reporting formats and proposing gender mainstreaming in meetings and plans.”

OK, we have female police officers in Sweden, we have female firefighters (gender-neutral language: firemen?) and we have female soldiers. Gender equality is a political goal that is close to the heart of left-liberals.

At the same time, the state has a reasonable responsibility to choose the optimum solution for important social services. I think that if the people had a choice, the distribution between male and female police officers would be more clearly skewed in favour of the men.

But if, for reasons I will not go into here, the people also choose women for these posts, then it is the duty of the state in a democracy to make not an ideological but an efficiency-optimal choice. Which means: women in higher positions are welcome, but if physical strength and other male “virtues” are required, then it should be men — and also women who meet the requirements for men. Ultimately, this is about competence. Police officers in Rinkeby should not have to ask for an external escort when they go home from work.

Is this a reactionary perspective? Yes; reactionary means reacting, and it is right to react to stupid decisions. I and many others react to the politicisation of society. At its core, it is totalitarian when politicians neither listen to what citizens want, nor look out for the best interests of citizens.

In a totalitarian state, ideology wins out over both democracy and optimal choices.

— Karl-Olov Arnstberg

Printer-friendly PDF version

24 thoughts on “The Estrogen Revolution

  1. It’s one of the subversive tactics mentioned by Yuri Bezmenov. And the problem is even bigger than that of lower physical performance: When you put young fit men and women together, there will be sex and rockenroll, and the result is quite literally an – F-worded up moral on the ships and in the units, because women subordinates tend to honey trap their male supervisors etc… It happened on British nuclear subs, and it’s happening in the US Military on daily basis – it’s simply guaranteed to happen.

    Terrence Pop – The US Military is Now a Laughing Stock

    I know only one woman who had managed to work with us installing antenna systems high up in the air. She was certainly not the strogest horse on the team, but she was unique enough for everyone being impressed. She worked in a team of four, came into the team as a “girlfriend” of one of the guys, then, within a couple months she managed to have sex with the teamleader, then, for another couple of months the “moral” of that team took a deep dive from which they never recovered. They were all friends before, now they all hate each other.

    Multiply this story by a 1000 and you’ll see what’s (also) going on under the surface.

  2. In Israel, sitting in the trenches is less dangerous for a woman’s health than in northern Europe.

    Oh, I remember those lessons of Basic Military Training in the Soviet school. I couldn’t remember in any way in what sequence to disassemble and assemble a Kalashnikov assault rifle, despite the fact that I have a rather mathematical mindset. I didn’t have enough strength in my fingers and my nails broke. And then it was still “to walk in formation ..” Fu. It’s so disgusting to walk in formation.
    How can a woman like it?

  3. The ceaseless attacks being waged today upon western civilization are of a piece with the attacks upon traditional western notions of manhood and the role of men in European history as the guardians and protectors of civilization, those ‘rough men’ of whom Orwell spoke, the kind who stand watch while good people sleep soundly in their beds at night.

    At the height of European civilization, her men (including those of the diaspora of Europe in other places, such as the U.S., Canada, et al.) explored the world and planted their flags upon the highest mountains, and at the very ends of the earth at the North and South Poles. They ascended to the deepest depths of the seas, developed powered and ultimately space flight. In 1969, less than a decade after President John Kennedy set it as a goal, American astronauts walked on the moon.

    Europeans – most of whom were men – invented the modern world and most everything in it. A person born in 1900 – as my late grandmother was – could remember horses-and-buggies in the streets and by the time of her death in the 1990s, humans were in space and marvels of technology existed which would have been considered fantasy in her youth, were commonplace. Rather than ride a horse, she could travel to the grocery store in an automobile.

    During the time of their dominance, European men were the finest warriors on the planet. Whether right or wrong, there can be no denying the extent of the great empires of the late 19th and early 20th centuries, whether British, French, German, or something or someone else. Aspirants who were not Europeans – such as the Japanese after the Meiji Restoration – still emulated the great European imperial powers.

    Whether as explorers, inventors, fighters or what have you- European men were leaders whose civilization was responsible for the greatest explosion of knowledge and technological advancement in human history.

    In short, European civilization was hated by those who hate it not because of its failures or weakness, but because of its strength and its successes. And the same goes for European men. Therefore, it seems axiomatic that in order to weaken and perhaps destroy the West, you must attack its men directly, since they have been an engine for so much of its advancement. And what better way to do that than by denying men their rightful places in society and in civilization, as protectors and warriors?

    Orwell’s ‘rough men’ have long-since been taken down off the walls protecting western civilization, and it is no accident that since then, the barbarians have penetrated the walls and now are in the process of over-running what remains of European (western) civilization.

