PROLOGUE (written a few days after the original blog) – I occasionally write something political in nature. Mostly about actual politics but sometimes about cultural or social issues that still fall under the political category but not as much as the more common issues of partisan politics. Sexual politics falls somewhere in between.
I am NOT afraid of sexual politics. Not TOO much, anyway. It’s just that it is a topic that has been beaten to a masticated pulp over the last forty years and I am already guilty of saying the same thing over and over. If you don’t believe that, ask yourself how many times I have suggested that the system is wonky, it may break down and that only fleeing off the grid makes any real sense? I can be monotonous and boring. Ask Sal. Ask my kids. It’s why they left home.
But, if I write anti-Trump rants I usually get a lot of comments. If I write anti-Liberal rants, I get even more. And, if I wrote something cultural or social I get still more. On this topic – after three days – I have received ONLY one.
I do NOT expect that all comments should be in agreement. I fully expect some dissenting points to be raised if not complete rejections of the basic argument…..
But on this one? Nada. Zip. Big O.
Well, Paul stood up. Paul commented. Paul opined. So NOT ‘zip’ but close-to-nada, for sure. Anyway, Paul is as outspoken and opinionated as I am. Maybe more. I really expected more from others.
NO! This is NOT a call for opinions. Volunteer them or not. That’s your call. No problem. NO OPINION is an opinion. Even silence speaks loudly. ESPECIALLY silence, actually! Silence says volumes.
I just expected more. But many, it seems, are afraid of this topic, don’t want to disagree or see no percentage in agreeing. Fair enough. But doesn’t that say something to you? Isn’t THAT also an issue?
Seems we can’t talk about this………………………..
—————————original blog post:
The provincial NDP don’t (or don’t want to) accept males as new nominations anymore. I honestly don’t know that to be 100% accurate but I have inquired of several NDP sources and NOT had a clear answer-back. True or not, if it was even considered, it makes my point: Sexism/gender bias is just fine if it’s against white heterosexual men.
This is what Horgan actually said: “It does have to be a woman if a woman (MLA) steps down,” said Horgan. “But (retiring) Bill Routley, for example … it doesn’t have to be a woman there.” But that statement at first appeared to be at odds with the NDP’s gender policy, which clearly stipulates that any departing NDP MLA must be replaced by a woman or “equity-seeking candidate”. Horgan’s office later clarified he was trying to say that a male candidate could meet the “equity-seeking” provisions, if that man was from a racial minority group, First Nation or the LGBTQ community, for example.
In other words: white, heterosexual men need not apply to replace a white, heterosexual man who is leaving. White hetero males need not apply for ANYTHING.
Think about that…just for a minute…where is that gonna eventually lead?
Trudeau also made a point of picking females for half his cabinet thus ensuring that birth-determined genitalia were the determining factor most relevant to governing and not intelligence, ability or merit.
Presumably, alt-genitals later chosen by a candidate for reasons totally private are NOT so restrictive of political advancement and may be a plus. Who the hell knows?
Graydon Carter the male editor of Vanity Fair is retiring but, in light of the Weinstein fiasco, the management and ownership of Conde Naste is being pressured into adding to the job description so many behavioural policies and restrictions that the only truly SAFE applicant will be female. This, of course, is all in aid of gender neutrality. In fact, one consultant said, “If they are smart, the top three on the shortlist should be female.”
Odd thing to say when Carter has exemplified competence and ability for 25 years. His hormones, it seems, did not get in the way of being a good editor.
Well over 60% of the provincial and Federal government workforce is female. The majority of those unemployed in BC are male. But we have ministries for women’s equality and millions in grants given to women’s programs. We are still promoting women in every position of the workforce despite the fact that they are currently in the majority (over 55% of the overall workforce is female).
Forty years ago female journalists were rare. Now it is the opposite.
The battle for equality may not be fully won by some standards but the tide has clearly turned, the writing is etched deeply on the wall, the pendulum has swung – women have come a long way and may well be in the lead or are at least gaining fast…..it might just be time to ease off on the shrill complaints.
WHICH BRINGS ME TO NOW……..OMG. OMG. OMG!!!!!!
Part of the shrill complaints, whining, poor-me, victim-oriented ya-ya sisterhood is the sexual harassment crowd. And they have now gone too far. WAY TOO FAR!!!
Of course, there are real problems of rape and assault and even, to some small degree, sexual extortions that use greed and ambition to entrap but I am not talking about that. That is wrong. Ugly. It should be corrected. There are some bad boys out there. I fully acknowledge that. I would argue that there is an equal number of bad girls using their less-than-moral wiles but let us leave that topic sit on the shelf for now. The topic for today is WHAT THE HELL IS WRONG WITH US?
A 93 year old Parkinson’s patient restricted to a wheelchair and looking as frail and old as his age would suggest is accused of SEXUAL ASSAULT by three women who’s bottom he inappropriately groped. Inappropriate? Yes. Bad? A smidge, I suppose…… but, ASSAULT? No way. These women were young, fit, strong, surrounded by others and in public. A bum-touch is NOT assault. That they or anyone thinks it is, in fact, ASSAULT trivializes the word and diminishes the claims of real assault victims in so doing. Hell, the old guy has been more assaulted than they were.
I have written about the need for due process in the Weinstein case for much the same reason. These hysterical and insane accusations are ruinous and way more damaging than the crime in many cases (yes….now is the time to do yet another disclaimer that states once again that real rape and real assault are real problems). Harvey Weinstein has over 40 women claiming all sorts of things but chief amongst them is assault. If that (the example of 93-year-old ex-pres GHWBush) is the definition of assault they are using, he has already overpaid his debt to all. In fact, he may be innocent of most charges.
The women’s movement does not see the cognitive dissonance that argument invokes. How can you claim to be equal, empowered, liberated, capable and competent at the same time as saying you were victimized by a 93-year-old, wheel-chair bound, Parkinson’s sufferer? Because he touched your well-clad bum in a public setting? How can you claim to be so equal when you can’t dissuade or deter the unwanted actions of an old lech? (yes….now is the time to do yet another disclaimer that states once again that real rape and real assault are real problems).
If you can’t say NO and say it loud and mean it, if you can’t say no because you actually want the guy’s wallet more than you want your dignity, if you can’t make no ‘stick’ with the time-honoured slap across the face or martini thrown, then maybe you truly are a victim-in-waiting and maybe we all DO need to rush to your aid. Like we would a child. Fair enough. If that is the case (as it seems), I’ll be there.
But don’t then tell me how equal and empowered and capable you are…because YOU ARE NOT!