Tuesday, September 13, 2016

The Cult of Extreme Gender Equality

This can be deflated with one short question:
Question: should 50% of all miners, sewage workers, and oil rig workers be women?
After all, if all gender inequality is a horrendous evil and must be addressed, then aren’t feminists, logically, committed to making 50% of all miners, sewage workers, and oil rig workers be women?

If the advocate of gender equality says “no,” then they have just admitted that some significant gender inequality is always going to exist, and that in certain professions it would be absurd to demand gender equality.

If the advocate of gender equality says “yes,” then immediately one must ask:
“But what if women don’t want to do these jobs, freely choose to avoid them, and most of them would actually hate to do such jobs?”
So, what, are you going to force women to do them? Are you going to subject women to a barrage of feminist propaganda telling them that women need to do 50% of these jobs? And what if – shock! horror! – women still shun these professions??

And could it be that there are basic biological facts? You know, that men – generally speaking and on average – tend to be physically stronger than women, and so are better suited to hard and difficult physical labour than women are?

You might like to read up here on the sexist, evil “hate facts” about the professions dominated by men because women don’t want to do these types of hard physical labour.

For example, there seems to be a horrible level of gender inequality in these professions:
(1) garbage collectors;

(2) deep sea fishermen;

(3) electrical power line installers;

(4) auto repair mechanics;

(5) roofers;

(6) heating, air conditioning and refrigeration mechanics;

(7) aircraft maintenance and service technicians;

(8) firefighters;

(9) construction workers.
So I am guessing that universal Western institutional sexism and the evil white male patriarchy is to blame for this outrageous gender inequality?! Those white male bastards!

But, returning to reality from our feminist fantasy world, doesn’t it follow that some level of gender inequality in our societies is not only natural, but also morally right and nothing to be concerned about?

Oh, and you might spare a thought for all those poor men throughout history who have laboured in mines, sewage works, and oil rigs for human civilisation, doing the work that women would not like to do.

You might also reflect on the reality that the socialist left fought for decades to get women and girls out of the mines and factories, and to stop capitalists from exploiting women for low wages in jobs which men, who on average are physically stronger than women, are probably much better suited to do.

Realist Left on the Internet:
Realist Left on Facebook
Realist Left on Twitter @realistleft
Social Democracy for the 21st Century: A Realist Alternative to the Modern Left
Realist Left on Reddit
Realist Left Blog
Realist Left on YouTube
Lord Keynes on Facebook

Alt Left on the Internet:
Alternative Left on Facebook
An Alt-Left closed Facebook discussion group can be accessed through this page as well.

I’m on Twitter:
Lord Keynes @Lord_Keynes2


  1. The most obvious problematic examples we have are in sport. Extreme feminists must logically support that sports be segregated. The extreme cultural left has already started something like this by supporting transgender 'former' males fighting women in UFC (yes, it's really quite sick).

    The other very serious issue is women in the military. Look into this. It's crazy stuff. The US military are fastracking women through the training procedures. It's going to have tragic results. The US are now drafting women.

    This stuff has come very far. Mainly to benefit female elites - especially in the military - who want to further their own careers. What happens to the injured grunt on the battlefield whose fellow female soldier is not strong enough to lift him and carry him to safety? They don't care. They only care about themselves.

    1. Geez, Illusionist, what’s with all these hate facts?!



    2. "What happens to the injured grunt on the battlefield whose fellow female soldier is not strong enough to lift him and carry him to safety?"


      More seriously, from what I've read women are naturally very few in construction work or fire fighting quite simply because most women are not physically strong enough, e.g., women tend to fail normal physical fitness tests for fire-fighters.

      So feminism means: having fire-fighters who can't carry people from burning buildings?

    3. You know they're f*cking drafting them now right? Bipartisan support on that bill.

      Here's a controversial thought: maybe contemporary feminism is anti-women. All the pointers are there. Feminists do not like women as they currently are. They do not like, for example, women who are not as strong as men (i.e. all of them). The whole thing is about women becoming men. It's really weird. As a feminist might say: it's a patriarchal ideology that chastises women for not being more like men.

      So maybe it's not unusual that the discourse raises logical problems that result in highly offensive conclusions. Example: if police are called on a domestic violence charge and a couple are straight-out fighting the man will catch the brunt of the charge (rightly so, as he's beating up a woman who is weaker than him). But in equality land they should get equal treatment. He could beat her severely but the police would have to assume that, since both were fighting each other, they were both liable. Any ideology that leads to that conclusion is quite manifestly anti-woman. Ditto for the idea that women should compete with men in sports, especially those that involve physical violence.

      I think that contemporary feminism is actually trying to undermine many of the protections that society has built up to protect women from men. Certainly their sexual ideology, which enforces promiscuousness no matter how this negatively impacts women's self-esteem, leans in this direction.

      Twisted, unhappy people attacking a group that they don't like so far as I can see.

  2. http://www.nationalreview.com/article/420826/putting-women-combat-even-worse-idea-youd-think-mike-fredenburg


    Disaster waiting to happen. I feel sorry for the people who will suffer due to this crazy delusion.

  3. If women aren't physically capable of performing those jobs then what is the point of applying for them? There are millions of men and women who are unemployed and desperate for any job. Those who find work will do so based on their aptitudes and skills. That means a woman with nimble hands will find work as a cashier, or in a textile factory. She won't be hired as a construction labourer. Likewise, a man who is physically strong will not be hired for work that requires manual dexterity.

    When there is high unemployment, employers can demand higher productivity. When unemployment is low, workers can be choosy and only seek the jobs they prefer. Feminism can't change the decisions of employers or workers. Those decisions are self-serving.

    No surprise that nearly everyone prefers the cushiest jobs with the highest pay. So that is where quotas are pushed. If there was Meninism, it would be pushing for more men in comfortable jobs. It wouldn't be insisting that more men be hired as cashiers or as textile workers.

  4. It's also the other way. Why isn't there a large recruitment campaign fronted by these women to reduce the oversupply of female primary school teachers. They are currently occupying jobs that should surely be reserved for men.

    1. Well, why aren't 50% of beauty salon workers men while we are about it?

      Naturally, we all know the need for common decency and privacy for women customers is a big reason why this would be absurd.

  5. A woman's choice? Her wants? Brainwashed at birth! We MUST prime her tabula rasa at birth to want to do heavy physical work, garbage collection and computer programming!

    and... soon enough in order to accomplish those tasks, we can't have those rotten ideas by PARENTS to get into their young minds. That needs to be done away with. Etc. :P

    1. Oh, for god's sake:



    2. Cool. I hate having to wear my glasses when I drive. I can't wait until they waive that stupid requirement!

  6. LK, you have hit this one out of the park my friend. Bravo! Too bad you're (presumably) a cis/straight/white male, so don't expect any traction where it counts.

    P.S. If you haven't already seen this, check it out

  7. This is a must see film for you LK


  8. I was with Kain until he said 'computer programming'.

    Computer programming does not entail physically demanding labor that would push up against the biological constraints of the female gender that we're positing. It is a profession that a 'physically weaker sex', if that's what we're arguing women are in this discourse we're engaging in, is 'naturally' suited for.

  9. On the whole, women are too important for the survival of the human species to risk them to do physically demanding and/or dangerous work. Men are expendable to a certain degree and the feminists know it, that is why we tolerate their shit for the most part.