THE FAIRER SEX
Short Stories on Male Privilege
No. 24
Winning Isn't Everything
'You wonder how good she has to be
before she's an athlete and not just a
female athlete.'
- Anon
I The Same Playing-Field
The job advertisement ran as follows.
Wrigley's Warehouses
We have six vacancies for warehouse operatives. Hours of work are: 8am-5pm, Monday to Friday; alternate Saturdays 8am-1pm.
Responsibilities involve: picking and packing orders; putting products onto shelves; loading and unloading materials from the yard; moving stock around in a timely manner; checking materials against purchase orders; prepping delivery paperwork and other general admin duties; ensuring warehouse is tidy.
Safety is paramount.
A forklift license would be advantageous but not essential. Previous experience not essential as full training provided.
Please note: candidates must be physically fit and able to perform manual labour, such as lifting heavy or bulky boxes and packages.
We are a diverse workforce, and particularly welcome applications from underrepresented groups.
The warehouse manager took the applications out of the envelope, and searched them for the sex of the applicants. Twenty applicants were men; three were women. Disappointing. Most of the men, moreover, had relevant experience; but none of the women did. It was all rather awkward. How to choose? Fortunately (since Wrigley's Warehouses were a diverse workforce, and particularly welcomed applications from underrepresented groups), there was a well-established formula: hiring for correct gender-balance. Humanity consisted, after all, of fifty/fifty men and women. The choice should consist, therefore, of fifty/fifty men and women. Anything else was discrimination. And discrimination is wrong. Against women, anyway.
The manager also knew that if no women were hired, he'd have to write a letter of explanation to the board. There would also be a summons to the Diversity Office, where he'd face one of their notorious inquisitions. The manager trembled and perspired at the thought of their thumbscrews and bastinado. It was far easier just to hire women. Resigned shrugs were the best tactic. He was getting close to his pension, anyway.
The three men and the three women started work the same day. The men, as they held forklift licenses, started work in the main warehouse. The three women, reasonably enough (so it seemed), were assigned to the small storage rooms, where no forklift was used, as the aisles were too narrow, and the corners too tight. Instead, the goods were moved around with a manual push-trolley.
A fully-loaded trolley, however, was quickly found to be a problem. The women could shove it, certainly; at which it moved one or two feet, but then stopped. Shove; shove; shove; they went, pushing and panting. One of them complained of over-strained muscles. There was then lively discussion about the proper meaning of the term 'fully-loaded'. It was agreed that, when women pushed the trolley, 'fully loaded' meant a lighter load than for men. This also meant, of course, that women took longer than men to complete the task.
A bigger problem emerged when a consignment of portable air-conditioners arrived. Some boxes were small, and weighed 35-pounds or so, which the women handled easily enough. But many of them, although still only 35-pounds, were large, and far too bulky for the women. The solution this time, with some extra paperwork, logistics and scheduling, was to segregate the boxes: lighter and smaller ones for women; bigger and heavier ones for men. Men, and only men, handled the 80- or 90-pound boxes, a few dozen of which passed through the warehouse every week. In total, therefore, men handled many more boxes than the women. Sometimes, the women were left with nothing to do.
It was also found that men, since they were taller, could stack boxes to greater heights; this also meant, of course, that only men could retrieve boxes from those heights. This was not a trivial problem, as storage space was in short supply, especially toward the close of each week. Fortunately, with a bit of paperwork, and remedial stock management, a solution was found: the women stacked boxes three-high; the men then added three boxes. The drawback was the ponderousness of this method; for it slowed everything down.
If the consignments for a particular week were exceptionally heavy or exceptionally bulky, then men were taken out of the office, and replaced with women. That is to say, women completed the purchase orders, delivery paperwork, etc.; while men did the manual work. The women enjoyed secondment to the office, as it was air-conditioned, and the summer proved an exceptionally hot one. It was men who sweated in the warehouse.
