Sunday, Oct 19, 2014
Columns

We’re not all the same – not even equivalent


Published:

I’ve had it up to here – no, even higher than that! Not a day passes in which the liberal press doesn’t feature a story about inequality and discrimination involving race, sex, ethnicity, religion, or other human differences; and they do that in the warm embrace of an “enlightened” age, wherein we all hold hands and sing “kumbaya.”

Of course, such narcotic sedated, liberal idealism serves only to further divide our population, creating additional, avoidable, serious problems for our increasingly troubled nation.

Think – has a day gone by that your newspaper, or some boob-tube broadcast didn't feature a tear-jerking, misleading, emotional report about how one group of humans, or another, is being exploited, or otherwise held back, by others (usually white males)?

According to the misguided, mindless, naive liberals, it is, for example, intolerable and unjust that women don’t make up at least 51 percent of elected/appointed government officials, CEOs of major businesses, combat soldiers, and trash collectors.

The reason, Hillary, why women are not represented, in some occupations, in relation to their percentage of the general population, is because, and only because, men are better suited for those jobs. Live with it!

Let’s establish, right up front, that: In a free economy (which we still have, sort of, in spite of destructive actions of the present Administration), successful managers of businesses try hard to hire the best available persons to fill any available job.

African Americans make up about 12 percent of the population, but represent a reported 78 percent of the National Basketball Association’s obscenely overpaid players, and nearly 70 percent of the millionaire football professionals.

There are no women in those jobs, nearly no Asians or Latinos, and only a handful of white males. Where’s the outrage over those imbalances? Of course, there should be no outrage, because sports businesses are simply hiring the best qualified applicants for the work involved. It is fair to wonder why we seem to be unable to apply that logic in other instances of alleged discrimination in the workplace.

Let's get the hard, inarguable, fact right out in front: there are significant differences between races, ethnicities, and sexes; and those differences often determine the jobs we will hold.

In the extreme, consider that males do not give birth, nor suckle the young: is that discrimination? Of course not! And females are unarguably weaker physically than males, so should they be found in equal numbers with males in work requiring significant upper body strength? Again – Of course not!

More than just physical strength and skeletal construction separate races and sexes. That's no surprise to intelligent, thoughtful, educated persons, who've long recognized that there are many significant differences between the sexes, which determine how each will live and work.

Normal women may be expected to react differently to a given situation then do men. Women often allow emotions to override logic and common sense; and women are more likely than men to be unavailable for work when needed.

When women went to work on assembly lines, during World War II, it was discovered that they periodically had what were sometimes called “poisoned hands.” That is, when they handled metals with their hands, corroded fingerprints soon appeared thereon. And recent studies even seem to prove that females see colors differently than do males. Isn’t it understandable that prospective employers consider such facts when hiring?

Wake up Nancy: there are important differences between men and women, which place necessary and predictable limits on the suitability of women for many jobs – including that of CEOs. Agreed: females with confused hormones can appear to perform adequately as head of a major corporation, as a football linebacker, or as a bayonet-thrusting soldier; and a perfectly normal handful (e.g., Britain's Margaret Thatcher) can perform superbly in high-pressure management positions; but those few are far from the norm for the female sex.

The free market place is doing a reasonably good job of placing workers where their particular skills and abilities are most productive. Except as in the rare case of such as a particular religion’s business, job applicants are almost always selected because they’re the best available – regardless of sex, race, or religion.

African Americans, for example, can and do find employment in just about every walk of life – from executive mansions to football fields. Race alone seldom closes doors to anyone: a lack of qualifications, and/or the way one appears, or behaves when being interviewed, can, however, be deciding factors.

Face it, there are many differences between sexes, races, and ethnicities; some are superficial, but others are, unavoidably, significant. Clearly, African Americans are favored as professional athletes in several major sports; men are selected as combat soldiers and construction workers; so-called Latinos, while currently only 12 percent of the population of the U.S., make up about 32 percent of the professional baseball players; women are favored in dozens of occupations. Oh yes — they also make far better mothers (mankind’s most important and demanding job) then do men.


Of Cabbages and Kings is a syndicated column by j.g.nash. Relevant comments may be sent to him at jgn@jgnash.com.

Comments

Part of the Tribune family of products

© 2014 TAMPA MEDIA GROUP, LLC