The Unz Review • An Alternative Media Selection$
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 BlogviewGuillaume Durocher Archive
Christine Lagarde Expounds on “Revolutionary Process” of Feminizing Leadership
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information

Lagarde and the other members of the ECB Governing Council, all men.

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • B
Show CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Thanks, LOL, or Troll with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

European Central Bank President Christine Lagarde recently spoke with the French business magazine Challenges [sic] on the “revolutionary process” of feminizing of the workplace (actually focusing on female leadership). Her comments were quite instructive on the state of globalist thinking on this question.

Lagarde opens with the following salvo of factoids:

Gender inequality still exists in terms of access to the job market and the pay gap. In OECD countries, the gender wage gap is still 13%. Women are working more and more but are still under-represented in management positions in both the private and public sectors. The coronavirus crisis has made the situation worse for women. Women make up almost 70% of the healthcare workforce; they are at greater risk from a health perspective. During lockdown, they have been active on all fronts, forced to work while caring for their children, not to mention coping with the threat of domestic violence. As in every economic crisis, they are at greater risk of losing their jobs or of having their wages cut.

This kind of hodgepodge needs no detailed rebuttal. Note that the OECD gender wage gap makes no account for the fact that men and women work different jobs (notably well-paid STEM careers). The comment on women being “at great risk” of coronavirus is in particularly poor taste given that men are more likely to die of the disease.

Lagarde ends with a totalitarian flourish that would make the dourest Ceaușesquian apparatchik proud: “The road towards gender parity in the workplace is anything but straight. It is a long-term process that requires vigilance at all times from every segment of society.” There can be no room for spontaneity and natural development in our society. Everything must be monitored, controlled, policed, and sanctioned according to our ideological priors.

When, exactly, did gender equality slip from a commitment to equality of opportunity to a mission of socially engineering equality of outcomes?

Lagarde observes: “We have made some progress [on gender equality], but unfortunately there is a civil society consensus at international level that, given the still slow pace of advancement, any significant gains on the equality front will take decades rather than years to emerge – unless something changes.” Now there’s a mouthful: “international civil society consensus,” referring to the vast network of para-governmental or oligarch-funded organisations that are considered our conscience on this issue. Evidently, there has been a decided shift in opinion in the managerial class, the top 15-20% of our societies, in France embodied by the supporters of Emmanuel Macron.

A curiosity of Official Feminism is that one can make the case for female superiority, but not the reverse. Lagarde argues:

You’ve often heard me say that if Lehman Brothers had been Lehman Sisters, the financial crisis of 2008 would no doubt have turned out differently. And the quality of a number of women leaders in the political or economic arena has certainly enabled better management of the unprecedented health crisis which we are now experiencing. But there are still too few women in positions of responsibility. More needs to be done in many areas. Just to give one example: we should encourage men to take paternity leave, and grant it to them for longer periods than their current entitlement of a few days or weeks.

Needless to say, the debate becomes rather one-sided given that anyone making the case for the superiority of male management will face instant professional annihilation and expulsion from polite society. Witness the fates of Larry Summers and James Damore after making more innocuous comments.

Lagarde adds: “And beyond the professional world, too, there is still quite a way to go, as is sadly evident from the prevalence of domestic violence and number of femicides.” This has become a popular and emotive issue in the French media recently, as though it were a recent issue or a worsening issue or something.

[M]en are definitely more accepting than before of women attaining the most senior positions, and corporate behaviour is beginning to change. Not only with regard to career paths, but also in day-to-day interaction between men and women. This is a valuable and necessary transformation; moreover, the younger generations are more aware of these issues. But the real change in mentality will come when nobody, male or female, questions the legitimacy of a woman holding a position of power.

One wonders who she could possibly be referring to in this current year.

The trouble with this whole discourse is that it denies a priori any significant biological differences between men and women. Or rather, feminists want to have it both ways: on the one hand there are no significant biological differences which could lead to legitimate male over-representation in a desirable field, other the other hand sometimes differences are acknowledged and these account for female superiority in some field.

In fact, given their differing roles and incentives through their evolutionary history – men using their physical strength to fight other tribes for instance, women spending much of their lives pregnant and caring for their young – it would be utterly normal for men and women to be attracted to different fields of work. If there is equality of opportunity, inequality of outcomes should be expected in certain sectors and should not be assumed to be because of exclusion or discrimination. It’s obvious that the fact that men are more violent than women by about an order of magnitude has fundamentally biological causes.