There was healthy competition in 'picking' the orders; and the female-friendly protocols were useful here. In the first a couple of weeks, the warehouse manager noted uncomfortably that, where men 'picked' a couple of hundred orders per shift, the women were way behind. Obviously, some form of discrimination was operating. But when the measures I've already explained were taken - women handled small or light boxes; men handled large or heavy boxes - the figures evened up. If the men were not slowed down by these female-friendly protocols, then they drew too far ahead, and this looked bad. In the first week, the manager had seen someone from the Diversity Office looking at the figures on the noticeboard and frowning. But now, the same person smiled: the bar charts showed that women were now 'picking' orders at rates comparable with the men.
Now, an hour was set aside on Monday mornings for diversity training: this was compulsory. All work in the warehouse ceased during this time.
The training was provided by Hetzel Snotzrag, professor of feminist diversity, inclusion and equity. Each week she would speak for about forty-five minutes, while illustrating her points with various overheads.
That week she said some of the following. That women are fifty per cent of humanity, and must therefore be fifty per cent of every workforce. Except for nursing or teaching; they're fine as they are. Obviously. That women are every bit the equal of men. Except for when they're superior to men. Goes without saying. That 'misandry' is a stupid, made-up non-word. That Men's Rights Activists are all Nazis, and would probably have joined the Einzatzgruppen.
At the close of the talk, the audience was asked for questions.
One of the supervisors put up his hand.
'The men are getting riled up by all this feminist diversity, inclu -'
'Well, that's just part of the backlash', said Professor Snotzrag, womanterrupting. 'I mean the backlash against all the progress that women are making. Men don't like giving up their male privilege.'
'I realise it's a heresy to say this', he continued, 'but I don't see why women warehouse operatives must be paid the same as men. Men are stronger and bigger. They can do more. Get more done in the same time. That's better efficiency for the employer. Wages should reflect that.'
'Diddums', said Professor Snotzrag, smiling. 'You want to keep your male privilege, I see. Well, I suppose it's understandable that men feel threatened - they now have to compete with women. But feminists like myself are trained to debunk bunkum. The argument goes like this. There are stronger men, and there are weaker men; there are bigger men, and there are smaller men; there are faster men, and there are slower men. Similarly, there are stronger women, and there are weaker women; there are bigger women, and there are smaller women; there are faster women, and there are slower women. The consequence is this: you cannot just say that, because a warehouse operative happens to be a woman, then she must be paid less than another warehouse operative who happens to be a man. Segregating men and women would be sexist, because it takes no account of ability. Women and men belong in the same category, because that gives true gender equality.'
Professor Snotzrag wrote the following in big letters on the whiteboard.
The Feminist Credo
Women must be grouped with men, and be paid the same as men, despite being less capable than men.
II Different Playing-Fields
The weekly seminar chaired by Professor Snotzrag in the Gender Studies Department began uncontentiously enough. This seminar was concerned, unusually, with women as the disadvantaged sex.
'In the last forty years', said Professor Snotzrag, women have entered many occupations and in large numbers. You see, all feminists ever really wanted, was a level-playing field, free of sexist bias against women. Let women come into the workplace, feminists said, let them compete with men on a level playing-field - a truly level one - and women will do the rest. If you're the best, you will succeed. It doesn't matter whether you're a man or a woman - so long as you're the best, you'll succeed. The whole system should be entirely gender-blind. No male privilege. Fair competition, that's what feminists fought for, and indeed continue to fight for.'
'Professor', said Julian, the only male student on the course, and strangely so, since men constitute fifty per cent of humanity, 'I agree whole heartedly. What we want, is a society that's entirely merit-based. It should also apply, say, to athletics. If you run faster than anyone else, you win. If you throw further than anyone else, you win. If you jump higher than anyone else, you win.'
An irritated expression appeared to flash across the professor's face.
'Level playing-fields are very important', she said. 'But there is still the problem of male privilege.'
