“Human beings are born with different capacities. If they are free, they are not equal. And if they are equal, they are not free.”― Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn
Every time I see an article about man hating, which are always about equality, I just have to stop and think: Wow. And then I laugh. Long and hard. First and foremost, it's group bias, which makes it a form of racism, but I'm not going to look at that today, and neither am I going to discuss all the women I know of who have done things just as bad as many men I know since no one has a monopoly on being a creepy screw-up based on their gender, age, or creed. Those are minor since equality itself doesn't even exist. That's right. Equality doesn't and can't exist beyond an abstract mathematical concept per its definition: The state or quality of being equal. It seems to be nothing more than a political and/or media buzzword used to stir up emotions and get people to react.
Bullshit! you say! Maybe. Or maybe not. Either way, it's irrelevant, because it's been known for quite some time that people aren't equal in production output and personal opinions won't change that. There's something called Price's Law that is attributed to Derek John de Solla Price. The essence of the law says that 50% of the work is done by the square root of the people doing the work. This means that if there are 100 people doing something, 10 of them are producing 50% of it. This also means that the majority of the people are being carried along by those 'stronger' than them in the work environment because they're at the lower end of the work and/or social ladder. This means they aren't equal in a broad measure of the term when compared with each other on the same task. Equality doesn't exist in such an environment, which means no workplace or place of creation or of doing is full of people who are 'equal'. It's why there's always a leader in group projects, which normally ends up being the most productive and unequal member. It'd also probably be why managers and supervisors are normally only so-so workers or aren't even promoted from the workers: you upset the balance if you pull too many of the most unequally productive from the work floor. People fundamentally know this, even if they can't explain why it happens.
Basically, it's been mathematically demonstrated since the 1970's that no one is equal because no one does equal amounts of work. You may not like it. You may not agree with it. But I don't care because I'm part of that square root that has to carry people in the workplace. You can even do a test to see where you stand. Look at your work history and determine if you were: 1. Rewarded and came to first with questions. 2. Didn't get rewarded nor punished. 3. Often dealt punishment for poor work performance. Guess what? You're around the top of the pack if the first, in the middle if the second, and being carried if the third. You may not like it, but your work performance says it all and you're responsible for that and no one else.
Here's another way to prove no one is equal. You know anything about MMA? Boxing? Weight classes? Reach? Go out and find two men who are completely equal for a fight. I have all my life to wait, because it won't happen. It won't happen because no matter how equal the two men you find are, one will have an advantage and be faster, stronger, more flexible, have a harder chin, or some other trait that is superior to the same trait in the other fighter, but that can't be quantified. Hence, you will never, ever find two men who are completely equal for a fight. By extension, saying that men and women have equality with each other would be as silly as a fight coordinator saying they have a fight planned between two fighters who are perfectly equal to each other.
In reality, no man is equal to another man, no woman is equal to another woman, and therefore no man is equal to any woman. Equality does not exist. This doesn't mean that we shouldn't strive to treat people fairly, but that's called treating people decently and as human beings, which has nothing to do with equality. In reality, chivalry and personal sacrifice for others wouldn't exist without equality not existing because the values that led people to perform personal sacrifices can be reduced to 'the strong protect the weak'. Actually, the people wanting equality don't practice or actually want equality or they wouldn't also want food stamps, Medicaid, free healthcare, free education, loan forgiveness, guaranteed income and a host of other government handouts, which is them admitting they aren't equal to others that don't need those things. Furthermore, the fact that society thinks anyone should be taken care of to any degree at all is chivalrous and the real world manifestation of the concept of 'the strong protect the weak'. In truth, every coin you see drop in a charity plate is proof that people aren't equal.
You know those stereotypical Archie Bunker assholes from the 50's with the woman in the kitchen mentality and thought they had the right to treat people anyway they wanted? Turn that woman hating, nonsensical thought process around and you'll have the current feminism, and that demeanor is not any more attractive on women than it is on men. Because this may be hard to believe, but decent men didn't like those men, so why would a decent man like a woman like that? Answer: they don't. Those women end up with the men that decent men won't even talk to and cry about his parenting skills, $10k back child support, and four other kids on social media. Or as stated in 'Why Women Can't Find a Good Man':
'Although not always true , often the man who is intelligent, high status, and ambitious will be unlikely to take a back seat, follow, and submit in a romantic relationship.'
Which leaves those at the lower end of the ladder for the women that want to act like men. Or they can go pretend to be lesbians. Or they can break the nonsensical programming that political entities shoved into their brains for votes. Their choice. 50 years ago the man was supporting the woman and buying kitchen utensils and now the women have men they have to support and buy video games for while crying that all men suck and not remembering it's just specific ones. Just like bad men did with women not so long ago. That's equality in a nutshell. There's something to be said for being careful about what you wish for, because you may get it.
People are better off when they play to their strengths and develop the skills they have the most innate ability and desire to do, not the things they're worst at and have to force themselves to do. You are not special, I am not special. You are not equal, I am not equal. You can do stuff I can't, I can do stuff you can't, and Jimbo down the road can kick both our butts at something. That's a basic fact of life that everyone on the losing end of a competition finds out real fast. (I won't digress into how the retardation of sports by giving participation awards has possibly led to people thinking equality exists, because after all, they all got trophies so must be equal, right?)
