Henry has a good point. The feminist complaint was "jobs for the boys". The argument was women shouldn't be excluded because they're women. But the argument has become that women must be selected because they are women. Clinton and Clark have replaced sexism with reverse sexism.
Blue declared Henry wrong. "Feminism hasn't come further than Hillary Clinton and Helen Clark, feminism will only ever go as far as they and other women go."
I have wrapped my head in a wet towel, meditated for two days, and still don't know what she is saying.
Blue goes on to rail against Parliament, public companies, wage differentials and newspaper headlines. It doesn't occur to Blue that women may be making different choices from men. Some women may choose to drop out of the workforce to raise their children. What's wrong with that?
Perhaps their desire to have children suggests to them it's better to be a nurse than a doctor. Perhaps there are women who choose not to define themselves against what men do.
The choices people make have consequences. When "never married, never had children" females are compared to men in the same boat, the females appear to do slightly better. It's not sexism at work.
I don't mind Blue writing stupid letters. What bothers me is taxpayers having to fund and having to grant her some special regard because it's state-mandated.
Henry won't mind. He and Blue enjoy a symbiotic relationship. They feed off one another. She gives him publicity. He justifies her job.
Blue concludes: "There is a lot of work to be done." Indeed. There are broadcasts to monitor, headlines to check, letters to write.
Debate on this article is now closed.
