For a long time, feminism has described the state as a patriarchy where men dominate power. Now, two researchers are presenting a study that points in the opposite direction and argues that developments have gone so far that the state’s own gender equality goals are no longer being met.
Erik J. Olsson, professor of theoretical philosophy at Lund University, and Catharina Grönqvist Olsson, an independent researcher and author, attends Svenska Dagbladets opinion page to attack the image of the Swedish state as a patriarchy. In the opinion piece, which is based on their new book The New Matriarchy: An Overview of Feminization Within the State, they claim that women now dominate large parts of the public sector.
”The goal of gender equality policy is for women and men to have equal power to shape society and their own lives. However, our study shows that the power to influence decision-making within the government is anything but evenly distributed between the sexes,” the researchers write.
According to the survey, 80 percent of government agencies had a majority of female employees as of the end of 2024. In more than half of the agencies, women accounted for more than 60 percent of the staff, while only 7 percent were still male-dominated. Furthermore, all government ministries are reported to have a female majority.
Criticizes the government's efforts to promote gender equality
The researchers argue that the government continues to pursue gender equality policies as if men still dominated the public sector. They point out that male-dominated agencies have been instructed to improve gender balance, while no such requirements have been imposed on female-dominated agencies.
””Strangely enough, the government itself seems to be ignoring the fact that, over the past 20 years, the gender balance has slowly but surely shifted from male to female.", the researchers write.
They conclude with a question about how the government applies its own gender equality goal:
”The question is, what is being done to counteract this? Or does the government only care about gender equality when men are in power?”, the researchers write.
No wonder the country looks the way it does when it's run by chickens.
It is not a fact that all individuals should have an equal say in all decisions, nor is it a fact that individuals of both genders should be equally represented in terms of numbers.
On the contrary, it is appropriate to let meritocratic principles prevail over the nonsense spouted by politically correct idiots about a reality that does not exist.
On the other hand, it is highly desirable and reasonable that the community within a homogeneous nation-state have an educational and prioritization structure that makes it easier for the most suitable individuals to gain the influence that their talents and level of knowledge justify. That is to say, the exact opposite of communist dictatorships and, to a large extent, also the opposite of the degenerate liberal democracy that prioritizes the power of globalists over the welfare of the people.
A prime example is Vattenfall’s CEO, who has an undeservedly high, MONSTER-HIGH salary that she definitely doesn’t deserve. Where on earth did they find this complete IDIOT?
God help us all if Haggan Maggan and her V scum win the election in September 2026.
LONG LIVE VICTOR ORBAN, JAVIER MILEI, ROBERT FICO, NAYIB BUKELE, AND OTHERS
The culture of driving in Sweden is widespread and has been around for a long time. It’s evident in all its dismal glory. Not least at the Road Administration!
I agree with those women—they ruin everything. They should go back to the kitchen.
Yes, that's right—now they're on the loose, but when I was growing up, they knew their place in the kitchen and stayed there.
As for the ”reign of the shrews” and the idea that they ”should go back to the kitchen,” I believe that such arguments risk being counterproductive. But of course, in practical terms, it would be more appropriate if a likely large number of women worked at home, a little closer to their families. At the same time, it should be possible to ”have your cake and eat it, too.”.
The crazy thing is that ”our” contemporary narrative is that women should NOT engage in what they are most biologically predisposed to do as well as possible. And the same goes for men, who, according to ”our” perverted culture, are considered most exemplary when they act like unmanly sissies—preferably gay men.
The sensible approach, therefore, is a sound cultural foundation that encourages individuals to do what they are most biologically suited to do, while discrimination and a ban on exceptions risk creating a totalitarian society. In other words, the absolute priority is to reestablish meritocracy by formally rejecting the culture of stupidity in which we live (kakistocracy).
In a healthy society based on love, community, and meritocracy, people are driven by an inner conviction and inspiration to do their very best—according to their abilities—for their family, their kin, their people, their race (ethnic group), their species, their animal group, and so on. Thus, there is no need for either thinly veiled discrimination in the form of ”affirmative action” or quotas. Instead, what is needed is respect for knowledge, competence, and the ability to produce results.
That's a very good comment. It demonstrates an understanding of what benefits a society and the people who work together to build it for the future.