For as long as I can remember, I've been hearing various women's rights campaigners telling me that it is OK for a man to have a woman manager or to have to deal with women in authority - and, to be honest, it's never really bothered me.
Over my working life I've had several female managers and several male managers. Some have been good, some have been bad - but I've also had regular dealings with women in authority too. Some of those have been clients of the company I work for and some have been people I had to deal with in public services - teachers and the like. It's never really bothered me that the person I had to deal with was not the same gender as me. I'm a grown up and I deal with people in grown up ways regardless of what gender they are.
But having spent the last 40 years of my life being told - by women - that it should not matter if the person in authority is not the same gender as me, why are so many of the sort of women who would make that assertion now be telling me that it matters to women that the person in authority is not the same gender as them?
Either it doesn't matter or it does - which is it? Why are men required to put up and shut up if the person in authority is female, but women are supposed to make a big deal of it if the person in authority is a man?
This is the big problem with progressives - they claim one thing and then deny the opposite. It's discrimination if you only employ men, but it's equality if you only employ women. It's racist to deny black people opportunities, but it's good practice to deny white people opportunities. It's homophobic to not include gays, but it's perfectly OK to exclude heterosexuals.
To any sensible adult these things should not matter - it can only matter if you are a racist, sexist, bigoted snob.
4 comments:
Now was it the insanity of Question Time or the vile Diane Abbott on This Week that inspired this post?
I couldn't believe what I was hearing last night on QT--some lib-dem and a columnist from The New Statesmen both waxing lyrical about equality and diversity, advocating positive discrimination, while all the time making jibes at the fact that Cameron and Clegg are both white, male and publicly educated.
Abbott, with her sneering, condescending brand of leftism, continued the class warfare and the attack on the white male, while Portillo just sat and agreed with her (while privately thinking his own thoughts, no doubt).
Melanie Phillips, as always, brought some common sense to the proceedings and some semblance of balance. She made a commonsensical point about how positive discrimination is not only patronising to minorities and women, but it also results in people being employed who aren't up to the job.
We should be promoting elitism and a more meritocratic society rather than criticising people who are simply more clever and more capable. The media needs to stop promoting this idea that there shouldn't be winners and losers in life.
I feel like my head's going to explode when I watch programmes like this on Pravda . . . I mean, the BBC.
As I rarely watch QT or This Week I'm afraid it was neither, Lightf00t. It was just a number of comments I'd heard or read over the last few days on various programmes and in various journals which prompted the post - culminating, of course, with the ridiculous Mary Riddell in The Telegraph.
I don't know why I keep buying the Telegraph - it really isn't a conservative newspaper anymore. It's just habit I guess - like those people who vote Tory even though the Tories aren't conservative - just habit.
I ended up voting Tory because there turned out to be no UKIP candidate in my constituency. It was a case of what I seen as the lesser of 4 evils. There was a party called Trust, who espoused similar policies to UKIP but I knew they didn't stand a hope in hell anyway.
The only thing in The Telegraph that's worthwhile is the blogger James Dellingpole, who's made it his life's mission to expose the fraud of global warming. If I buy a newspaper, it's always either the Daily Express or the Daily Mail.
From my daughter's experience of having a large mixed staff, she finds it is the women who in fact prefer a male boss, whilst the men don't care.
I suspect this is because she has no sympathy for all the women's sob stories about why they had to take a day off, and won't put up with sick leave forms where they were suffering from "the usual female problems", tending to ask "which bloody problem this time?". She has very little problem with the male staff!
Post a Comment