This totalitarian feminists now want to engage in “ambition management”, after finding out that girls` ambition tend to taper down compared to boys` after certain age. In their uniquely feminine reasoning, achievement with regard to social status is a direct result of one`s ambition, and nothing else is a factor. Thus, in the spirit of achieving total statistical gender parity both in external social and economical status and internal emotional and psychological realm, we would need to highten girls ambition, while at the same time lower that of boys, perhaps by imbuing them with the virtue of being a stay-at-home-husband.
Girls` ambition needs to be monitored so it remains sufficiently high to feminists` satisfaction, and so that they do not start dreaming about easy comfortable life as a housewife. Boys` ambition needs to be monitored so that it remains lower (this is an important point) than girls`, and so that at least certain percentage of them dream of becoming a perfect house-husband.
The author seems to wonder why girls` excellence in higher education is not mirrored to the exact proportion in the women`s status in political and economic realm. We can leave the speculation to feminists, and I`m sure they will come up with thousand ways in patriarchical society discriminates women to prevent the fulfillment of their full potential. But for the rest of us, it is good to know that not all the Fortune 500 CEOs come from the top universities, and not all the top graduates of Ivy League schools end up in top executive positions. It means that there is mobility in society and opportunity for second chance in life after college. You don` t need to graduate from top MBA schools to be a CEO of big company. You don`t need to spend your entire college life inside library and be a valedictorian to be a good politician. Bill Gates doesn`t even have a bachelor`s degree. It is good thing for most of us, except feminists.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment