The Paradoxes of Gender parity…

The Paradoxes of Gender parity…

So far one could think it was necessary to choose our candidates for election according to their (supposed) intelligence. But the obligation to elect a democratic pair having an individual of every gender suggests that the selection criteria are becoming more sexist, or that women are forced to be more responsible citizens by encouraging them to share the glory of an election?

Case 1: the guy is a moron and the woman is a genius

The voter will not have the choice of the guy and therefore cannot complain since he has been forced to vote and he did it anyway.

Case 2! it is the woman who is a Moron…

Who said it was the most likely case? Is that a discrimination attempt, some hate speech?

Anyway in both cases, we are left with a moron!

Do we have some reasons to hope?

Of course. Do not forget that this is all part of the sacrosanct egalitarianism. So we just imagine that the duos will be homogeneous. This does not guarantee more two geniuses than two morons.

Besides, watching the three daddy Hollande´s governments, we have the impression that equality is done by pulling down!

Did Hollande managed to make all French equal?

The question reflects his extraordinary ability to play gadflies, and does not necessarily imply that he has something to do with Charlie’s adventure.

But since two months, I have the impression of having had the demonstration that the people of my beautiful country have reached some homogeneity with their government and its head, and it makes me rather sad. Hence my insistence that you read my “Let’s be logical! … in God’s name!”!

And appalling speeches from supporters of parity do not make me more of an optimist…

We’re learning by the way that the FN is the worst student in relation to parity, while it is the only significant party that has a woman at its head! That may be why Valls makes it so much advertising?

Maybe we should increase the uniformity of the application of parity and elect two presidents of the republic, a male and a female? Come on, a little courage, we have not yet arrived at the bottom of the bullshit!

We’re lucky and it is not really spoken of “sex” but of “gender”, because if equality was to focus on the sexual practices, we would no longer need pairs, but whole battalions.

It is true that since the so-called liberation of women, there is no longer a reasonable doubt about the fact that our female companions dream by understandable jealousy to become as stupid as males and win our prerogatives of fools protected by law, such as being able to smoke cigarettes, which was the standard at the beginning of the revolution.

Speaking of sexual liberation, they may have shot themselves in their high heels because they are not paid any more for their “debauchery” as the recent judicial circus with DSK has shown.

However, it appears that the handful of over-excited sisters is not so contagious. For quite some time, nothing prevented women to practice most trades, so why are so few choosing political careers and why does it seem that those who choose it seem to be the silliest? In any case in the Socialist Party.

I can understand that not everybody wants the hassle of being a Ceo, even some guys do not want it. But politics? Bumming and telling tall tales, “work” only 5 years and have a dream retirement after a lifetime spent above the law, should be exciting. Isn’t it?

There still remain a few problems to ensure that parity. If there is an imbalance in favor of the number of baby boys, will we choose to induce abortion of future males or discourage abortion of female babies? And how will we identify all these people? It is difficult to give birth to a female for each male at roughly the same time and about the same place, so what will we choose as geographical coverage to ensure that parity? Could this be the unspoken reason for French redistribution that appeals so much?

Well, enough: I’ve got to complete my pair…

About

View all posts by