By Christiaan van Huyssteen (@cvh23)
A new video promoting every activist’s favourite thing: EQUALITY – or, in this case f’ing EQUALITY.
Little girls (and at some points not so little girls) in bizarre princess costumes does work well to create the shock value needed to ‘get people going’, and cover up the lack of any actual meaningful content in a ‘soon to be viral’ video.
Every ‘fact’ given in this video is so generalised, vague and out of context that it seems almost impossible to create any valid arguments based on them.
Gender equality/inequality as an issue is really much more nuanced than this kind of publicity stunts would have you believe. There are so many variables that it is almost impossible to give any reliable statistics on inequality.
Females for example typically don’t choose to focus as much on their careers as their male counterparts. This is simply due to the fact that they take time off to have kids and raise a family. Employers may decide not to risk giving certain women promotions, as they feel those women may leave at any time to go have children. This is not sexist, this is entirely rational.
If women are in fact paid 23% less (this is a very broad and vague statement made in the video), why don’t businesses across the board rush in to hire women, and save 23% on their wage bill? Or are all businesses run by sexist men? These issues aren’t straight forward. But it is a case of economic realities, more than simple male prejudices.
According to a study by professor Thomas Sowell (senior fellow at the Hoover Institute, Stanford University), when you take into account variables such as hours worked, and time taken off to raise families, the differences between what men and women earn become arbitrary.
Men and women traditionally have different roles in society as a whole when it comes to jobs. For example, you don’t get many female builders, garbage men or computer programmers. In the same way you don’t get many male receptionists or primary school teachers. Is this right or wrong? I don’t know, but it is what it is. I would not mind female builders or male receptionists, given that they are willing to do those jobs, and they can do them just as well.
In America it is also a big thing lately amongst feminists to complain when their employers refuse to pay for their medical insurance that covers birth control. Your employer shouldn’t have to pay for your birth control, in fact no one should pay for your birth control. If a women ‘has the right to choose what to do with her body’ she also has the responsibility to pay for it herself.
It is always easy to play the victim, and blame the ‘system’. People who say they stand for ‘equality’ (and these are mostly people with good intentions) generally have a hard time explaining what they mean by that. Do they mean equality of rights? Do they mean equality of abilities and outcomes? Or do they mean economic equality?
There is a world of difference between treating people equally, and attempting to make them equal. If you are going to attempt to make people equal, you will have to invariably treat them unequally.
Manipulating innocent young girls to be rude and aggressive is in itself disgusting. And the parents are solely responsible for the upbringing (and consequences of that upbringing) of their children. There is nothing wrong with adults swearing, but using these girls to fight for a cause they may not even agree with is egregious.
Stefan Molyneux’s response to Emma Watson’s UN speech:
Follow us: @DiagonalViews