I Can’t Get Behind This At All

The Feminist Bailout.

She maybe could have had a point with me, because there are single moms out there, and they need jobs, too, except she goes on to say this:

Fortunately, jobs for women can be created by concentrating on professions that build the most important infrastructure — human capital. In 2007, women were 83 percent of social workers, 94 percent of child care workers, 74 percent of education, training and library workers (including 98 percent of preschool and kindergarten teachers and 92 percent of teachers’ assistants).

The emphasis is mine, in order to draw attention to the part I object to.

One gets the feeling that whatever occupation can be found that mostly women — and few men– do, that would be the “most important” infrastructure to her.

Look, we can debate the issue on the merits, but this writer isn’t willing to, I don’t think.  The fact is, there are jobs women won’t do.  They tend to be the nasty, painful, difficult, risky, smelly, dirty jobs.  (cue: “But changing daipers is smelly, nasty, and dirty!”  Yep, and my wife wasn’t willing to do that when I was around to push the job off on, either…but that’s anecdotal reporting).

The fact is, studies have shown that women are capable of doing the physical jobs, too, they just have to do about 30% more strength-training to achieve the same level of performance.  So why don’t women do these jobs, if the alternative is unemployment?  Answer: because they don’t have to.  Because the federal government is always willing to jump in and cast dollars on the wind to prevent discomfort for anyone…as long as votes can be bought by doing so.

Please note: that isn’t just women’s votes.

But the attitude of the author of this article is the same attitude that had my children handed over to their biological mother, despite her abandoning them, despite the Custody Evaluator saying they’d be better off with me, despite the children wanting to stay with me. (Yeah, I’m still bitter).

On there other hand, there’s this:

When the history of this awful moment of bailout hysteria is written, there’ll be a chapter or 20 on the complete bogosity of what might call “the infrastructure flim-flam”—the idea that government can boostrap the economy out its funk by hiring two guys to dig a hole and a couple more to fill it in.

Don’t you see? It’s the perfect plan!, as Batman’s Riddler might exclaim. In fact, one only wonders why they don’t hire three guys to fill the holes, thereby cutting unemployment to negative-something.

And when there’s gub’mint money to be handed out, everyone’s got their hand out:

Like Detroit’s troubled Big Three automakers, federal intervention to save the newspaper and magazine industries are highly problematic, at best. Ink-on-paper periodicals are never coming back, and it may be some time before the web can provide well-paying jobs with health benefits–if it ever will. Until then, providing some way to provide young journalists a way to get started, or displaced media workers a way to transition to new occupations, or to retirement, might help–and serve the nation in the process.

Advertisements

6 Comments

Filed under economics, Politics, rant

6 responses to “I Can’t Get Behind This At All

  1. Of course; the thing over at the NYT is a Feminist; they’re only concerned with furthering the “vagina agenda.” You can’t expect reasoned though from them, or ideas that step beyond their twisted gender issues.

  2. I so want to be a feminist, I am after all a woman. I love the idea of being equal in all things. However, one of the fundamental ideas of a family was squashed flat by the feminist movement and therefore I feel hypocritical saying I am. (Allowing those woman who needed to work to work, encouraged woman to work, which encouraged woman not raising their own children, which in turn created situations in which you have to struggle to get by or have two working people within the home, unless of course one of the people was fortunate enough to get a really good paying job. However, those that are that fortunate aren’t the ones with the children who need their parents the most. – sorry for the extra long run on.)

    As for the other part 2 things: All jobs are important, they rely on each other. I have had a labor intensive job (or quite a few) and woman and men can do them if they choose to.

    • chiefmuser

      If all feminism meant was “equal”, I’d be all for it.
      But too often, what is “equal” is extremely dependent on viewpoint.

      You hit me 10 years ago. So last week, when you were holding a very delicate and valuable sculpture, I hit you back. You were so startled that you dropped the sculpture. I say it’s fair because I’m just hitting you back. You feel that the original hit was so long ago as to not matter anymore, and besides, your hitting me didn’t break anything valuable. So you go and key the paint on my brand new car.

      …not that you would. But you get what I mean.

      For instance, women are, if not tyrants, at least masters at manipulating men into doing things they don’t want to do themselves. Is it fair that women get free/cheap drinks at bars on ladies night, but there is no corresponding men’s night? Is it fair that women have exclusive clubs where men aren’t allowed, but not men?
      Well, from some perspectives, yeah: it is fair. From others, it isn’t.

      I have a feeling that as long as women have periods and childbirth, no amount of favoritism/benefits will ever make them feel like they are “equal” to men. But that’s because most women don’t see the truly crushing responsibilities that men assume to spare the women they care for.

  3. I agree with you completely. One of my biggest disappointments (for election time) was to do with Palin. I respect that some feel differently than I do in regards to if she would be good at being VP or even if she could be president. However, I was so disappointed in the women that thought she was the right vote on her gender alone. That isn’t equality for woman, that is making them better because of their gender.

    As for manipulation of men, well I can’t say I don’t, but I am not sure they all do. 🙂 However, my sweetheart might think I didn’t love him if I didn’t manipulate him a little. He is however, quite the “gentleman” and if I was to do the “mans work” he would be quite upset with me…

    • chiefmuser

      Yep.
      I am happier in having let myself be manipulated into doing the distasteful/difficult things for my wife.
      It’s kind of part of being a man.

      Embracing the Suck (as I posted on my old site).

      But it isn’t “fair”.

  4. 🙂 I might have to mention the “embracing the suck” to my sweetheart, he would appreciate it.

    In my house the fair is put there though. I think he has done the dishes like 10 times (in 12 years), has cooked if I was sick, did the laundry less than the dishes and so forth. He sees that as the woman’s job. Oh and diapers? If I wasn’t around, or some other woman wasn’t around he would do it… 😉

    Quite old fashioned in many respects I know, but I love him anyway… Plus I guess it puts the fair back into it…

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s