Naturally feminism focuses on replacing men in prestigious positions such as government, corporate leadership, and STEM. Few ask: why are all those UberEats bikers delivering food men? Why are nurseries and primary schools overwhelmingly staffed by women? (“Stereotypes,” of course, have probably brainwashed these women to prefer spending time with small children rather than face dismal weather conditions as UberEats bikers.) Why are garbage collectors men?

Actually, I hesitate to tease feminists on this. I have even encountered official government programs mandating the increase in the percentage of female garbage collectors. But the inevitable question: Why? Who cares? Don’t you have better things to do?

Anyway, the growing popularity of transexuality among our thinking class shows that they have become completely unhinged from biological reality, at least wherever some wounded ego is concerned.

The upshot to all this is that, in Europe and much the developed world, systematic and official discrimination against men in politics, management, and science will intensify. Quotas for female politicians already exist in many European countries, notably France, and the EU wants to legally require all corporations to have gender quotas for their corporate boards. Including, obviously, for sectors women tend to avoid, such as IT.

Lagarde concludes: “Female emancipation boosts productivity and economic development. That is an established and documented fact. So, what are we waiting for?”

All this begs the question: what will be the long-term consequence of feminizing leadership?

Hide 53 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
  1. Anonymous[267] • Disclaimer says:


    Of course, the result of 50+ years of pussy-whipping in Sweden is the helter-skelter plunge into Afro/Asianisation due to the abolition of all controls on immigration as ‘discriminatory’.

    Ironically, perhaps, but inevitably, the ultimate result is the islamisation of Sweden, ending in the imposition of sharia law and the purdah of women.

    The natural order of things will reassert itself, due the the built in self destruction of falsity and the perversion of nature.

    • Replies: @Baxter
    , @Dumbo
    , @Black Picard
  2. Of course, the corollary of more women working and especially working in important posts is the necessity for more “child care”. Ultimately, only very few women can work full-time and raise children as well. I used to consider the phrase “culture of death” as wild hyperbole, but nowadays I think it rather good. Many of the wonderful “advances” of our times depend on the willingness to slowly disappear into the sunset. Many, many people, perhaps especially in Europe, would rather die agreeably than strain themselves to preserve their way of life.

  3. Lagarde concludes: “Female emancipation boosts productivity and economic development. That is an established and documented fact.”

    And as we all know boosting the GDP is all that matters (other than black lives!) It’s also a documented fact that female emancipation leads to lower marriage and birth rates, increases in depression and suicide, and ultimately social collapse. The elites really must have a perverse psychology to destroy the only society that makes their existence possible.

    • Agree: Aristotle1
    • Replies: @paranoid goy
  4. Anonymous[368] • Disclaimer says:

    She sounds like a massive bore. There’s not a hint of original thought in her “convictions”. Just a walking, talking, “woke” pamphlet.

    • Agree: ariadna, Dieter Kief
  5. Hope Whiskey comments on this!

    I have an idea: Let pay and status equality for women depend on the number of women killed or seriously injured on the job. When that figure is equal to men, then women’s pay and status can be equal to men.

    If the management of the COVID-19 pverreaction and hysteria is any indication of the results of women leadership, we’re in for a long and difficult ride.

    Kueche, Kinder, Kirche (kitchen, children, churchà was Otto von Bismarck’s idea of the proper role of women in society. The Iron Chancellor was certainly on to something;

    • Replies: @JackOH
  6. “The trouble with this whole discourse is that it denies a priori any significant biological differences between men and women. ”

    Do we know for sure that Lagarde is a woman? Frequently those who make the most noise have the most to hide

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  7. That the fall comes through woman predates the bible by a long way. The principle role of woman is to have children and nurture them – a role that the modern freak show has abrogated. The principle role of men is to father, protect and provide for their family. Civilization builds on this self evident foundation. Of course exceptions prove the rule.

    The West is finished and ultimately all the so called victims of her will in time come to know that Western values were no evil compared to what they have visited upon themselves by destroying whitey through the evil spirit that the Jews worship.The seeming triumph of evil could not have happened but through their dominant role in the media, politics and that hater of mankind whom they empower everyday through their “prayers”.

