Over my eight decades life-time I’ve witnessed many major changes. By far the biggest has been the sexual equality revolution, something which say a 20 year old today might be puzzled to read about as they now take it for granted. It wasn’t always that way. For example, I recall in the mid 1960s when the word got about that a woman lawyer had hung up her shingle in Lower Hutt. Such a thing seemed inconceivable and I recall with a couple of local commercial property characters, going to her office address to see for ourselves.

Who on earth would use her we wondered? Well, a noted eccentric industrial building developer by the name of Paddy said he would and so he did for a couple of years before moving to Sydney. That was the end of her.

Today, more girls than lads seek law degrees each year, God knows why as it’s now a horrible career.

My initial puzzlement at the 1960s Women’s Liberation movement was ended when I read Frank Sargeson’s 1961 novel “Joy of the Worm” and I abruptly saw the light.

Nevertheless, every now and again I read something that reminds me of the way things were.

For example, despite my well-justified mocking of thespians and ridiculing of the sad sack inadequates that make up their audiences, I’m a regular reader of plays. The other night I read Arthur Miller’s 1968 play “The Price”.

In the frontispiece was the standard copyright warning, noting “anyone disregarding the author’s rights will find himself liable to prosecution”.

That says it all. Today, I imagine it’s conceivable there may be more women stage directors than men but back half a century such a thing was unthinkable.

The principal result of women’s equality has been to double the workforce and with it the level of prosperity. But an unintended consequence in the developed world, has been women shedding their traditional home-maker role resulting in no developed nation now reproducing itself. That includes Catholic countries such as Spain and Italy. So developed nations’ populations are now sustained by migration.

The coming economic depression will see migration unwelcome, but depressions don’t last forever and within five or so years it’s my pick the developed world will be competing to attract fresh blood with all sorts of incentives.

Postscript: It hasn’t all been plain sailing. For example, an excellent case based on clear cut evidence can be argued that the world would be a vastly better place without bloody women drivers cringing about our cities, staring at green lights for 8 seconds before taking off, driving alongside one another and blocking the roads and so on.


.. when you are waiting to turn behind them and they slow down.

Not sure it has brought twice the prosperity, seems for many the level is the same or lower. Those that can survive on single salary are very limited.

My wife and I share the driving,partly because she’s a bit younger and sharper. Most of the older women I know that have problems,it was because the Old Man hogged the car and she had to learn when the bugger kicked the Bucket. Now who’s to blame?

There are two places women should never be allowed to inhabit:
1. Behind the steering wheel of any vehicle on the road, and
2. On a golf course.
However, since its 2020 and we’re all so bloody precious about everything, I’ll relax my stipulations above to
1. They can drive any left hand drive vehicle in New Zealand, and
2. They can play golf between 8pm-6am.

Here’s some contrarianism on a related note.

If the psychologists are correct that on average women are predisposed personality wise towards being politically-correct and collectivist, which is subsequently reflected in their politics, and given that women make up the majority of the voting population – for entirely logical reasons such as outliving their harebrained male counterparts. It follows that the enfranchisement of women could counterintuitively be one of the greatest threats to liberty ever devised.

This of course lies in complete tension with the commendable liberalisation of women in all facets as individuals and the many ensuing benefits.

New Zealanders often bray about how we were the ‘first in the world’ to give women the vote, but while self-congratulatory, people usually forget that most men were only enfranchised barely a decade earlier.
In many democratic countries to this day, male voters are still subject to the draft, but never so female.

In regards to the initial premise, one could argue on almost purely mathematical grounds it is an inevitable trend that women as the majority will, over time, tip democracies towards a collectivist, regulated, and rule-saluting direction. Some might even say this trend has seemingly already happened in the past century.

From personal experience I can say that women are more often generally disinterested in the more intellectual dimensions of politics. If they are even interested in anything political, instead are rather more taken with what the ‘daddy’ state can provide/do for them, or more crucially, what it can as a proxy make other people do, or if the woman doesn’t like it, force them not to do.

Libertarianism’s ‘Female Problem’ is hardly unknown* and few would be shocked if told women are happier to trade freedom for safety than were men. Freedom always being the first thing on the chopping block for safety’s sake, and the ‘safety of women’ is one of the oldest tricks in the political book.

This all is a hard sell for lover’s of individual freedom, and might not even be right, but it does occasionally give me pause for thought.