  4. Does the Swedish Government and Military believe that instead of having Berserkers (Berserkir) and Wolf-warriors (Úlfhéðnar) or Boar warriors (Jöfurr) it is better to have an army of Milkmaids dressed up as Valkyries?
    Or do they believe themselves all to be Shield-maidens?
    Will these female “soldiers” need a 2 men strong escort for protection when duty calls?
    What are they are going to when they all have their menstrual cycle on the Battle-field?
    What are they are going to do when confronted with the Enemy and they are ALL male and Muslim?
    Complain about that the Enemy is not diverse enough and the High-Command cannot possibly think that they will fight such an gender unbalanced Enemy or be seen as Islamophobes?
    Or are they hoping that when the Enemy sees all these women they will let themselves be killed more easily because they know that most men don’t raise a hand against women? (Good luck with Islamists)
    I know, many questions that I’m pretty sure will be considered patriarchical and misogynistic and islamophobic or outright racist.
    But what do I care? “Sticks and Stones”
    At the end, what could go possibly wrong?

    Also, Valkyries arrive when the slaughter is OVER and are not doing it.

  5. Police officers in Rinkeby will be escorted to and from the newly built police station in the area. The hope is that everyone at the police station will feel safe.

    The new police station in Rinkeby has protection equivalent to armoured military vehicles, according to information provided to Expressen.

    – We come there with a history of attacks on police and on our vehicles. Even though a lot has changed, we want new staff to feel safe, says Frida Nordlöf, acting local police area manager in Rinkeby to Dagens Nyheter.

    – We work a lot in the criminal gang environment. If you make an intervention, finish the working day and then go to the subway fifteen minutes later, it may not be optimal, says Frida Nordlöf, acting local police area manager in Rinkeby.

    • @LN

      Female police wanting an escort home is the (ill)logical endpoint of the current madness for diversity, feminism and the like. The authorities in places like Sweden and elsewhere in the EU do not like to broadcast the fact, but it is quite common for male cultural enrichers in the custody of female police to escape by overpowering their guards and taking their weapons from them. Often, the shahid (true believer of Islam) shoots them before leaving the scene.

      How is this outcome in any way beneficial for western civilization?

  6. Aug. 01 2021.
    The Swedish Armed Forces is profiling itself ahead of this year’s pride festival with a picture of soldiers raising a rainbow flag – all over Svenska Dagbladet’s front page.

    It is a full-page advertisement that makes social media spin with twitterers who strongly condemn or also enthusiastically praise the initiative.

    “A flag worth defending”,
    reads the caption on the image, which is being shared with approval by many, with Foreign Minister Ann Linde (S) leading the way – as the partial inventor of the Feminist Foreign Policy she is and advocates with male bravura.

    – The armed forces can stick to the Swedish flag, that’s good enough, says right-wing debater Ivar Arpi.

  7. “The strength of the wolf is the pack, and the pack must be male…”

    (from: Kingsley Browne, “Coed Combat: The New Evidence That Women Shouldn’t Fight in the Nation’s Wars” 2007)

    No matter how qualified an individual female may be in her branch of service and MOS (military occupational specialty), her very presence is enormous disruptive to heretofore all-male units. Unit cohesion, esprit de corps, and trust are all adversely impacted by her presence, whether she realizes it or not – so therefore are combat power, readiness and other measures of effectiveness.

    In other words, it is not so much about the woman or what she offers; it is about fighting men and how they best-function. The pack is male and must remain male for them to do what they do best. As harsh as it seems, the truth is that women are neither needed nor wanted in such units. They have nothing to offer in terms of combat effectiveness and much risks being lost by their presence.

    So much of the debate around women in the military focuses on specifics, i.e., can she do as many pushups as the men, or can she carry as much weight. These arguments are important, but since a priori they concede the premise of the feminists – that women have the right to be there if they can perform as well as the men – they often end up being counterproductive for traditionalists.

    The civilizational argument against women in the military and especially against women in combat is inherently stronger. Nature – or God if that is your belief – has designed male and female differently. Since only women can bear children and thereby perpetuate society, it is extremely foolish to risk women in combat when there are men who can do the job instead. Men are designed for protection of women and therefore expendable, so that women can perpetuate the species.

    It is tragic when a man dies in battle and leaves behind those who care for him, but it is the way of the world and always has been. Whereas, it is an affront and an outrage against everything our civilization is supposed to hold dear, when a woman dies in battle who need not have been there in the first place. Only a morally sick and confused society sends women into uniform and into battle in the first place.

    To kill women, especially young women of child-bearing age, in battle is to literally kill the seed corn, as the farmers would say. It is to imperil and perhaps destroy the future of one’s civilization and society.

    James Webb, the former Secretary of the Navy and a U.S. Marine officer who saw combat in Vietnam, wrote that men go to war in large part and in the first place in order to protect what is “behind them,” namely home, hearth and the women and children they love. Placing women in the front lines beside men, throws this moral gyroscope completely out of wack.