  8. Anonymous[120] • Disclaimer says:
    @Leander Starr

    In her case ‘the most nose’ rather than noise …….

  9. Christine Lagarde is right about ensuring center place for women across the boardrooms of the nation as leaders in management of Finance Capitalism as opposed to the less egalitarian and simply counterproductively competitive gender opposite in men.

    The days of the bald egg-headed fat white guy managing money has finally come home to roost in terms of Finance Capitalism.

    The absolute best money managers are women by far bar none.

    Women are more likely to share the wealth whereas their counterparts vis-a-vis gender seem to be hoarding it like bag ladies that also hoard cats.

    Warren Buffett is exactly like a hoarding old bag lady that has far too many cats.


    • LOL: GazaPlanet
    • Replies: @Wyatt
  10. Anonymous[264] • Disclaimer says:

    Lagarde doesn’t seem capable of feminizing herself, much less the world.

    But let me cite an authority in the matter:

    “Women have become the men they wanted to marry.” — Gloria Steinem

    Yes, they have. And now they’re welcome to marry themselves.

    • Agree: ariadna
  11. Jake says:

    The Reformation led directly to the Enlightenment, which led to total secularizing of the West, which led to all we saw and suffered from in the 20th century, which led us to this point: men are not allowed to defend themselves from the attacks of women; whites are not allowed to defend themselves from attacks by blacks; Christians and whites are not allowed to defend themselves from Jews; whites and Christians are allowed to defend themselves from Moslems only if they are doing so primarily for Jews; and homosexuals soon will be have rights to screw teens as young as 13.

    The rebellion against Christ and Christendom serves Satan.

  12. utu says:

    EU countries above the 13% OECD average: 13%<F<NL<A<CH<CZ<D<SK<GB<FIN<LV<EST≈25%

    Countries with gap lower than 5%: 2%≈RO<LUX<BG<B<GR<DK<5%

  13. JackOH says:
    @Diversity Heretic

    “Kueche, Kinder, Kirche (kitchen, children, churchà was Otto von Bismarck’s idea of the proper role of women in society. The Iron Chancellor was certainly on to something;”

    DH, thanks. Construed broadly, that phrase implies the married woman having charge of household economic management, the bearing and rearing of children, and contributing to the moral edification of the family. No small responsibility.

    The Left’s awful achievement is to turn that productive domesticity into an “oppressive” bad thing, so Joan and Sue can flood labor markets for sales reps and credit managers, diminish wages and salaries for all, and incur day care, restaurant, commuting, and cleaning service costs in the bargain.

    I think–not sure–a small number of traditionalist-conservative women have seen through that bee-ess, and they’re fortunate enough to have husbands who still earn enough to allow them those traditional avenues of empowerment.

  14. Anonymous[343] • Disclaimer says:

    If women are, as we learn from Lagarde, equal to, when not better than, men,
    then she really ought to be promoting segregation in say, the armed forces.
    Why should these equal and better than equal creatures be held back by the
    presence of men in their ranks? Let’s have all female battalions, brigades,
    divisions! Sic them on the inferior male chauvinist brigands of ISIS,
    Hezbollah and the Taliban! Think of it, peace in our time in no time.

    • LOL: ariadna
    • Replies: @The Alarmist
  15. dimples says:

    I was under the impression Lagarde has a history of incompetence.

    • Replies: @Diversity Heretic
  16. @dimples

    She had a fairly long career in the French government, but her record (aside from “first women to”) is pretty much devoid of accomplishments. She was cited for negligence in a case involving bribery of an arbitration panel in a high profile case, but doesn’t seem to have suffered much.

    I find it interesting, and telliing, that the President of the European Central Bank, one of the most important financial institutions in the world (the equivalent to the U.S. Federal Reserve), and the manager of the euro currency, chooses to talk about putting more women in positions of power, rather than the role of such an institution in modern monetary theory. I suspect she never really understands what she’s doing, follows the lead of her staff, keeps out of trouble or keeps convenient scapegoats around, and moves up on the basis of politics and connections. Ursula van der Leyen is probably a German equivalent.

