Gender Quotas And The Feminist Obsession With The Apex Male

So there has been some recent talk in Australia again about gender quotas and how men like me will sleep easier if there is a mandatory 50/50 gender quota in politics and corporate boards. Apparently I should feel guilty as a man over another feminist injustice. Sorry I am not that stupid or susceptible to manipulation. This is propaganda posing as journalism, nothing more. You can read Annabel Crabb’s article, which is linked here and is the main subject of this Hub. Apparently the feminist clique in the mainstream media is unhappy about there not being enough vaginas in federal Parliament and other leadership positions. The problem is not a lack of honesty or integrity or vision or intelligence! No the problem is there are not enough vaginas! Yes feminist thinking really is that simplistic. I try not to read the news anymore to keep my blood pressure down. There is simply too much mental retardation in the far-left or far-right wing Australian toilet paper known respectively as The Age and Herald Sun, for me to handle most of the time. It is not so much that I can’t tolerate stupid people, it is that I have difficulty coping with stupid people that are arrogant and hold a delusion that they are morally superior to everyone else. That pretty much sums up the modern feminist movement in a nutshell and quite a few other ideologues in the media and in politics. But aside from me needing to vent, this topic does need to be addressed and critically examined.

Freedom is an absolute benchmark of any developed and democratic society. Imposing laws on a society to determine who can do what job and in what number, is fascism. I don’t care how you window dress your double standards, this is what mandatory gender quotas amounts to. I don’t want Australia to become the reincarnation of the Soviet Union. Apparently Annabel Crabb is intelligent enough to realise the serious flaws in imposing mandatory gender quotas on elected positions in government. But that does not stop her from implying that it is a good idea in her article. In not one instance in her entire article does she offer a solid rebuttal to any of the arguments against quotas, which she acknowledges are valid. Instead we get emotional hyperboles and passive aggressive sarcasm. The reason why she can’t provide solid rebuttals, is because she does not have any. There are not enough blond people in the government or blue eyed people, so it is must be discrimination of course! That is the level of stupid we are dealing with.

How about we focus on equality of opportunity and not equality of outcomes and just let people be people Annabel? How about we try that? How about we stop making every sex difference we observe an example of discrimination against women? How about we accept the reality that men and women are different and have different interests? Can we have less delusion and more commonsense please. Oh and please don't try and sell the BS narrative female politicians are somehow better than male politicians. They are just as bad. Bronwyn Bishop and her recent resignation in response to the public outrage at her extravagant use of Australian taxpayer money (my money!) for her travel expenses, is merely just one example I could cite to debunk this fallacy female leadership is somehow more virtuous than male leadership! It is the twisted and corrupt form of our current political system and the influence of lobby interests and ideologues which both rountinely usurp the interests of the Australian public, that is the real problem. The problem is not the gender of our political leaders. Knifing your political rivals is not the exclusive domain of male politicians either, just ask former Australian PM Julia Gillard. In the US it is no different, just look at Hillary Clinton who is currently being investigated by the FBI or look at her poor leadership with the incident in Benghazi. Left or right, male or female, politicians are all the same. Paraphrasing Gerald Celente, "Slime is slime, it comes in all races and genders".

Modern feminism is not about women’s rights, it is about shaping society to fit to their Marxist worldview. If you are a woman and disagree with them, well too bad! Just ask Alison Tieman or Lauren Southern. It is a reality that men and women have very different career interests and that this does lead to skewed gender ratios in particular professions. Women generally are less likely to want to work 50 or more hours a week, work full-time, pursue a long-term career or pursue high risk and demanding occupations like politics. It is not because they are inferior, or incapable of doing these jobs, it is because they want different things in their life than men do. The reality is that more women than men will want to work in childcare for instance. Conversely it is a reality that more men than women will want to work in demanding political or managerial positions. It is about choice and interests, not about who is better. This is common knowledge that most people understand, but feminists simply refuse to accept reality. One example of that, is the consistent ommission by feminists to acknowledge that substantial numbers of women (not all of course!) by their own volition and preferences and without external pressure, choose to be full-time mothers rather than pursue a career as their top priority in life. It does not seem to matter how much evidence that feminists are given, they simply cannot accept the fact that substantial numbers of women might actually not just choose, but prefer being a full-time mother than pursuing a career.