'How is it privilege?' asked Julian. 'If there's privilege involved, then it's by being better, not by being male. Merit privilege.'
'Men's greater strength and speed are part and parcel of male privilege. In mixed athletics competitions, men would use their male privilege to steal all the prizes from women. Not segregating men and women would therefore be sexist. To run mixed athletics competitions fairly, either the women must have a head start, say, or the men should be given some type of handicap. What we really need, of course, is two playing-fields: one for women, one for men. They would both be perfectly level, of course.'
'But at different heights' ventured a female student.
'Erm, I wouldn't put it quite like that ', said Professor Snotzrag. 'That might imply that men are playing at a higher level. Neither playing-field is better or worse than the other one. Let's just say that they'll be playing fields located in two different places.'
'Professor', said Julian, 'when it comes to the world's fastest runners, men of African origin are overwhelmingly represented. That's presumably driven by black-male privilege. How about competitions with one playing-field for black men, and a second one for all other men.'
'I've warned you before about arguing provocatively', said Professor Snotzrag. 'There's no place for racism in this seminar, no place for racism in this department, and no place for racism in this university. No, you cannot segregate athletes according to their race; that would be wholly unacceptable. There are bigger men, and there are smaller men. There are faster men, and there are slower men. But they all belong in the same male category. I'll say it again: women and men should be segregated into two playing-fields.'
'But if it's not sexist to segregate men and women, then how is it racist - ' said Julian.
He stopped speaking when Professor Snotzrag pointed her finger at him and frowned.
'Aren't humans sexually dimorphic?' asked a female student. 'Men are stronger, bigger and faster because of their genes, surely.'
'No', said Professor Snotzrag. 'Decades of research by leading feminist scholars who reject biology as a male construct have shown that strength differences between men and women are socially constructed. Women and men would be of equal strength and size, if girls and boys were raised equally. Sadly, gender stereotyping sets in at an early age. Boys are encouraged to engage in vigorous athletic activities, but girls are discouraged. Also, at meal times, boys grab the best-quality protein, leaving the girls with poorer food.'
The students looked at each other for a few seconds, and made some more notes.
'Okay', said Professor Snotzrag, 'that'll be it for today. A single category for men and women is unfair, because it takes no account of ability. Women and men belong in different categories, because that gives true gender equality.'
She stood up, and wrote the following in big letters on the whiteboard.
The Feminist Credo
Women must be grouped with men, and be paid the same as men, despite being less capable than men.
Except when women must not be grouped with men, or men will outcompete them.
III Equal-Paying Playing Fields
'Good evening, and welcome to the Independent Republic of Mike Graham, where there's never any shortage of no-nonsense opinion. Are women footballers underpaid? FIFA is again under fire from feminist groups demanding huge pay rises for women players. In the studio I have Gordan Pedersen, professor of clinical psychology, and Hetzel Snotzrag, professor of feminist diversity, inclusion and equity. She's also the author of Women's Sports - The Fight Against Male Privilege. Professor Snotzrag, isn't it the case that people just aren't that much interested in watching women's football?
'Male privilege is still very much alive in football, I'm afraid, Graham. All women players face what you might call the grass ceiling.'
'Hang on, I'm about to spilt my sides laughing.'
'No, seriously, Mike, women players are still not paid the same as men, not nearly the same. It applies throughout the game, but it's most obvious at the top. The winning team for the women's world cup were paid a tiny fraction of what the men received for the men's world cup. It’s time the sporting world stopped humouring and patronising women, and, instead, recognised them as men's equals.'
'Professor Pedersen, what's your take on this?'
'This is the usual feminist guff, I'm afraid, a flat refusal to look all the statistics squarely in the face. The final match of the men's world cup had about one-and-a-half billion viewers word wide, but maybe five billion engaged with it on various platforms. The final match of the most recent women's world cup had a much smaller audience, about a quarter of a million. The men's world cup therefore generated vastly more revenue. Since revenue determines salaries, then what the facts say is this: either the men are underpaid relative to the women, or the women are overpaid relative to the men. What Professor Snotzrag wants, but does not admit, is for men's sports to subsidise women's sports.'
