在 2010 年代，「Lean In」与「girlboss」的拼命文化把女性的成功框定为在工作上全力以赴，并以一些象征性的极端例子作为标志，例如声称每周可以工作 130 小时，还有一波职涯指南，如 Sheryl Sandberg 于 2013 年出版的《Lean In》，以及在 2014 年与 2018 年推出的相关书名。到了 2020 年代，文化氛围转向「burnout feminism（倦怠女性主义）」，重点不再是最佳化，而是选择退出、休息，并透过关于过劳、焦虑与想要离职或缩减工作量的回忆录与宣言，将成功重新定义为超越企业阶梯。

文章追溯这种转向如何在不同类型与平台中浮现：倦怠回忆录把成瘾回忆录中的「rock bottom」换成坐在办公桌前的恐慌发作，把职场性别歧视写成崩溃的临界点，并呈现母职与无止境期待的冲突（包括研究指出，今天的在职母亲花在育儿上的时间，比 1965 年典型的全职家庭主妇还多）。具体标记包括：在任职 4 年后才发现薪酬不平等，与男性同侪相比至少差了 $100,000；产后 1 week 内就被叫回去上班；以及一则历史轶事：有位母亲把 3 岁的儿子送去寄宿学校。与此同时，社群媒体上也出现趋势，嘲讽 25 岁以后仍做 9-to-5 工作，将仿照 1950s 的「tradwife」美学浪漫化，或推销一种以最低努力为特色的「lazy girl」信条。

文章主张，从雄心中撤退可能会在一个结构性支持正在削弱的时刻，从健康的界线设定滑向失败主义；并指出一份 2025 年的 LeanIn.Org 与 McKinsey 报告，其中 80% 的入门级男性对比 69% 的入门级女性表示渴望升迁，并把更广泛的倒退与 DEI 退场相连结，以及一个被描述为首次自 1960s 开始搜集数据以来正在扩大的性别薪资差距。文中也引用 2025 年 January 到 August 的劳动市场流动，据报几乎有 0.5 million 美国女性离开劳动力市场，并指出一种表演性的悖论：即便是反雄心的姿态也能被变现（例如拥有 1.5 million 追随者的网红声称在 30 岁时降低了雄心）。这暗示女性的雄心可能仍在，但愈来愈被否认或重新包装，而公开宣示雄心的「例外」时代被概括为 2013-20。

In the 2010s “Lean In” and “girlboss” hustle culture framed women’s success as going all-in at work, with emblematic extremes like a claim that it’s possible to work 130 hours a week, and a wave of career guides such as Sheryl Sandberg’s 2013 “Lean In” plus titles released in 2014 and 2018. In the 2020s, the cultural mood shifts toward “burnout feminism,” where the point is not optimization but opting out, resting, and redefining success beyond the corporate ladder through memoirs and manifestos about overwork, anxiety, and the desire to quit or scale back.

The article traces how this turn shows up across genres and platforms: burnout memoirs swapping the addiction-memoir “rock bottom” for desk-bound panic attacks, workplace sexism as a breaking point, and motherhood colliding with relentless expectations (including research suggesting an employed mother today spends more time on child care than a typical stay-at-home mom did in 1965). Specific markers include pay inequity discovered 4 years into a job with at least a $100,000 gap versus male peers, returning to work calls within 1 week of giving birth, and a historical anecdote of a son sent to boarding school at age 3; alongside this are social-media trends that ridicule 9-to-5 work after age 25, glamorize “tradwife” aesthetics styled after the 1950s, or pitch a “lazy girl” ethos of minimal effort.

The piece argues the retreat from ambition can slide from healthy boundary-setting into defeatism at a moment when structural supports are weakening, pointing to a 2025 LeanIn.Org and McKinsey report where 80% of entry-level men versus 69% of entry-level women say they aspire to a promotion, and to broader backsliding tied to DEI rollbacks and a gender wage gap described as widening for the first time since data collection began in the 1960s. It also cites labor-market churn from January through August 2025, when almost 0.5 million American women reportedly left the workforce, and notes a performative paradox: even anti-ambition postures can be monetized (for example, influencers with 1.5 million followers claiming reduced ambition at age 30), suggesting women’s ambition may persist but be increasingly disavowed or reframed, with the “exception” era for openly asserted ambition summarized as 2013-20.