I would like to see more women in politics and I would like to see more men in teaching, but I am not going to put a person’s private parts above their merit or individual liberty. Feminists will not let this go until they have everyone playing to their script. It is not about what society wants, it is about imposing their will on us. I am not going to sit back and remain silent while this dribble gets circulated in the mainstream media. A meritocracy is something I firmly believe in and my personal freedom is something I highly value. If I go for a job, I don’t want to be in a position where I am passed over because I lacked the right private parts. Reverse discrimination is discrimination and modern feminism is a movement of hypocrisy and bigotry.

All of this talk about quotas comes from the feminist obsession with the apex male. Feminists are envious of the minority of men that reach the top rungs of society and have decided that all men must pay for the fictional injustice they perceive. Because of course this tiny male minority didn’t earn their positions right? They didn’t work their backsides off working 50 plus hours a week, or sucked it up when the going got tough to get where they are, did they? Also apparently the top 1% of men reflects how much power all men have to all women. But hang on a minute….Men make up the majority of the homeless, the minority of university students, the majority of workers in hazardous and lower paying jobs and the majority of suicides. Despite having a significantly shorter life expectancy and a higher disease burden in many areas, men receive considerably less health funding than women. But of course men can count on getting longer and more severe sentences than women for the exact same crimes! I could go on further. Where are all the feminists fighting for equality for homelessness, for the boy crisis in education, in criminal sentencing and in health funding and so on? Where are the feminists crying for equal numbers of female sewage workers, garbage collectors, taxi drivers and so forth? Why are the feminist cries for gender quotas limited to politics and corporate boards? Where are the gender quotas for male teachers, psychologists, nurses, childcare workers and male university students? Oh that’s right! It is only automatic sexism if men outnumber women in occupations where feminists idiotically perceive men are getting some mythical privilege they did not earn. I am sorry, as Annabel alluded to I must be “mansplaining”.

Only the apex male is visible to feminists. The homeless male is invisible. A mentality of female entitlement and blind narcissism is behind the feminist mindset. There is a complete lack of empathy for men that are struggling and zero consideration given to how much men have to sacrifice personally to reach the top of the corporate and political ladder. It is the mindset of a child and it is pathetic. Feminists will automatically conclude sexism if men are getting something women are not, without even bothering to examine the many factors that explain and justify why.

Annabel writes in her article:

“Let us pray that no man ever wakes in fright, wondering why exactly it is that he is nine times more likely than a female competitor to make it to a senior leadership role in a big organisation, despite the fact that female university graduates have outnumbered male ones for nearly two decades.”

What are women studying Annabel? A gender studies course does not generally lead to a senior leadership role in business or politics. Women are studying courses that don’t lead to high powered occupations because those courses interest them more. Money and power are not everything in life! Heaven forbid women choose something feminists disapprove of, like staying at home to raise children. Women are choosing to study education, nursing, psychology and humanities courses in greater numbers than men. They are not studying economics, finance, computer science, engineering and doing MBA’s to the same degree that men are. There are not as many women that want to work 50 plus hours a week, as there are men. Consult the adjacent videos for supporting research and see these two links here and here. I could go on and on and on. Again women make different choices and the only people that seem to have a problem with women’s choices are feminists.

Feminists need to get over their insecurities over men and stop meddling in the affairs of men and women and wider society. Let people be free to choose what they want to do. The reality is feminists have no problem laughing and mocking men when men and boys are struggling, but the moment men succeed in some way they cry “sexism” and “patriarchy”. We have women in the media over the last couple of years writing books and running public debates about why men are obsolete and unnecessary. These female media commentators are gloating over some victory they stupidly perceive women are experiencing, because substantial numbers of men are struggling in education and employment. It is juvenile but they are indeed fully grown women! Then we have these same women crying foul because men in some areas are represented in greater numbers than women.

Men don’t outnumber women in leadership positions because of their genitals. Men take personal responsibility for their own choices and accountability for their own actions and that is why men get leadership positions, just like their female counterparts. It is feminism that teaches women to excuse themselves from their own choices and it is feminism that discourages women from trying to be responsible. It is feminists that are the real misogynists in Western society. It is feminists that are the ones infantilising women. I will sleep easier when both genders are held to the same level of responsibility and accountability. Until then rest assured I will continue to keep exposing the lies, hypocrisy and bigotry of the feminist movement.

Annabel writes:

“It then occurred to O'Neill that the entire feminist movement was really about being patronising to women.”

