Well-paid job in City. Salary £500,000 per annum. Needs totally committed individual. Minimum contract for 10 years. Prepared to travel away from home. Working hours from 9.00am to 9.00pm.
Now, if we asked 100 men if they would like this job, well, let’s say that about 40 would say ‘yes’. But I think that out of 100 women, only 20 would say ‘yes’.
Fewer women would be prepared to make such a commitment even for the high salary simply because women, statistically speaking, have a different set of priorities in their lives compared to men. And they are less obsessed about their jobs because their values tend to revolve around more personal issues, like family, children, relatives, friends, love, etc.
As a result of their priorities, women will also choose to have babies, and to look after them. And babies and children take up an incredible amount of their time. How can such women possibly make up for this time when competing against men who have been focusing on their jobs throughout their lives without breaks? - particularly at the high-power, high-flier levels of any given job, where women would have to compete against the very best, and against the most ambitious, of men?
Following a career and getting to the top is very much like running a marathon where there are thousands of competitors. But only the first three get a medal. The winners are going to be those who have laboured and trained and who kept going and pushing without a break. Those who stop and rest for a while to have babies will be overtaken even by the plodders.
Statistically, in the end, therefore, the men will win hands down in the employment market and in the highest salary awards. They will also reach the highest posts within their professions.
Butit’s not the men who win the race that are holding the women back, as the EOC would like you to believe. In this area, it’s the women themselves. After all, they can choose not to have children. No-one forces them to have children. Instead, they can choose to do what men do. They can take on men’s values and men’s commitments, and devote more time to their jobs, if they want to. Nobody is holding them back.
However, statistically speaking, compared to men, women just don’t value winning the marathon that much. Statistically, therefore, they get paid less. And quite right too, because they work fewer hours and they achieve less.
However, the EOC keeps squawking loudly that women are being paid less than men and that, somehow, they are being cheated by men. The suggestion is always that men are, somehow, holding women back. But it’s the same old vindictive feminist nonsense that tries to blame men for everything.
The EOC also perpetually bemoans the fact that there are fewer women than men in high positions, and they always want to give us the impression that it is men who are purposefully holding the women back from reaching the heights of their profession. It simply isn’t true. It’s just that women, statistically speaking, care less about jobs and status than do men.
But then the EOC has a long-established tradition of distorting the truth and painting a negative picture of men. It’s what they appear to get paid for.
It is also pointless for women to keep moaning about the fact that employers are reluctant to give them special consideration when they have children, and to demand exactly the same pay when they don’t actually put in the same number of hours. Why should anybody who works full time (man or woman) have to subsidise other women in the workplace just because they choose to have children?
**Feminists tell us that women who have children should not be disadvantaged in the employment sphere. But, as with everything else, feminists think that the world should cater exclusively for their own selfish needs. Their gardens must always be full of roses, no matter what they do, or what they choose. They believe that women who have children should not in any way have to curtail their employment prospects or their incomes. **
Thus, despite the fact that such women will take leave from work (for years, perhaps) and that they will not be able to put in the same number of hours that their colleagues do, feminists argue that they should be paid the same and be given the same status!
**But it’s the same old selfish whingeing, with never a thought for anyone else. **
Feminists think that they should have everything regardless of their circumstances or their choices. But these are the immature whinings of little girls who want to have their cake and eat it, and who shriek frenziedly, ‘Not fair’, whenever they are told that they can’t have it both ways.
**But little girls need to grow up. ****And when little girls become bigger girls they also need to learn about hormones - you know, the chemicals that cause some 3.5 million women in this country to behave aggressively and irrationally, every month. Well, men have a powerful hormone inside their bodies too? It’s called testosterone. And men’s bodies start producing high quantities of this at around puberty and thereafter. ****Testosterone (as women who have taken it regularly will tell you) is known to dramatically increase the sex drive and the tendency toward aggression. It also powers strong drives for achievement and infuses the body with stamina and energy. Couple this with a man’s characteristically focused mode of thinking, and bang, you’ve got a human being who is very determined to get to wherever he is going. ****Now, women have testosterone too. Some more than others. But, statistically speaking, men have far more of the stuff. So, we have yet another reason why men, statistically, will beat the women hands down when it comes to the race to the top. **But, it’s not just at the top where men will earn more money. Statistically speaking, they can also do harder and more dangerous work.
Miners required for 12-hour shifts in filthy, dangerous pits. £500 per week. Strength and stamina required. Dangers include mine collapse, poisonous gas and lung disease.
**Statistically speaking, how many women could do this job as well as men? How many would want to? Surely the EOC doesn’t expect men who work in difficult and dangerous conditions to get paid the same as school dinner ladies? ****Of course not. But the EOC continues to excrete its poisonous twaddle whenever it can, and it forever tries to stir up the anger of UK women against its men by twisting the truth about gender and pay. It is a dishonourable organisation that ferments further misery and unhappiness throughout the country. **
**Needless to say, the EOC is run by feminists, and, as is typical of feminists, they seem completely unable to appreciate the fact that there are clear differences between men and women, statistically speaking. This complete failure on their part makes it impossible for our country to benefit at all from their continued presence. And by preserving this prejudiced, unintelligent body, the government is not only wasting huge resources but it is funding a regular source of false, hysterical propaganda that is harming the nation’s psychological well-being as well as creating employment strategies and structures that are absolutely bound to fail. **
Now, we all know that feminists are full of anger and resentment at the undoubted statistical superiority of men in most areas of employment, but they should take some comfort from the fact that a statistical difference between the two sexes does not mean that every man will be superior to every woman. Just like with height, while it is true that, statistically, men are taller than women, there are, nevertheless, millions of women who are taller than millions of men. Statistically, however, men are taller. And similarly, statistically, for the reasons given above, and for other reasons, they will rise to far higher incomes.
Now the feminists at the EOC may not like the fact that, for example, men have higher levels of energising testosterone while women have higher levels of hormones that debilitate them every month, statistically speaking; but there we are.
It’s a tough old world, isn’t it?
