Perhaps the political theorists behind it haven't thought it through, but emasculating men is policy.
The first part of this sentence contradicts the second. Emasculating men is not policy. Emasculating men is an unintended side-effect of policy. The creators of that policy, in turn, were shaped by their own education, and so-forth in a cycle of positive feedback. Even if you want to find some ruling class to single out and assign blame to, which I don't think is a worthwhile exercise, then the number of bad actors is too large and their individual crimes too slight for an "orchestrating hand" to be anywhere close to an appropriate metaphor.
If there were a policy where vehicles were not allowed to be within X miles of the coast (to prevent pollution / damage to the flora), wouldn't it also be a policy against living that close to the coast? Sure, some people would still do it... just as some men are still teachers in the UK.
Emasculating men is deliberate. The second-order effects (e.g. kids without a strong male role model having behavioural problems) were perhaps unexpected.
The first part of this sentence contradicts the second. Emasculating men is not policy. Emasculating men is an unintended side-effect of policy. The creators of that policy, in turn, were shaped by their own education, and so-forth in a cycle of positive feedback. Even if you want to find some ruling class to single out and assign blame to, which I don't think is a worthwhile exercise, then the number of bad actors is too large and their individual crimes too slight for an "orchestrating hand" to be anywhere close to an appropriate metaphor.