Well yes that is exactly what the feminist movement does. I can tell you right now Annabel, that there are number of young women that I know that actually do feel that way about the feminist movement. In fact I remember a while back when I was at university and the subject of gender quotas came up in one of my management lectures. We had to discuss it with the student next to us. The female student sitting next to me without any prompting by the way, came right out and voiced her disgust at the idea. Women that are intelligent and accomplished, find gender quotas insulting and humiliating because they know better and can see right through the feminist BS. But as you write later on in your article Annabel, you seem to be aware of that.

Annabel writes:

“Can you imagine how dreadful it would feel – how soul-sapping – for a human being to suspect on any level that their success was attributable to their genetic equipment rather than their merit?”

Well yes, which is why so many people are against gender quotas Annabel. You seem to be aware of this, do I need to connect the dots! What you need to understand is that many men and women don’t share the feminist insecurities about men and women.

Annabel writes:

“Horrible thought! According to the 2013 Women In Media Report, 80 per cent of experts and commentators quoted in Australian newspapers are male.”

Have a read of your article Annabel. Good journalists like to quote articles with substance and facts. Your article has neither and neither does much of the content of your feminist media colleagues. The lack of quoting has nothing to do with women in the media and everything to do with the feminist establishment in the media and the toxic material it routinely dishes out to the public. Proper journalists understandably don’t value the agenda of media feminism as highly as other sources and consequently don’t quote feminist journalists as frequently. If it makes you feel any better I have quoted you several times in this article Annabel! Oh the horror lol.

It is really feminism that devalues the speech and opinion of both sexes and not this mythical Western patriarchal oppression. If you are a woman and don’t toe the feminist line, you don’t progress in your journalistic career. If you are man with a high profile and dare to question feminist ideology, then you can expect a feminist witch-hunt by the Australian media. Want an example Annabel? How about psychiatrist and former White Ribbon Day ambassador Dr. Tanveer Ahmed, who dared to question the feminist description of domestic violence in The Australian and was consequently subjected to a feminist media witch-hunt and excommunicated from White Ribbon Australia and the feminist establishment. Dr. Ahmed describes his account of what happened in the adjacent video which covers an excellent presentation on domestic violence (please also consult my article on domestic violence). Of course if radical feminist lecturers at say James Cook University vilify men, we can expect the same feminist media to frame any male opposition to this hateful feminist rhetoric, as men having an issue with women having an opinion (see this link). Yes you will find most men have a problem with bigots and man haters! Who would have thought!

Keep up the hypocrisy, projection and doublethink feminists! You never disappoint. On a closing note for this topic, you will notice I have used the video content of an honourable and respectful feminist named Prof. Christina Hoff Sommers (the Factual Feminist). If you are a feminist and really care about women’s rights, I strongly suggest you support her. I do. Men’s rights and women’s rights are not mutually exclusive issues and I value both. There are legitimate women’s rights issues that need to be addressed in this world and we need more women like Sommers stepping forward and leading the way with facts and evidence and not with emotion, dogma and ideology.

For further discussion on why feminist quotas are a bad idea and for further debunking of feminist fallacies about men and leadership, please read this article.

Now I have one last thing to discuss in this article. Time and time again, we see feminism fighting for equality for women only in areas they deem will benefit women. For example, in not one instance can I recall feminists campaigning to make sure female murderers get the same sentences as their male counterparts. Funny that. We are constantly told by feminists that we need to focus on men's violence toward women. What are feminists doing to stop women's violence toward men and boys? Nothing. Zip. Recently a tragedy occurred in which a mother killed her three sons because her husband was not giving her or her daughter enough attention (see the two adjacent videos for a description). The usual knee jerk reaction by society in these cases, is to find excuses for women that kill people so the women don't have to be held fully responsible and the usual reaction of feminists in the media, is either to remain silent or to join in on finding excuses and reframing the story so the female perpetrator is a victim. I want people to watch the two adjacent videos on this story. This is how predictable the social reaction to horrible events like this are when they involve female perpetrated violence. This is gynocentrism in action. Feminists would rather police men for manspreading on trains than address the reality that women can be violent or acknowledge the fact domestic violence is not a gendered issue. This is where we are people with this feminist lunacy. Read my article on gynocentrism to understand why the public and feminist reaction to events like these can be predicted so easily. If you are a woman I hold you accountable for your actions like I do for men. A vagina does not excuse you.

I believe in equality of human dignity, equality of opportunity and equality before the law. I don't believe in equality of outcome or the selective application of equality when it suits people.

Source article discussed in this Hub from The Age: Men Will Sleep Easier If There's A 50/50 Quota, Annabel Crabb