  17. I recently had lunch with an HR recruiter type to discuss one of my mentees, and she admitted that she was interested in fast-tracking this one for further development precisely because my mentee is a woman first and talented second. OK so far, but the really telling comment when asked why they also didn’t look outside the company was that it was (a) hard to find suitable candidates who (b) wanted the additional duties, stress, and demands of jobs higher in the management structure. Women who have families are even less likely to actually want to get to the top if it means less balance in their lives, so talented young females with no immediate family plans are a serious target demographic.

    I had earlier told my mentee she should monetise her current single status, and she replied that she didn’t want to get promoted on that basis; so then I asked her what she really wanted in life, and she danced around the question for a few minutes, after which I realised it might be reasonably concluded she had not ruled out a family life in her future. HR thinks they can get around the problem by hiring and promoting single women, but many of them will still want a happy, balanced life more than reaching the pinnacle of power. And it does not follow that promoting lesbians will fare any better, as they are still hardwired toward relationships first. Most of us are, regardless of sex, so it’s mostly sociopaths (like Legarde) who rise to the top.

    BTW, she is my mentee because many women execs are lousy mentors, especially for other women.

  18. I’m sick of all this, one of the sicknesses of the West. The rot and stench of this putrified corpse is becoming unbearable. Had Buddhism spread to the West, and a few Jewish mentally deranged dissidents not founded and spread Christian-inanity, none of this would have happened.

    • Agree: Aristotle1
  19. Wyatt says:
    @Robert White

    Even if you were right (lol), women don’t make money to start with. They don’t innovate, they don’t work extra late and they don’t have novel ideas worth selling to anyone. So a “money manager” that redistributes wealth is just a socialist within a capitalist system. So even if women were good at managing money, putting them in positions where they manage wealth that isn’t theirs by right is going to have repercussions with dumb investments into diversity and retraining.

    Likewise, I would like to laugh at your general ignorance of what Warren Buffet is. For as much of an ass as he might be, liquid assets (cash) are good to no one. Buffet, like every other billionaire, has his assets in the market, in property and research. Assets like that require maintenance, support staff and professionals to pay. Buffet’s money circulates in a roundabout fashion, but it does circulate.

    • Replies: @Robert White
  20. Anon[970] • Disclaimer says:

    “what will be the long-term consequence of feminizing leadership?”

    No one will take responsibility for anything ever.

  21. “… given their differing roles and incentives through their evolutionary history….”

    You ruin your otherwise perspicacious assessment of feminism, by this no less deplorable emasculation of the scientific method: As with so many European ‘intellectuals’, you substitute this scientistic (as distinct from scientific) hypothesis (as distinct from theoria: a ‘theoretical’ representation of an objective reality) for material evidence. In other words, you’re begging the question. Otherwise, you’re to be congratulated on confronting this authoritarian imposition of marxism that is the feminist movement.

    One last thing. The departure of intellectual rigour amongst men, is but one of the manifestations of the loss of virility that has spawned the rise of (indeed, the need for) the ‘virilisation’ of women. Hence the success of feminism. Nature abhors a vacuum.

  22. @Wyatt

    Oh yeah, I forgot that Nomi Prins and Blyth Masters et al. were women. I follow Pam Martens at Wall Street on Parade too. Oops, she is a woman too, I must be a dunce.

    I guess women have more time to write about Finance Capitalism than their male counterparts do.
    Canada just got our new Finance Minister Freeland and she is a woman too, eh.

    Oh yeah, I almost forgot Brooksley Born’s warning to the American taxpayers that the all male Committee to Save the World members were putting American taxpayer dollars at risk in the dark pool derivatives market before the Committee to Rule the World actually blew it up with their braintrust repeal of the Depression era Glass-Steagall Act in 1999 under William Jefferson Clinton who getting getting blow jobs under the White House Oral Office desk by Monika ‘I did not have sex with that woman’ Lewinski, eh.

    Monica was innovative, and she worked late too, but I agree she was not a money manager.


  23. Wyatt says:

    Canada just got our new Finance Minister

    • LOL: Dumbo
    • Replies: @Dumbo
  24. ariadna says:

    Lagarde is right: the gender wage gap is real and in some professions quite large. Averages do that… In medicine, for example, male physicians on the average earn a lot more than their female counterparts. There is a simple solution to this: raise the salaries of pediatricians (a specialty to which women flock) and lower those of cardiac/neuro/brain surgeons and just about all surgeons, professions to which women do not seem to be attracted….If we can accept quotas we should also accept different pay scales on the basis of sex.