It's hard enough to get anywhere in the world, and it's even harder if you handicap yourself with envy of others. Thinking there's some great inequality that needs to be corrected says more about the people thinking it then the world, and it says that the people saying it feel inferior, not equal, and are naive enough to think anyone in the world can be equal. Everyone should feel inferior in a way because we are like ants on an apple compared to the world and because no one is equal and never has been. And I can't change the fact most people grew up with propaganda blaring 'EQUALITY!' and therefore think they're being treated unfairly by not being 'equal'. They forget that to be equal also means being of equal action/production and that's where most people drop the ball as demonstrated by Price's Law. This seems to be creating a society in which someone down the road isn't looked up to for bettering themselves, but in which those on the lower parts of the ladder want to drag everyone else down with them. And that's called spite and spite is a sign of bitterness. Therefore, equality seems to breed bitterness and is a Utopian dream that doesn't exist, and that's why it's Liberalism's El Dorado. It's one possible reason why no one is talking about stuff in Sweden it didn't fix: it's taboo to point out paradise was lost, or worse, never existed. There's also some evidence in the study on STEM graduates that equality actively holds society back by reducing personal initialize:
'The researchers, from Leeds Beckett University and the University of Missouri, believe this might be because countries with less gender equality often have little welfare support, making the choice of a relatively high-paid STEM career more attractive.'
Be happy with what you can do and do the best you can at it and don't worry about Joe Smoe down the road being better than you, because someone out there is better than him. And someone out there is better than that person, and someone is better than that person and so on. The more you worry about it, the less time you have to move yourself forward and the more unequal you really are because the world keeps moving forward whether you do or not.
Further reading:
One brave young man takes on gender inequality at USC: https://www.thepostmillennial.com/one-brave-young-man-takes-on-gender-inequality-at-usc/?fbclid=IwAR0VYisVfgAcj5KaQImHvDTuoV2HZjmj01X04uS3IgdjVzTgB8bCtaI-Raw
Price’s Law: Why Only A Few People Generate Half Of The Results: https://dariusforoux.com/prices-law/
Why modern women behave more like men: https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/the-human-beast/200908/why-modern-women-behave-more-men
Society is creating a new crop of alpha women who are unable to love: https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/society-is-creating-a-new-crop-of-alpha-women-who-are-unable-to-love
Why Women Can't Find a Good Man: https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/the-attraction-doctor/201203/why-women-cant-find-good-man
'Sweden is not some kind of equality paradise': https://www.thelocal.se/20150310/sweden-is-not-some-kind-of-equality-paradise
'A gender equality paradox': Countries with more gender equality have fewer female STEM grads: https://www.thejournal.ie/gender-equality-countries-stem-girls-3848156-Feb2018/
In my investigation of humans, the use of domestication of animals and plants, and the congregating of humans in villages has begun the process of weakening humans who have gained the upper hand, not by physical ability alone, but by the use of technology like glasses. I am myopic and therefore would not have survived as well as others while hunting and gathering because of my weak eyesight. With my paralysis at 20, I would have died by the time I was 21, instead being propped up by technology and education, to be one of those highly productive in the top 10% that you extol.
You are fostering the idea of Herbert Spencer in 1859 of social Darwinism. The darling of right-wing conservative thinking these days. The success of social Darwinism has led to a world population of 7 billion and growing, stressing the resources and all other life on the earth. Some theorists and futurists, like Arthur Clark, believe that humans can expand our population exponentially into space, or Michlo Kaku, absorb growing population in cities where crowding forces depopulation.
Social Darwinism has led to taking the ropes off of "free enterprise." The result is the lopsided annual incomes of those social achievers at the top and those unequal losers at the bottom. In the past, when that kind of inequality existed, bloody revolution ensued. It is my hope that we have progressed ethically enough to have a social revolution. Automation and growing AI (artificial intelligence) are rapidly taking over the means of production leaving work for average or below people and intelligence out of the workforce. Eventually, we all will pursue what we are capable of and receive adequate compensation for it, regardless of our output, thanks to these technological developments. Not the vision of the captains of industry, the unions or conservative draggers of feet in the face of social and technological progress.
You say that you are for fairness. Well, you don't write like it, spreading the kinds of fear mongering that right-wingers like to throw out about how there are so many gobbling up freebies from the government without the actual statistics. Have you ever tried to get some of those government freebies? I have, and it's difficult unless you are a scam artist and there are scam artists in every strata of society. Some of the best scam artists are CEOs and presidents. As far as freebies, those that inherit the money of billionaires spend lives of regal opulence. Dabble in charity and other pursuits, but don't have to prove that they are capable of being that wealthy like British royalty still sucking on the tit of the British people.
Fairness requires, not only a boost (I got them time to time), but a fair playing field. Why many sports provide handicaps (cap-in-hand) to players whose statistics do not measure up to other players, leveling the playing field. When that can't be done, like in the Olympics, Special Olympics was created for people with disabilities so that they could gain some self-esteem for hard physical work and physical activity without having to win to get reward.
You definitely seem to have a problem with women and their quest for equal pay for equal work. Perhaps somewhere along the line you feel you have been victimized by women one way or another.
Finally, you have certainly picked out some articles that help prove your points taken here. Whether that those articles come from refereed and impartial studies or are purposely written, like this one to divide people over terminology like equality.
Ron