*the same is true of ethno-nationalist and supremacist movements incidentally.

markscreaminggoosearmstrong September 11, 2020 at 6:00 pm

Ha ha you red-necks latch onto the driving of females and ignore the rest of Sir Robert’s musings. I’m male but frankly I generally favour females when choosing highly paid professionals to which I must pay some of my meagre earnings.for their services, be they lawyers, keepers of accounts, or usually more honourable medics. (I envy other less highly paid professionals like chippies, plumbers of depths, sparkies and others who work each day make the kind of tangible difference in the world that I rarely do.

Why do I prefer women professionals? Because I can’t stand the constant pissing competitions whereby testosterone drives we males to a need to dominate. Lawyers in particular I have found difficult – but only the males. In fact on two occasions my clients have had to tell the male lawyers – that had been engaged on my advice – to shut up and listen to me; when they were forced to listen the problem at issue was then much reduced but the lawyers in each case had been too busy crowing to look after their clients by listening to those like me that prefer to work on the coal face; those they like to look down upon. Hence the lawyer, in each case, couldn’t or wouldn’t see the wood for the trees until forced to do so.

That’s not to say I am not overly fond of taking the piss/extracting the urine/a certain dominance as I share Sir Robert’s keen eye for seeing the fun in every situation and extracting every last piece of remorseless humour out of the many many idiots in this world who are so focussed on their own self importance that they are blind to both their own human failings (which we all share in many varied and interesting ways) and to the strengths and value of others.

A relevant case in point is how so many – more often – males in positions of power cannot help themselves but feel threatened by each and every highly competent underling. Oh that they would celebrate the competence and know that such minions must be encouraged to excel for it is only in encouraging the excellence of others that we can climb to our own lofty heights of possible achievement. And they fail to recognise the fact that if workers are looking good then their bosses look even better and instead their own insecurity drives them to quash the aspirations of others. I see this idiocy much less frequently in females holding positions of power.

Sir Robert I envy you your sharp intelligence and wit and I respect you for your business skills, but it is your ability to extract maximum urine from the bumblingly arrogant fools who scream “OBSIQUIENCE!” at anyone who dares to favour a politician they do not, yet worship at your altar here while failing completely to register that their urine is quite often much depleted by your words.
Sir Robert I look forward to celebrating your progress in octagenerism in a month or two, and hope that one day I can buy you a fine red wine and try not to argue with you but instead enjoy your curmudgeonly humour.

I read this article today ( and it made me smile almost as much as your wit does here. I thank my parents for passing on to me their respect for you and others who say – or write – what they think and damn the consequences. I am sure your most valuable legacy will be in your wit and I fear your intelligence has been somewhat wasted on property but not at all on looking after those who have earned your loyalty.

That “greater prosperity” from women working was stolen by a growing retired population that believes the younger generations owe them everything. The raw truth is, via the dynamics of democracy, we spend our child-rearing resources on paying for grandma and grandpa’s extravagant holiday to the grave, resulting in low fertility…except for the classes that breed easily, because they hardly care for their kids anyway. Yep – it’s completely f*d up.

Another consequence of equality is that women are forced to work. When women only got half the rate of pay as men, the family income dropped by 1/3 when a women stopped work to have kids. Now it cuts in half. Not that I’m opposed to this… its hard to argue against ‘equal pay for equal work’, but it does have that effect.

    My dad would remark on this…and it always struck me as it wasn’t articulated much anywhere elsewhere. Two working parents means the kids are part raised by others.

There has been a downside to having many more women in the workforce especially in the corporate world where the propensity for females to gossip and import a level of bitchy behaviour will of course not end well. Just look at primary school teaching where it is nigh impossible to find a male teacher; the above being a component to the reason why. No male would put his toe into being a primary teacher, yet at least 50% of the students will be male and in need of a blokes way of doing things.

    markscreaminggoosearmstrong September 14, 2020 at 12:42 pm

    Poor logic there JohnnyB. Read my post above and see we males have pissing contests that in my view are way worse. I’d much rather watch women fight than men and I’ve always wanted to be a primary school teacher BECAUSE all the teachers are women.
    Maybe you should leave that closet full of misogeny behind and be a real woman..

When driving out of our driveway in the mornings onto a busy road, we undertake a market survey; 9 out of 10 men stop & let you in, however, it is only 1 out of 10 women! Why the aggression?

    I note and agree with your comment Murray , but it’s not aggression.
    My theory is that because of the multi-tasking mythology , women have to be acknowledged as being much busier than men and that simple act is the straw that breaks the camels back.
    Ain’t gonna happen !

From an age where women were clearly discriminated against, 70’s. We now have a society where high powered women are the discriminators. All hiding behind the liberation veil. The bulled have turned into the bully’s. Using the legal system to it full potential.

Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: