Women in Canada have had almost all the
white collar staff and supervisory jobs in banks, business offices and
corporate head offices given to them because women are not vulnerable
to military duty in the event of war. The lucky but vacant ingrates
have been enjoying this arbitrary work environment since 1945.
I have been making this rather obviously blunt and correct assessment
(enter virtually any white collar business and observe the staff ranks
are just as totally female as the managerial ranks are totally male)
publicly for some time and occasionally I will get a response to the
effect that my activism is quixotic and that I am going "backwards".
Evidently, going forward is:
having the major white collar employers hire exclusively women for staff
and then stonewalling the poor fatuous dears when they try to flood
into management (hence, the glass ceiling).
having the abortion rate grow by leaps and bounds because conception
interferes with skills acquiring, upwardly mobile white collar jobs
so many women choose to abort.
having the birth rate decline precipitously as more women abort than
give birth (see abortion rate, previously).
having the divorce rate soar as the employers hire only Moms as a hiring
hedge, ie Dad isn't going to be the principal breadwinner anymore because
Mom has the job so isn't Dad a ne'er do well and lets ditch the poor
fool.
having the nuclear family disintegrate because the divorce rate is so
high (see ditching Dad, previously).
having disenfranchised, disaffected anomic nuclear kids from broken
homes and single parents (Moms, usually) wander aimlessly through society
like lost souls (That is, broken homes, broken kids - the growing legacy
of fatherless "families").
having almost everybody in society mindlessly conform to this reprehensible
status quo (and having them congratulate themselves on their progressive
wisdom for so doing).
Are we to believe that this decaying social structure is progressive
and forward? Accepting this situation is liberalism at its finest. Anything
challenging this environment smacks of right of center conservative
ideology and any such challenge is an exercise in "backwardism"?
I would get my supposedly retrograde views re these hiring policies
and their impact on society disseminated in the media were it not for
the fact that I am criticizing big business and media is big business.
The SOB's (media and otherwise) have a vested interest in keeping the
staff totally female; namely, in the very unpredictable event of a major
war the trained staff doesn't go as cannon fodder.
When men do die in combat, they (media and the politicians) pay lip
service to their inherent worth and sacrifice and their contribution
to society but stay silent about the employers not wanting to hire men
on staff because of their vulnerability to military service.
Politicians and media pundits will preach equal rights and freedom of
speach (have you heard them? It's called lip service (see above)) but
will keep their collective mouths shut about awkward employment issues
like this (which involves women, you see, and for good or ill the unpredictable
dears have both money and suffrage) because speaking out could negatively
affect their careers and/or the corporate bottom line.
Nice hedge - hiring only women - but look what it is doing to society.
This is the way forward? Well, the Canadian way. Apparently, it is.
Pity, Eh?