    She also says: “You’ve often heard me say that if Lehman Brothers had been Lehman Sisters, the financial crisis of 2008 would no doubt have turned out differently.”
    Apparently the fact that she said it before clinches it. A concrete argument would help. Is Yellen doing a great job?

    Finally talk of “feminizing” leadership does make one think of Otto Weininger….

  25. Undoubtedly more women in executive roles will improve the way business is done in the same way that more black politicians and a black president improved the racial issue…

    The closer we get to closing the mythological gaps, the wider the gap between the elites and the rest of us gets. It looks like a bright future for a properly representative few. Many people who are accustomed to thinking of themselves as being kept down by white males will be so empowered, knowing that they’re being kept down by a handful of people more likely to bear a superficial resemblance to them.

    • Agree: ariadna
  26. Christine Lagarde, the sun-tanned corpse, is exactly the sort of woman that Andrew Anglin would call a ‘brutal mommy’.

    You’ve often heard me say that if Lehman Brothers had been Lehman Sisters, the financial crisis of 2008 would no doubt have turned out differently.

    As I see it, if Lehman Brothers had been Smith Brothers or McIlwain Brothers instead, the financial crisis of 2008 would no doubt have turned out differently.

    Lagarde adds: “And beyond the professional world, too, there is still quite a way to go, as is sadly evident from the prevalence of domestic violence and number of femicides.”

    One wonders what sort of trends in domestic violence and “femicide” would become apparent if one were to control for race and religion! We might then see that all men were truly not created equal.

  27. @Diversity Heretic

    She doesn’t want to bring attention to Rothschild fiat banking cartel scam. Better for her to propagandize for women to abandon their traditional role as being mothers and keepers at home first. The financial elite Bilderbergers like Lagarde have no use for traditional society and the nuclear family. Like their Club of Rome with it’s global warming carbon credit scheme and now the medical fraud of the fake virus, the elites are working to overthrow all of the old structures and implement one where all the livestock everywhere are micro-managed in an austere U.N. planned Sustainable Development Initiate (agenda 2030-21, for their own good of course.

  28. When, exactly, did gender equality slip from a commitment to equality of opportunity to a mission of socially engineering equality of outcomes?

    If I could be so bold – the former is an anarcho-socialist ideal, the latter is a communist ideal.

    I think we know full well which branch the current left shelters in!

    For me though, good leadership is a balance of the masculine and the feminine, regardless of the vessel it is guided by.

    Men have their issues (as a stereotype) – aggression, impulsiveness.
    Women have their issues (as a stereotype) – indecisiveness/cracking under pressure (they mostly haven’t been chasing beasts for the last 100,000 years), dishonesty (psychological gaming).

    We really would benefit from a fair balance of both sexes working together. Sadly feminism is not aiming for this!

  29. Dumbo says:

    A curiosity of Official Feminism is that one can make the case for female superiority, but not the reverse

    Strindberg was right. Female worship is really the Devil’s religion.

    All this begs the question: what will be the long-term consequence of feminizing leadership?

    What was the result of Eve being charmed by the Snake and eating the forbidden fruit?

  30. Dumbo says:

    The Swedish Government advertise themselves with no shame as a “feminist government”. Cringe.

    Of course, feminism and the granting of power of women is only possible by the voluntary resignation of men. And it’s only possible by men having created civilization and sustained it by force.

    But it’s not eternal. If something really bad happens, who’s gonna come to rescue the ladies?

    Eventually they will be mass raped and enslaved by their beloved refugees and their progeny, and might as well enjoy it.

    • Replies: @anonymous
  31. @Diversity Heretic

    She had a fairly long career in the French government, but her record (aside from “first women to”) is pretty much devoid of accomplishments. She was cited for negligence in a case involving bribery of an arbitration panel in a high profile case, but doesn’t seem to have suffered much.

    She rubber-stamped payment to a friend of Nicolas Sarkozy. The amount involved was about €400 million (taxpayer money). French judges found her guilty of negligence but she didn’t serve time.

    Unlike her predecessor Mario Draghi, she isn’t an economist but a lawyer. Her appointment at the ECB, like the IMF prior, was about French pride not merit.