    If against all evidence and reason, society demands that women be placed in harm’s way, then the best way to go about it is to segregate such forces by sex, just as the Soviets did during the Second World War. This approach minimizes the destructive friction between the sexes, and allows each to do what it can do, reasonably well. Although it is germane to note that as soon as the crisis had passed, the Red Army reverted back to being almost all-male, just as had been before.

    In closing, it is noteworthy that no modern nation has fought and won a war using large numbers of female combatants. Many of the nations now allowing women into heretofore all-male jobs in the military are small and have not been at war for many years. Therefore the up-front costs of make-believe are slight…. at least until the chickens come home to roost.

    Even the much-vaunted all-volunteer force here in the United States, which has been “gender-integrated” since Gulf War One, has a quite mixed or even poor record since the AVF was formed in the 1970s. And no neutral cost-benefit analysis of that force model has been done since that time. There have been internal audits by the Pentagon/DOD, but these have been far-from-impartial, and the services themselves have “pencil-whipped” (or simply destroyed) any data which tend to contradict the “You go, girl!” mentality of the post-modern military.

  8. One other point: That women should not be in line combat units does not mean there are no useful roles for them to play. Quite the contrary: History shows that women make excellent spies and espionage agents. During the Second World War, women participated in the American OSS and British SOE and compiled a distinguished record for themselves. Women can also make effective paramilitaries or resistance fighters, again, as the historical record shows.

    Having an effective national military is largely about putting people where they can do the most good and be most effective in accomplishing the mission. The preponderance of evidence suggests that we ought to do just that. The fifty or so years of the AVF conclusively shows that trying to force a square peg into a round hole doesn’t work.

  9. (I am a woman, yes I know what it is!).Australia is just as bad for police and armed services gender quotas. They make male applicants wait until after the female quota is filled. My favourite jokes are;
    1. they are told it will be like the boy scouts lots of camping and hiking LOL and they can have “work life balance” in the trenches LOL.
    2. women need to drop their pants to expel waste products, men don’t so women will be exposing their [posteriors] on the battlefield in more ways than one!. Ha Ha, so funny.

    They leave the services in greater numbers so they have to be recruited and trained in greater numbers. They get promoted with less active service after the men have done all the dying for them.
    I can’t wait until they are on a real battlefield like Ukraine without all the first world supports. They will be complaining so hard it’s not like the brochures.! I will be laughing my head off!
    I am a woman, but live in the real world not the gender equity fantasy LaLa land these people inhabit.
    I long ago decided Australia was no longer a safe place to live as it cannot be defended.

    • Perhaps Australia will be made an asset for China at some point. Everyrhing is possible as you have some very psychopathic politicians down there.

  10. Re Israeli army. Many jews in Melbourne from Europe , Russia and Israel and I worked with a woman who was a former Israeli soldier. Her job was to go round and inform families when their soldier children had been killed. Very draining emotionally,but not life threatening and no physical effort required. I ,therefore, do not think the women are on the front line there.

    • I believe that when the Israelis first deployed female soldiers on the Golan Heights, the enemy deliberately targeted them so that their male comrades would try to rescue them, exposing themselves. Maybe MC has an update?

      • @ Mark H.

        To a Muslim male, it is insulting to have to face a woman in battle, and a humiliation, too, since the prestige of facing a tough opponent is greater the more-formidable the opponent happens to be. The converse also applies. Which is why Arab fighters characteristically brutalize and torture mercilessly any female soldiers they capture, and it is also why they tend to horribly mutilate the corpses of such women.

        Deliberately targeting female personnel in order to lure male rescuers into a planned ambush would certainly be one ploy of which the Sunni Arab enemy are capable.

      • The more unmanly your force becomes the easier for a focused male only army to wipe you out. Feminisation is degenerate. Islam is loving it.

  11. “… group of female soldiers complained to the European Court of Justice. Swedish politicians listened and removed the offending member.”

    Removed the member, but left the nail polish.

    On another note, you all scoff at the armies of diversity, but forget one important thing:

    The woke army isn’t meant to kill your enemies, the woke army is designed to kill You.

    With zeal and without hesitation.

    Once you’ve surrendered your arms, become a minority in your own country and have your every move tracked by the electronics you’ve become dependent on, the digital currency you are forced to spend and the omnipresent video surveillance in every building and on every street corner.

    At that point in time, that ridiculous woke army of women, trannies, 3rd worlders and self-loathing leftist scum will be all that’s needed to keep you in line.

  12. As an anti-dote to feminism in policing I keep coming back to an excellent docuseries on Amazon Prime Video ‘GEO Beyond the Limit’ with this trailer on Y/T

    It is a fascinating look at the psychological processes at work in developing special operatives in the Spanish National Police, and the masculine strength of those working to bring forward those that can do it while always charitable and supportive of those whose attributes lie elsewhere. Beautiful.

    It is in Spanish but the English subtitles are very good. Binge watch on a trial subscription if you must.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.