Let’s start our “thoughts juggling” with this: if I would pinch a woman’s buttocks and she would turn around and slap me, does that mean she fights for her rights? I would say that it is so.
But if a woman pinched my buttocks and I would turn around and hit her, what would that be? Fighting for my rights, or violence towards women?
What I dislike most is this endless talk about the percentage of women in executive positions lately. What is that all about? You know: crap like the statutory requirement of 30% (sometimes I heard about 40%) women in the supervisory boards and such. Interestigly enough, there’s never such an idea concerning assembly lines, or construction works. How come and why not?
I am an admirer of the womanhood, but achievement should be rewarded based on personal capabilities. Otherwise such “anti-discrimination” laws and regulations become actually antisocial, for they favor individuals based simply on affiliation to a specific sex.
More than that: when we start talking about legally regulated proportions and percentages, in correlation with women’s emancipation, or any other kind of emancipation for that matter, well then you can screw the emancipation part, if you ask me.
Same rights should mean same reward, for same achievement, and NO privileges!
Well, to get that reward you sometimes must suffer, get your ass kicked and so on. If you, as an “emancipated” woman, start bitching about that and demanding preferential treatment, than you’re not emancipated, my dear.
How should I feel, as a man, in an company which has 10% women employees and MUST have 40% women in the supervisory board, i.e. almost half of the total women employees? I’d feel underrepresented!
How should a really emancipated woman feel, achieving all through her own capabilities, being thrown in the same basket as those “percentage” females? Betrayed by her own sex.
What about private enterprise? It is my concern whom I employ and for what reasons, ’cause it’s MY company, MY property… MY fuckin’ business!
And I can’t see nothing good in being governed, administrated, conducted and shepherded in any way by an uncapable woman, instead of an uncapable man. Could you point out the difference?
I mean, if you ask for “equal” treatment, which would be in detriment to men in this case, by enforcing a percentage, how can that be equal treatment in the first place? It is preferential treatment, what these women want, and nothing else.
Preferential treatment means unequity. Why would anyone go for that?
And how can I treat equally, i.e. in absolutely the same manner, such a frail being as a woman anyway? Men are rough. I cannot treat a woman as rough as I treat a man. And if I still do it, all say it’s unfair. If I don’t, then I treat them unequally, which makes me the boogeyman any way I turn it.
Men and women should not be seen as equals in the first place, but as complementary beings, each having its privileges and obligations and that is how nature wanted it to be from the start.
We could extend this topic to all those minorities protected by anti-discrimination laws, about their proportions and percentages, but I’m sure there will be enough of those, who didn’t call me sexist by now, to go on calling me racist, xenophobe and what not. Maybe some other time…