    In terms of work culture and ethics, she is a latter-day Édith Cresson, the lady who employed her dentist friend as scientific advisor when she was at the European Union Commission. However, Cresson was based while Lagarde is woke – she condemned Jean-Paul Guerlain for using the N-word in reference to a perfume he created.

    • Replies: @Diversity Heretic
  32. Dumbo says:

    Anyway, the growing popularity of transexuality among our thinking class shows that they have become completely unhinged from biological reality,

    Nothing new, it’s part of the same Promethean/Luciferian impulse of rejecting human nature and natural order. It’s not an accident, it’s what they want. Feminism was just a step stone to that, now the old feminists can be thrown under the bus. In the future, 100% of leadership will be “female”, but the females will be actually be male.

  33. @Amerimutt Golems

    Christine Lagarde had a lucky break when Dominique Strauss-Khan was forced to resign as managing director of the International Monetary Fund over rape allegations in a New York hotel. She moved to quickly to secure support to be the first woman managing director of the IMF.

  34. anonymous[858] • Disclaimer says:

    It all started in Wyoming. Feminism and the granting of power of women, rather than being made possible by the voluntary resignation of men, is a consequence of technology, primarily that tool known as Sam Colt’s “Equalizer.” Gun-totin’ badd-ass women in the Wild West led to female suffrage, because male strength as a necessity of weapon effectiveness was demolished with the demise of the sword.

    P.S. Also destructive to the natural order was another technological equalizer, the bicyle, precursor to the fossil-fueled iron chariot that also requires no male body strength to drive.
    Woman is riding to suffrage on a bicycle.”

    • Replies: @Dumbo
  35. Dumbo says:

    rather than being made possible by the voluntary resignation of men, is a consequence of technology

    Technology was created by men.
    Bicycles were created by men.
    Jesus, even the birth control pill was invented by men.

    Camille Paglia was right, if it was up to women and their mating choices we would be living in mud huts. We might still get there when Africans and their mulatto progeny become the majority population worldwide.

    Even now only very few women have a natural interest in technology. They have interest in power, in “equality”, in the status of tech jobs, but not in technology per se. Even in Art, Science, all creative human endeavours, women have very limited interest. Perhaps literature and visual arts is the only realm where they have had a significative contribution. And acting of course, because all women are born actresses.

  36. Dumbo says:

    Canada’s Immigration Minister used to be a Somali until this year. Apparently not it changed to somebody else, not sure however if the immigration policy will change much. Actually the new Minister seems even worse, if that is possible, he wants to bring one million new immigrants every year. Just imagine, Canada has only 38 million people, if this continues, in only 15 years the country will be majority immigrant (as they already represent a substantial amount of 21% or 7 million, and they reproduce faster or bring their families etc). O Canada!

    • Replies: @Black Picard
  37. @Anonymous

    Let’s have all female battalions, brigades, divisions!

    Indeed !

    I worry our gals might be outclassed.

    • LOL: JackOH
    • Replies: @Black Picard
  38. One characteristic of Christine Lagarde is that she never said anything original or controversial in her entire life. In an institutional environment of ever more complex procedures and regulations to be complied with, as well as increased requirement for ideological conformity, it may indeed be the case that female “leaders” have an advantage. This is also an institutional environment characterized by inertia and entropy. Procedures are followed, stakeholders are consulted, everything goes through layers of impact assessment, administrative and judicial reviews, reporting, monitoring, evaluation… keeping everybody busy and employed while nothing useful gets done or nothing gets built.
    Multiple level of decisions makes things even worse. Looking at the dysfunction of the US federal government, the founding fathers of Europe said “hold our beers” and worked on establishing something even worse.
    So yes, the future is female. It is also more conformist, more bureaucratic, with seemingly unending institutional decay over the horizon, which more propaganda, more re-education (aka diversity training), more virtual reality and more medication, licit and illicit substance.

    • Replies: @JackOH
    , @utu
  39. JackOH says:

    HyperDupont, superb comment, sir.

    The pigeonholing of thought, feeling, and action into soulless bureaucratic categories has been covered by others. That’s the world we live in, where the appearance of doing something is regarded as actually doing something, and, by God, there are budgets, salaries, and offices dedicated to the appearance of doing something. Your very good insight comports with my own impression that woman more than men excel at bureaucratic running in place.

    • Replies: @HyperDupont
  40. Anonymous[328] • Disclaimer says:


    “Technology was created by men.
    Bicycles were created by men.
    Jesus, even the birth control pill was invented by men. ”

    Yes, but there was a tampon designed by a woman, because I remember the TV commercial for that one. Of course, it ended up giving them all toxic shock syndrome. Still, credit must be given where credit is due.

  41. @Anonymous

    I read somewhere in a #SYSBM blog comment or video that the reason white women ARE exploring other male options outside their race is due to the fact that white (liberal/conservative) males in general have ALLOWED gay/simp culture to permeate (be tolerated) tremendously within their once alpha male dominated white societies.

    So they’ve LOST RESPECT for this unattractive un-manly queer mentality & therefore seek refuge in other alpha male dominated cultures. Makes a lot of sense to me since feminine women are attracted to strong males who can provide.

    Quite frankly, I wouldn’t be interested in any pro-Sharia Muslim male if I were a Swedish white woman. Ditto for a ghetto negro thug wannabe who can’t put 2 simple English words together in a sentence. It just wouldn’t stimulate me “intellectually” nor get my pussy wet. But that’s just me.

    Thankfully there’s a massive movement #SYSBM going on TODAY in the West where intelligent RedPilled black males are ditching FemiNazi fake hair/weave-wearing/fat/sloppy black women & seeking companionship with non-Feminist/non-Westernized women of Asian, Latino & Caucasian cultures. The love connections are truly remarkable.

    What can white society learn from this? STOP promoting degenerate sexuality. Stop letting your feminist white women destroy your society. Stop tolerating ZioPress scum from poisoning the minds of your kids.

    THIS is the reason WHY educated black men are going SYSBM. 👇🏽👇🏽

    It’s safe to say that white liberals feminized the Western black women so as to create division & chaos within black society, so YOU can deal with em. We SYSBMers will pass for better feminine options since we’re educated, well traveled, athletic, have good jobs & are NOT ghetto. Thank you very much.

    You reap what you sow. Think about that!

    Note: #SYSBM = Save Yourself Black Man (ie. get your passport & get the fcuk out of the toxic feminized “Western” society)

  42. @The Alarmist

    The last pic (US soldiers) happens when you let toxic Western feminism dominate your society. Is it any wonder why intelligent males are avoiding “Westernized” womin?

    Good riddance!

  43. @Dumbo

    Shit, and all along I thought he was East Indian so the Liberals can cater to the desi community. lol.
    Anywho, Canada is heading to the dumpsters with its crazy immigration policies.
    Sometimes “less is more” in relation to quality vs quantity.

    Well, I’m in Africa for now. But if things get too fucked up over here — due to the influence of certain toxic Western habits — then there’s always Asia:


  44. @JackOH

    Speaking from personal experience unfortunately.

  45. utu says:

    Once she tried to be funny trolling conspiracy nuts with numerology:
    Now, I’m going to test your numerology skills by asking you to think about the magic seven, okay? Most of you will know that seven is quite a number in all sorts of themes, religions. And I’m sure that you can compress numbers as well. So if we think about 2014, all right, I’m just giving you 2014, you drop the zero, 14, two times 7. Okay, that’s just by way of example, and we’re going to carry on.

    So 2014 will be a milestone and hopefully a magic year in many respects. It will mark the hundredth anniversary of the First World War back in 1914. It will note the 70th anniversary, drop the zero, seven– of the Breton Woods conference that actually gave birth to the IMF. And it will be the 25th anniversary of the fall of the Berlin Wall, 25th, okay. It will also mark the seventh anniversary of the financial market jitters that quickly turned into the greatest global economic calamity since the Great Depression.

    So my hope and my wish for 2014 is that after those seven miserable years, weak and fragile, we have seven strong years. I don’t know whether the G7 will have anything to do with it, or whether it will be the G20. I certainly hope that the IMF will have something to do with it.

    • Replies: @HyperDupont
  46. @utu

    I know a few people who worked with her. She certainly isn’t an impressive economist. She is emblematic of the transition from the male technocratic age to the inclusive global bureaucratic era.

  47. @Magic Dirt Resident

    Yo, got any idea why everyone thinks women will save the world from destruction by male aggression, when history is littered with female leaders swimming in the blood of her own people?
    Of course, this feminist bull and queerification via food additives is all part of the destruction of the nuclear family, which will destroy society and State structures, then, according to Protocol 1 vs 6:
    “… It is precisely here that the triumph of our theory appears; the slackened reins of government are immediately, by the law of life, caught up and gathered together by a new hand, because the blind might of the nation cannot for one single day exist without guidance, and the new authority merely fits into the place of the old already weakened by liberalism.”

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  48. When discussing the “gender gap” it’s important to note that the feminist argument of inequality only works if most metrics are excluded. Yes, they say that women only earn 80% of men. But what they don’t say is that women are by far the greater recipients of State aid. Welfare, EBT, WIC, Section 8, Medicare, free childcare, and other freebies add up to billions of dollars. So if feminists wish to compare income levels between men and women, they have to include all income from Federal or State sources which women receive. A lot of black women have as many babies as possible, in order to maximize their “benefits”. Total State financial support for an unmarried mother of four is worth forty dollars an hour. Most men don’t earn that much. The entire “gender pay gap” argument is a fraud. Women game the system in order to obtain tax-money without working. Have you ever wondered why welfare recipients, and people on unemployment don’t have to work? That’s because women don’t want to work. They want to stay home and receive a support check. If welfare recipients were offered ten dollars an hour for sweeping the sidewalk, they’d take it. But women don’t want to do any labor, so they promote the idea that working for money is unfair. Women are very delicate.

    So we need a change: No more welfare or unemployment money. If a person is in need, then he or she will receive a ten dollar an hour job. Sort of like the Civilian Conservation Corp. but simpler. A man or woman will be assigned to almost any job. Sweeping, mopping, cutting grass; anything. The money they receive will be earned, which will probably motivate a lot of them to look for a better job, instead of watching T.V. all day, like they do now.

    • Replies: @Robert White
  49. @Ron B Liebermann

    Look at the gender distribution from the vantage point of corporate chief executive, BuckO. Looks to me like there are far more CEOs that are male as opposed to female. And what about all those so-called ‘men’ that fail to pay Income Support Payments to the ex-spouse of whom carries the financially abandoned children that are then forced into impoverished living conditions far removed from the middle class neighbourhoods that less socially conscious people like you live in, eh?

    Corporate Welfare of the serial felon behemoth Wall Street marquee investment banks is orders of magnitudes greater than the pittance low income families receive y/y.

    No more Corporate Welfare for JPMorgan Chase, Goldman Sachs, BofA, Wells Fargo, et cetera. Tell the lazy good for nothings that live on asset inflation and Greenspan Put culture to get a fucking job pushing a broom for $10.00 USD per hour with no Dental Plan, Medical Plan, or Insurance Plan to back their sorry asses when they drop through the cracks of impoverishment into abject poverty.

    P.S. Get your ignorant uneducated misogyny off the Internet. It’s stinking the joint up too much, man.


  50. Anonymous[394] • Disclaimer says:
    @paranoid goy

    Yo, got any idea why everyone thinks women will save the world from destruction by male aggression, when history is littered with female leaders swimming in the blood of her own people?

    History is littered even more with eager, weak at the knees, wives and concubines of mass killers – many of them making a guy even more brutal. Genghis Khan never needed a pick-up line in his life (granted, he wasn’t the type to ask, but I’m willing to bet that most of his wives worshipped him).

  51. Funny how city and state govts. have become so much more corrupted with women holding office (Jenny Durkin, that idiot Michigan governor, and other mayors, judges, etc.)…and the men holding many offices as well are girly-men, metro-sexuals, LGBTQs and trannies as well…didn’t start with ol’ Christine, but I am sure she helped nourish this nonsense….and I used to be a feminist…She is an embarrassment to all Lagardes everywhere…I know a few…

  52. Feminizing leadership would possibly result in there being less smart women reproducing. Normal women just reproduce, feminism seems to only affect smart ones.

Current Commenter

Leave a Reply - Comments on articles more than two weeks old will be judged much more strictly on quality and tone

 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
Submitted comments have been licensed to The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Commenting Disabled While in Translation Mode
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS Subscribe to All Guillaume Durocher Comments via RSS
The Shaping Event of Our Modern World
Analyzing the History of a Controversial Movement
Becker update V1.3.2