No one thinks it is fair to pay someone less for the same job performance if they're short, or tall, or to pay them differently if they're Roman Catholic or Jewish, or to discriminate in the wages paid because they or someone back in their family tree somewhere came from one place rather than another.
It is a fundamental premise in this country that people are equal, and that what matter is not superficial qualities, or qualities unrelated to the requirements of a task. We believe in the meritocracy that people should be judged - and PAID - for what they do and how they do it, not who they were born. It is a core value of our democracy that we are and should be a meritocracy, and that equality of opportunity and reward for our efforts is an essential part of that.
The right keeps lying when they assert there is no right wing war on women. There is a full-blown culture war that is attempting to harm women, to make women submissive and dependent, that penalizes gender (among other individual qualities).
Todd Akin is one example:
I suppose Todd Akin thinks it is just a matter of free enterprise for one person to own another person as well? After all, slavery was 'just business', and condoned by the Bible, so how can something be bad if it's just business? That is the essence of a belief in free enterprise, that seeking profit is always good, and that the assumptions of a belief in free enterprise is that it always results in a correct and desirable solution, when that is a false assumption. What is promoted as free enterprise can be both ineffective, and tremendously inequitable, and far too often favors illegal competition.
Even the rare woman who manages to achieve C-class status (CEO, CFO, etc.) usually makes 75% of what her male counterpart earns in compensation.
Then we have Glenn Grothman, in Wisconsin, who also believes that it should be acceptable to pay women less -- because he believes women are actually HAPPY with that outcome (which is a fantasy I would put on a par with believing pregnancy is a minor inconvenience for women, and that giving birth is a pleasure like orgasm - both notions advanced by right wing nuts that have no basis in reality).
It is a fundamental premise in this country that people are equal, and that what matter is not superficial qualities, or qualities unrelated to the requirements of a task. We believe in the meritocracy that people should be judged - and PAID - for what they do and how they do it, not who they were born. It is a core value of our democracy that we are and should be a meritocracy, and that equality of opportunity and reward for our efforts is an essential part of that.
The right keeps lying when they assert there is no right wing war on women. There is a full-blown culture war that is attempting to harm women, to make women submissive and dependent, that penalizes gender (among other individual qualities).
Todd Akin is one example:
I suppose Todd Akin thinks it is just a matter of free enterprise for one person to own another person as well? After all, slavery was 'just business', and condoned by the Bible, so how can something be bad if it's just business? That is the essence of a belief in free enterprise, that seeking profit is always good, and that the assumptions of a belief in free enterprise is that it always results in a correct and desirable solution, when that is a false assumption. What is promoted as free enterprise can be both ineffective, and tremendously inequitable, and far too often favors illegal competition.
Even the rare woman who manages to achieve C-class status (CEO, CFO, etc.) usually makes 75% of what her male counterpart earns in compensation.
Then we have Glenn Grothman, in Wisconsin, who also believes that it should be acceptable to pay women less -- because he believes women are actually HAPPY with that outcome (which is a fantasy I would put on a par with believing pregnancy is a minor inconvenience for women, and that giving birth is a pleasure like orgasm - both notions advanced by right wing nuts that have no basis in reality).
Has anyone else noticed that these right wingers are predominantly white men, and mostly OLDER white men at that, who think it makes sense to oppress women - and that we LIKE it?
Then we have the well-meaning Neanderthal from Minnesota who thinks that women are genetically supposed to be submissive to men. Like the right wing generally, he believes funny things that have no factual scientific validity or basis in objective reality; his views are entirely founded on a false and flawed ideology. Another crazy old white male right wing nut.
THIS is the worldview of the right towards women - that it is ok not to pay them fairly; that it is ok to rape them, because it isn't rape if isn't extremely violent, even if they don't consent; and that women are genetically unequal and therefore SHOULD be subservient. Their world view is cartoonish, two dimensional, primitive, and not at all satisfying to women.
No comments:
Post a Comment