My grandfather, a modern-day gadfly of sorts, has a longstanding practice of slipping a copy of Most Evil Women in History into gifts and packages for my ultra-lib aunt, who instinctively recoils in horror at the suggestion that any woman, anywhere, could be less than saintly.
If you read the Huffington Post or watch MSNBC and mistake the corporate propaganda for news, you might understandably suffer under the delusion that all women crave a gynarchy in which the entire society is run by women, for women in a united front of global sisterhood.
Unfortunately for the ideologues, social science shatters the façade.
Via Psychology Today:
A 2013 Gallup poll found that despite a slight uptick in female corporate leadership, more than a third of American workers surveyed–both men and women–say they prefer working for a male boss compared to 23 percent who said they prefer a female boss…
A 2011 survey by the American Management Association found that 95 percent of 1,000 working women polled believe they were undermined by another woman at some point in their career, while a 2008 University of Toronto study of nearly 1,800 U.S. employees found employees working under a female supervisor reported more distress and symptoms of physical stress than those working under a male supervisor.
One of the theoretical reasons that women reject female bosses is a phenomenon called “queen bee syndrome.”
RTE explains:
The queen bee syndrome refers to women in power who treat subordinate females less fairly than males purely because of their gender. It refers to females who have personal and professional success, but who refuse to share expertise and ideas with other women which might encourage them to achieve their own success. Many considered Indira Gandhi, the former prime minister of India, and Margaret Thatcher, the former prime minister of the UK, as queen bees.
It turns out women are just as prone to being territorial, egotistical, and ambitious as men, albeit in their own peculiar way.
As the left always does when members of the “marginalized” community reject the official narrative, they accuse non-feminist women of “internalized misogyny,” a mythical condition in which women’s preferences for male leadership are not informed by logic or personal experience, but rather by social conditioning that biases them against their own interests.
Women who reject the feminist narrative, rather than having the capacity to form their own preferences, are framed as empty vessels incapable of original thought, just waiting to be directed here and there by the Patriarchy™ – one of the many vicious ironies of feminist dogma that robs women of their agency.
Similarly, blacks who leave the leftist plantation are derided as “Uncle Toms,” and so on. Nothing threatens the narrative more so than these individuals of the “marginalized” group who don’t go along with the program. So, in another irony, they must be marginalized by the left and their ideas dismissed as the product of conditioned self-hatred to maintain the mythology.
If women were just allowed, despite the malign influence of the Patriarchy™, to be more supportive of one another, if they were more united, if their presence were more universal in leadership roles, the story goes in the neoliberal press like The Atlantic, then the utopian gynarchy could emerge and world peace could prevail.
Join the conversation as a VIP Member