The Abominable No-Man

In a moment of weakness at Christmas, I said Feminism was 90% scam and 10% honest feeble-mindedness. I said a retard could honestly confuse women's equality with racial equality. Let's expand that point.

Feminists expect half the staff in the CBC to be women. They never object that half the taxi drivers should be women; or the media should be 1% Jewish, at most. Currently there are 100 vacancies in the Vancouver police force. If 5000 qualified men apply for those jobs, and 50 women: What's the betting all 50 women would get jobs, and 50 of the 5000 men? Do the math. 50:50. Equality. 100%=1%. Feminist mathematics.

The Sun Newspaper here in Vancouver went on strike in 1978 (if memory serves. It was over-shadowed by the brewery strike.) In retaliation, management employed hordes of female eunuchs as scabs. It was the most blatant use of black labour I have ever encountered. And as cover, management and the Feminists argued that women compose 50% of the population: So Why Not?

We need a clear rationale why Jews and Blacks should be proportionately represented in the CBC for example but not women or children. And a really strong case is needed, because men are programmed to yield to women, no matter how unreasonable.

Let's start with the obvious. A married black man, with a wife and kids to support, should be able to bump a single white girl out of some dumb govt job: the post office or LCB. There is a clear moral need for equality between racial groups in a society. Black men = white men. Black women = white women. Black children = white children. But it is absurd to suggest that black men should have parity with white children; or white women with white men.

It abominates me when Feminists argue that single white women should be preferred before married black men. Racist white males love that one! They would rather a good job go to a single white female than to a married black man. Feminism is music to the corporate ear.

There is a clear moral imperative for parity between racial groups in a society. Races are whole populations, whereas genders are parts of a population. Racial differences are to be eliminated: gender differences should be rationalised. In the Richmond fire dept for example (a big issue in Vancouver) there is every reason to expect more Chinese firemen (Richmond being heavily Chinese). But it is absurd to suggest half the firefighters should be female. And if not half, Why any? Equality for women in the workplace only means when a woman is the best 'man' available. That is all that was ever assented to. Equality does not mean that anything should be half female.

Employment masculinises remember. Universally, it tends to turn boys into men, but girls into 'female eunuchs', as they have been called. Frontline employment is good for men, but problematic for women. Athletic men are handsome studs, meaningful approximations to the male ideal. Athletic women are meaningless: The comparable ideal for women would be something like Marilyn Monroe, pregnant.

The whole point is the realisation of the potential in people, as individuals and populations. Racial and religious groups fully realised would achieve comparable distributions. If 1% of the country is Jewish, 1% of the media would be Jewish. If 5% of whites have degrees, 5% of blacks would have degrees. With men and women however, most men would be breadwinners with full-time jobs; and most women would be homemakers with part-time jobs. That is the social ideal of maturity and partnership. The anti-social alternative, promoted by the corporate media, is a world of pre-sexual types in an arms-length relationship.

The central meaning of Equality remember is a world of private farms, each worked by a farmer and his wife, with little room for landowners and peons. In practical terms, we must choose between single-income couples, and working couples. Promoting the one means marginalising the other. Which is more important? Nice homes, or cheap labour? Stay focussed!