[x]

The most lasting impact is that the sheer number of deaths of the best of the European male population on all sides, ultimately led to the feminization of Western society, which is why in large part where are where we are today.

Losing about 4% of their population in the First World War didn't make countries feminized enough to avoid the Second World War. Nor did losses in our Civil War make Americans more feminized. So I'm going to have to put the blame or responsibility on non-biological, non-genetic factors.

[alternatives?]

“Losing about 4% of their population in the First World War didn’t make countries feminized enough to avoid the Second World War. Nor did losses in our Civil War make Americans more feminized. So I’m going to have to put the blame or responsibility on non-biological, non-genetic factors.”

Do the math. If it was 4% of the total population it would be 8% of the men assuming a 50/50 M/F ratios pre-war. Tt works out to a 48/52 ratio post war. For the voting distribution it was even more skewed. For the 16-35 age group it was much more pronounced.

Also, in the US women couldn’t vote until long after the Civil War,

[kearnyirish2]

Losing 1.7 million men in WWI convinced France that there was no point in fighting WWII. Except for those facing the Soviet Union, there was no reason for other European countries to fight - a few decades later and they were back where they started: a “European co-prosperity sphere” led by Germany (the EU). Sweden, Turkey, Spain, and Ireland apparently realized when a Hitler fights a Stalin, there are no “good guys”, while Finland, the Baltic states, Germany, Austria, Hungary, Romania, Slovakia, and Bulgaria understood that if they didn’t fight the USSR then the atrocities visited on Spain by communists in the 1930s would be coming to their doorsteps as well.