Annual Ad-Free Subscription… Join the Fight and Support Revolver Now…

Check out the new merch! — Donate…

Sign up for our email list… Stay on the bleeding edge… 

Writer Helen Andrews just dropped a piece that’s getting a lot of buzz in conservative media. In her new piece, Helen argues that the rise of “wokeness” wasn’t born from Marxism, academia, or even Obama-era politics. That in itself had people shocked. Helen theorizes that it actually came from something way simpler… the quiet but steady feminization of America’s most powerful institutions.

Intrigued? Yes, so were we….

READ MORE: Bernie-backed Maine oyster farmer exposed: ‘communist’ hates fellow ‘rural white Americans’…

Andrews calls this cultural shift “The Great Feminization,” and her theory flips a lot of earlier assumptions on their head. Helen pinpoints this shift back to the moment Larry Summers was pushed out of Harvard back in 2005 for suggesting that men and women might have different skills in science. Helen believes that was the spark that ignited the entire woke era… when emotional outrage replaced rational debate and these elite institutions began enforcing left-wing ideology through feelings instead of facts.

Andrews backs up her argument with data that shows how back in the 2010s, women became the majority in nearly every elite profession. From law and medicine to media and academia, the ladies began running the show. Helen says once that shift happened, the entire vibe changed: empathy over logic, safety over risk, and comfort over competition.

Compact Mag:

In 2019, I read an article about Larry Summers and Harvard that changed the way I look at the world. The author, writing under the pseudonym “J. Stone,” argued that the day Larry Summers resigned as president of Harvard University marked a turning point in our culture. The entire “woke” era could be extrapolated from that moment, from the details of how Summers was cancelled and, most of all, who did the cancelling: women.

The basic facts of the Summers case were familiar to me. On January 14, 2005, at a conference on “Diversifying the Science and Engineering Workforce,” Larry Summers gave a talk that was supposed to be off the record. In it, he said that female underrepresentation in hard sciences was partly due to “different availability of aptitude at the high end” as well as taste differences between men and women “not attributable to socialization.” Some female professors in attendance were offended and sent his remarks to a reporter, in defiance of the off-the-record rule. The ensuing scandal led to a no-confidence vote by the Harvard faculty and, eventually, Summers’s resignation.

The essay argued that it wasn’t just that women had cancelled the president of Harvard; it was that they’d cancelled him in a very feminine way. They made emotional appeals rather than logical arguments. “When he started talking about innate differences in aptitude between men and women, I just couldn’t breathe because this kind of bias makes me physically ill,” said Nancy Hopkins, a biologist at MIT. Summers made a public statement clarifying his remarks, and then another, and then a third, with the apology more insistent each time. Experts chimed in to declare that everything Summers had said about sex differences was within the scientific mainstream. These rational appeals had no effect on the mob hysteria.

This cancellation was feminine, the essay argued, because all cancellations are feminine. Cancel culture is simply what women do whenever there are enough of them in a given organization or field. That is the Great Feminization thesis, which the same author later elaborated upon at book length: Everything you think of as “wokeness” is simply an epiphenomenon of demographic feminization.

The explanatory power of this simple thesis was incredible. It really did unlock the secrets of the era we are living in. Wokeness is not a new ideology, an outgrowth of Marxism, or a result of post-Obama disillusionment. It is simply feminine patterns of behavior applied to institutions where women were few in number until recently. How did I not see it before?

Possibly because, like most people, I think of feminization as something that happened in the past before I was born. When we think about women in the legal profession, for example, we think of the first woman to attend law school (1869), the first woman to argue a case before the Supreme Court (1880), or the first female Supreme Court Justice (1981).

A much more important tipping point is when law schools became majority female, which occurred in 2016, or when law firm associates became majority female, which occurred in 2023. When Sandra Day O’Connor was appointed to the high court, only 5 percent of judges were female. Today women are 33 percent of the judges in America and 63 percent of the judges appointed by President Joe Biden.

The same trajectory can be seen in many professions: a pioneering generation of women in the 1960s and ’70s; increasing female representation through the 1980s and ’90s; and gender parity finally arriving, at least in the younger cohorts, in the 2010s or 2020s. In 1974, only 10 percent of New York Times reporters were female. The New York Times staff became majority female in 2018 and today the female share is 55 percent.

Medical schools became majority female in 2019. Women became a majority of the college-educated workforce nationwide in 2019. Women became a majority of college instructors in 2023. Women are not yet a majority of the managers in America but they might be soon, as they are now 46 percent. So the timing fits. Wokeness arose around the same time that many important institutions tipped demographically from majority male to majority female.

The substance fits, too. Everything you think of as wokeness involves prioritizing the feminine over the masculine: empathy over rationality, safety over risk, cohesion over competition. Other writers who have proposed their own versions of the Great Feminization thesis, such as Noah Carl or Bo Winegard and Cory Clark, who looked at feminization’s effects on academia, offer survey data showing sex differences in political values. One survey, for example, found that 71 percent of men said protecting free speech was more important than preserving a cohesive society, and 59 percent of women said the opposite.

