Maybe we don't need a solution to 'gender inequity'

American Thinker ^ | 22 Jul, 2021 | Robert Arvay

[MtnClimber]

What if the sexes are just different?

I recently watched two online video presentations about gender inequity (here and here). There are many others, but I stopped there. Both of them are informative and, I think, well meaning, but they have two glaring defects. They approach the issue, first, as if it were a problem and, second, as if the so-called problem can be solved. These criticisms may sound narrow-minded, but until we dare to venture into forbidden territory, matters will get only worse.

Let me emphasize that the subject here is not sexual harassment, the boorish practice that unjustly causes suffering, oftentimes in the workplace. The accused perpetrators here are not of the Harvey Weinstein ilk. Indeed, to their credit, the speakers in these videos are not accusing anyone of such crimes.

Instead, they are grudgingly acknowledging that, for decades now, there has been progress, at least in terms of social awareness. They use numbers. A large percentage of Americans now view gender inequity as a real thing. Many, if not most, regard it as unfair, and many demand solutions, ranging from re-education of men to enforced quotas and wage standards.

Despite all that supposed progress, women, who are fifty-one percent of the population, continue to occupy only a small proportion of positions considered important, such as top corporate offices and seats in Congress. There remains a supposed pay gap (which is disputed once the numbers are run). Feminists have been maddeningly frustrated by the persistence of these statistics.

The frustration feminists feel has forced them to re-evaluate: just what the problem is, what are its causes, and how to solve it. Their evaluations fail in all three.

[MtnClimber]

Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities - Voltaire

[Adder]

continue to occupy only a small proportion of positions considered important,

Thats bs.

Women have become ubiquitous in board rooms and there are a large number in congress and in many gov. bureaucracies.

And everyone knows they are now the preferred action hero because men are so ineffectual at it.

[mewzilla]

When anyone of either sex can self-identify as a chick, gender is meaningless.

[maddog55]

The “TWO” genders are different to normal people and normal people enjoy that difference.

Anyone who identifies as anything than what they are is a useless psychological POS.

[Leep]

Like you can reason with people who will not be reasoned with.
You either agree with their premise or they will call you all kinds of names.
Or,perhaps they will indoctrinate your children or burn down your city?

[b4me]

Maybe? The answer is NO. If people were meant to be same in every aspect then surely by now “evolution” would have evolved us all clones.

Evolution is stupid think which i s trying desperately to not have to agree there is a God and God has a plan which involves unique individuals with choice options of accepting His plan or messing up His plan. No middle ground you’re either with Him or without Him.

He uses unique people of all sorts of character, abilities or not, aged or not, etc for His plans so anyone can join whenever they decide :)

[b4me]

your tag line fits you well.

[cockroach_magoo]

Those who claim to believe in gender equity never talk about the severe underrepresentation of females among prison populations.

I don’t take gender equity seriously, and I cannot take others seriously if they don’t seriously believe in equity.

[joshua c]

dont look now but the transgender movement is proving that men are even better at being women

[Wuli]

The problem with the “gender equity” business, and it is a business, is an erroneous assumption that men and women should naturally gravitate to every job and profession in proportionately equal numbers. That idea is an invention with no prior analysis by which to prove itself, yet by the “gender equity” business it is accepted as an article of faith.

Why? It is 100% a political wedge tool. Why? To achieve “gender equity”? No. They use the issue to get the “right thinking” persons in positions of power or influence, not BECAUSE of their gender, and only because they subscribe to the larger political agendas married to the “gender equity” business. They promote a person of the “right” gender BECAUSE that person is going to promote them. In other words it is all about politics and power, period.