'Why should the women players be forced to accept market forces?' said Snotzrag. 'We live in a culture that's hostile to women players, and to women generally. Everyone's been socialised into seeing men's sports as dominant and more interesting. This is an internalised falsehood, and it's hard to correct. The media are a big problem here, because they help to grow the fan base. The media's been set up by men, to celebrate men's accomplishments, not women's accomplishments.'
'Professor Snotzrag, isn't there an easy way to settle this?' asked Mike Graham. 'Why don't the women just play the men? The best players win, don't they? The women's national team recently played the country's best under-16 boys - and lost. Eight-nil, if I remember rightly. How can you justify paying women in the women's super league the same as men in the men's premier league? The men in the premier league aren't paid the same as the men in league two. There's a reason: the men in league two just aren't as good.'
'You're making a common mistake, Graham, it's not just about the match. Women pay a penalty for being raised as girls; they're not encouraged athletically. If we raised girls and boys in the same way, then women would play football just as well as men. Probably better. We must get rid of childhood gender norms and gender stereotyping. Stop encouraging little girls to dress up as princesses. Stop encouraging little boys to play football.'
'Gender equality, then', said Mike Graham, 'says that male and female players must be treated exactly the same.'
'Yes.'
'And you treat men and women exactly the same, by segregating them into different teams.'
'You're twisting my words, Mike.'
'The refusal of so-called researchers in gender studies to recognise incontrovertible biological facts', said Pedersen, 'is very probably the greatest intellectual scandal of our time. It happens, because gender studies is an ideologically-driven subject with no interest in empirical data. The truth is, humans are sexually dimorphic in a colossal number of ways. Men have fifty per cent more muscle mass in the upper body, and twenty-five per cent more in the lower body. Men have greater aerobic and anaerobic capacity, as well as more haemoglobin. Men have larger hearts, relative to body mass. Men have denser, stronger bones, tendons and ligaments. Men convert more of their caloric intake into muscle. Men have larger lung volume, relative to body mass. When the fastest man crosses the finish line in a marathon, there are biological reasons why the fastest woman will be two miles behind. Girls and boys aren't that different, initially; but the sex differences in strength and speed widen during puberty, and because of puberty. The male advantage - '
'I'm sorry, but we're running out of time.'
'The male advantage in sports will endure', continued Pedersen, 'because the male sex has a performance-enhancing drug, namely testosterone.'
'Okay, I'll let you have the last word, Professor Snotzrag, but we've only a few seconds.'
Professor Snotzrag held up a sign to the camera that read as follows.
The Feminist Credo
Women must be grouped with men, and be paid the same as men, despite being less capable than men.
Except when women must not be grouped with men, or men will outcompete them.
And except when women must not be grouped with men, yet be paid the same as men, despite being less capable than men.
'What a curious way to end an interview', said Mike Graham. 'I've never had anyone do that before. Anyway, now to the weekly event, where I tear up a copy of the Guardian. Interestingly, there's a relevant article today by Lorrie Baits. "Let's destroy the grass ceiling - stop boys playing football." I'm Mike Graham, and you're listening to Talk Radio.'
Endnotes
· American Enterprise Institute (2015). 'World Cup pay gap: Here's why it's justified FACTUAL FEMINIST'
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KfDynQFUHys
· ManWomanMyth Mirror (2015). 'Other - On Tennis and Female Nature'
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NrIXnW8btNI&list=PLjMscr0TpRqhGadn27XAzBcwXchJ2EvYp&index=15
· Dr. Steve Turley (2023). 'Woke US Women’s Soccer Team LOSES to Teenage Boys!!!'
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RmmDmjmXyoc&t=135s
(c) Cufwulf Montagu
Cufwulf@aol.com