We encourage you to read her entire piece here.

Here’s Helen speaking at NatCon 5 in DC, where she expands on her “Great Feminization” theory.

After her article dropped, a popular “take” from X user John Carter added an even deeper and sharper layer to this debate, and that’s where this discussion gets really interesting.

John says that cancel culture wasn’t just about feminization. He says it was also about prestige… and how that prestige has now completely collapsed.

John Carter:

One thing Helen misses in this otherwise excellent analysis is the role played by prestige. Cancel culture was enabled by the unique circumstance of women weaponizing the prestige of freshly feminized legacy institutions. So long as those institutions retained their prestige, what the people who ran them said really mattered.

Unfortunately for the ladies (but luckily for civilization), this is self-limiting, because prestige is fundamentally an emergent property of masculine competence hierarchies. We see this demonstrated whenever a profession becomes coded as women’s work: its prestige immediately crashes. Feminists have complained about this for years, though of course they misunderstand the mechanism (prestige is a component of male sexual attractiveness, but not of female, and this is biologically hard-wired).

This prestige collapse is now affecting essentially every coopted, feminized institution – universities, news media, publishing houses, movie studios, large corporations, various government agencies, hospitals, courts, churches, all of them wield far less cultural power than they did even a few years ago. The only people who really care what these legacy institutions say are the women who took them over. To everyone else, the angry sounds they make are nothing more than background noise.

This is probably the main reason for the vibe shift. Once the prestige of feminized institutions declined below a certain threshold, their ability to enforce social consensus began to evaporate.

It’s also probably no accident that the Trump administration seems to care a lot more about what the anons of the Online Right say than it does about the opinion of the universities or the news media. All the intelligent young men got pushed out of the institutions, and those ionized particles of free male energy then began to self-assemble online into an ad hoc competence hierarchy where prestige is measured by clout rather than professional degrees, job titles, or institutional affiliations. The anon swarm is entirely informal, meaning that its outcomes are not amenable to antidiscrimination legislation or to procedural manipulation; you can screw with the algo all you want but you can’t actually force people to care what women say just because they’re women (thereby placing women into the position of openly trading in thirst, which gets them attention but certainly doesn’t mean that anyone has to pretend to take them seriously).

All that’s happened so far is that people’s attention has been redirected away from crazy woke females and towards the influencers of the online right. The fever has broken but society is a long way from recovered. The institutions are still under the control of crazy woke females, and this is extremely bad, especially because they are – for biological reasons related to childlessness – only going to get crazier as time goes on. Fortunately no one really cares what they say anymore, so as they throw tantrums as the institutions are reclaimed over the next decade or so, their protests won’t register as anything but irrelevant toddler noise.

Okay, so what does all of that mean?

In plain English, John is saying that cancel culture only had power because these newly “feminized institutions” were still coasting on the old prestige that was built by men. Harvard, the New York Times, and Hollywood – all those big-name institutions still had the credibility they earned back when results actually mattered. But once they swapped common sense for feelings and “safety,” their elite shine tarnished really fast.

READ MORE: Welcome to America, Mr. and Mrs. White…

John’s argument is basically this: prestige doesn’t survive without performance. So, when the focus went from competence to consensus, people stopped listening and taking the “experts” seriously. Universities, media outlets, and studios all keep shouting, but hardly anyone’s listening anymore. The influence they once had has flown south to independent creators, online voices (like John Carter), and the “anon” right. These are places where ideas rise or fall on merit, not credentials, and certainly not “feelz.”

Honestly, it’s the ultimate irony, right? The very institutions that once claimed authority on truth have become punchlines, while the people they tried to silence have built their own prestige systems from scratch and are thriving… all thanks to women and their failed quest to be just like men.

The Great Feminization movement explains a lot about how our culture got so fragile, emotional, and scared to take a risk. But John Carter is also right about the collapse of prestige. Once people stop caring what the legacy institutions say, the spell is broken, and everyone starts seeing things for what they really are: many of our “experts” are politicized buffoons.

READ MORE: We’ve seen activist judges pull a lot of shady moves, but this one takes the cake…

The gatekeepers lost their keys, and this new era belongs to people who push competence over approval. These once-prestigious institutions like Harvard and the New York Times aren’t sparking debate anymore. These days they’re starring in memes mocking their wokeness. My, how the mighty have fallen.

Annual Ad-Free Subscription… Join the Fight and Support Revolver Now…

Check out the new merch! — Donate…

Sign up for our email list… Stay on the bleeding edge… 

NEWSFEED — FOLLOW ON X — GAB — GETTR — TRUTH SOCIAL — BLUESKY