A few days ago, I gushed about my new favorite holiday spot.
But I’ve come-across a recent article which confirms my best suspicions: It seems that the Swedish government’s equality office is 90% female! What better way to ensure gender-balance than to entrust it to such a gender-balanced group? This is exactly what us feminists mean whenever we rant about “equality”:
The Swedish government’s unit for coordinating equality policies and distributing funding to equality organisations has come under fire for its own inequality: only 3 out of 28 employees are men.
“It’s not good. A more equal gender balance is important to show that they are serious about these issues,” said Eva Nikell at the Equality Ombudsman’s office, Jämo, to TT.
Whoa there Eva, back-up for a sec. “Not good”? What’s not good about it?
A department that is 90% female is already gender-balanced!
Look, when an organization is over 50% male it deserves an hour-long foot-stomping tirade on the sexism inherent in such an institution. But as soon as an organization has a disproportionate surplus of wymin among its staff, then gender-equality is no longer important.
We demand gender-parity, except for the places which already have a female-majority. That’s when the need for equality vanishes like magic. POOF!
And to extend the same femi-reasoning: a department which is 100% female would be the most balanced department you could ever find anywhere. It would deserve rapturous applause and acclaim for being so progressive on gender equality. Ahh, it brings a tingling sensation to my thighs just thinking about it.
Now I bet some fucking assholes out there (i.e.: men) might say I’m being a “hypocrite” about this, but there’s a perfectly reasonable excuse for why 25 of the 28 employees in this Swedish organization are wimmin:
Jens Orback, Sweden’s Minister for Equality… maintains that it’s hard to avoid, since there are not enough competent men coming forward when jobs are advertised.
You see? That’s a reasonable explanation. I buy it totally. Men are too stupid to understand what “equality” means. The expense of recruiting and training male employees for the job would be way too troublesome and costly perhaps. And they’d rape every womyn in sight anyway.
But don’t get me wrong: “a lack of competent applicants” would be bullshit if it was ever used to justify not hiring a female into a male-majority institution. The offending institution would be obligated to spare no expense to seek-out, encourage and advance females throughout its ranks regardless of how badly they might match the positions.
“Lack of qualified (female) applicants”! Hah! What a flimsy pretext. Establishing equality between the sexes is too important to not take drastic measures… when the right people can benefit, that is.
(Sigh! The mental acrobatics that feminism requires can often be tricky, but I somehow manage to perservere without my head hurting too much.)
Anyway, I am definitely hopping on the next plane to Stockholm as soon as I can. They understand how equality ought to be achieved: by only letting wimmin say how much equality is “enough”.