Pampered princesses

I’ve been sent a supplement from a recent Times newspaper, published 19 April, titled ‘Top 50 Employers for Women’. It’s an eye-opener with numerous articles (mostly but not all penned by women) making the case for companies to bend over backwards to accommodate ambitious women, and offering time off for childcare responsibilities – it seems many of these female high-fliers want to work part-time, even when they don’t have kids – and to pursue hobbies (I’m not making this up). What the cost of all these measures to suit pampered princesses must be to the efficiency of UK plc, I have no idea, but it must be enormous.

But in this post I’d like to point to an interesting article which inadvertently reveals how women manipulate businesses to positively discriminate for female employees. Christine Hodgson, executive chairman of Capgemini UK, a consultancy firm, reports that, ‘Customers ask about our commitment to diversity as part of the  procurement process’. In other words, women in procurement positions are abusing their positions to preference female employees in their potential suppliers.

It gets worse. In the same article there’s some material provided by Justine Delroy, a tax partner at Addleshaw Goddard, a major City law firm:

At Addleshaw Goddard, many of the corporate clients’ legal teams employ a lot of women, often women who left law firms after discovering that in-house roles were more conducive to family life. Delroy says, ‘So it is not acceptable, nor does it feel right, to present a very male team to serve that client’.

Let’s read between the lines, shall we? Women who’ve opted out of working for law firms because it doesn’t suit their ‘family life’ are nonetheless expecting law firms to preferentially advance female employees. So while men are expected to be gender-blind in their dealings, women are free to preference women. Anyone who’s read Steve Moxon’s The Woman Racket won’t be surprised by any of this. While men don’t show any favouritism towards their own gender – whatever paranoid feminists might believe – women show a marked preference for their own gender in recruitment, promotion, procurement etc.

Let me get this right. Men have freely given special treatment to women to advance their numbers in senior reaches of their organisations, and in return women shamelessly discriminate against men once they have the opportunity to do so. It doesn’t bode well for UK plc, or for men, or for the principle of advancement through merit, and it certainly has damn all to do with equality. Apart from that, who could possibly object to what these manipulative women are doing in the name of ‘fairness’ and ‘equality’ and ‘diversity’?

Advertisements

About Mike Buchanan

I'm a men's human rights advocate, writer, and publisher. My primary focus is leading the political party I launched in 2013, Justice for Men & Boys (and the women who love them). I still work actively on two campaigns I launched in early 2012, Campaign for Merit in Business and the Anti-Feminism League. In 2014 I launched The Alternative Sexism Project, aiming to raise public understanding that the sexism faced by men and boys has far more grievous consequences than the sexism faced by women and girls.
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s