Women's Equality: It's Not Just for the Old and the Ugly

So, my views on feminism are extremely nuanced and after reading a story on LinkedIn a few days ago I definitely think some words need to be said.

A young, attractive looking woman recounts her recent experience of being fired from her admin job the very same day she started there despite making effort to learn the job, having lunch with the boss and doing nothing wrong except existing on the planet. The male boss hands her a check at the end of the day, saying "I didn't tell my wife I was hiring for this role." I along with some other commenters suspected this woman was the victim of a jealous wife and her insecurities. Worse, others talked about how this was commonplace in the work force (particularly in closely held private companies) or personally experienced that themselves in these our modern times.

So, as a woman who went from married to divorced and ugly to pretty by society as well as a business owner who dealt with the HR end in a company, I have a few choice words to say about this situation:

1. These wives should have ZERO hire/fire authority in a business. There is a little thing called gender discrimination, which is a state & federally protected category. Who knows what these harpies said to these women or what they heard from the male boss or anyone else in the company that could subject the place to a deserved lawsuit or EEOC complaint? If you can't run a business separate from your insecurities and mental issues, you should not be in an HR leadership role.

Instead, these crones need to seek counseling, perhaps even take their husbands to couples/marital counseling. They need to be asking themselves why they wish to stay in a marriage with a man they have so little trust in. Why in the hell do you want to subject yourself to that aggravation and harassment in the name of a "marriage?" Children see that stuff & they'll just learn Mommy is a jealous bitch or think it's okay to treat attractive women like garbage or that marriage is all about controlling men instead of a mutual, loving relationship where those two people have each other's backs no matter what. That's what I would have picked up from that. Do these women hassle their attractive teenage and 20 something daughters for their looks?

2. These men do not need to have businesses since they don't have any balls, which leadership requires. It doesn't work if you're running to your mommy or your wife every 5 seconds for every little decision. See #1 if your wife refuses to behave like a mature grown up and recognize that attractive women have the right to gainful employment and not be looked upon as scum for doing nothing more than existing on the planet. Also, if men are that unhappy with their wives they need to seek out a divorce instead of cheating on them or enabling their insecurities.

3. Who wants to bet these same wives are Clinton supporters and claim to be feminists and "pro-women?" Plenty of women backing Clinton claimed that women who didn't vote for her were traitors to the gender. But look how Hillary treated the women who said her husband sexually abused them? Was SHE in any way being "pro-woman?" NO!!!!!!!!!! That along with her stealing the nomination from Sanders and thinking it was a coronation convinced me she was not worthy of my vote.

Newsflash, harpies: if you're pro-woman, that means you support ALL women. That includes women who are younger and more attractive than you. It includes women who disagree with you. If you're okay with bashing and harassing some woman for being better looking than you, then you aren't a feminist. That makes you a hypocrite along with a harpy, a crone, anything else negative we can think of including jealous and insecure. Another newsflash: it takes TWO to tango. Where is your rage at the guy harassing such a woman? Why are you blaming some woman's mere existence when it could easily be a different one tomorrow? Being an asshole to someone who's better looking doesn't make you a saint nor a hero.

Do you want to fit the guy for a chastity belt or shouldn't you grow the fuck up, get some self-confidence and be content with who YOU are? That's why you need counseling. Confident people don't have to knock others down to lift themselves up. They actually TRUST their spouses and boyfriends and react to cheating with "nobody's stopping you from walking out that door but you'd better not try coming back since I won't have you."

What would these wives do if some attractive sales person or business development person from a potential client's office walks in trying to solicit business from that company? What if she's from a company that could make that business tons of money? Are we going to let jealous harpies dictate these decisions? Is she going to have the husband call up the client company and say "you can't have this person discuss the deal with us?" If it were me, I'd say run your own damn business and I'd spend my money elsewhere instead of catering to some old crone's self-esteem problems.

I think there should be a listing of these businesses and they should be boycotted as well as sued or run out of business since those are terrible businesses which shouldn't exist, period. I would happily boycott these places and if that incident happened to me, I would seek out whatever recourse I could.

So in reading about this, I realized that this is why you will never organize a truly proper pro-women's movement. It seems too many of these women are talking out of both sides of their mouth. Get the young pretty secretary fired for merely existing (no actions on her part) while claiming to want equality for women. I also can't get behind third wave feminists since they just want superior rights & to create offense out of thin air. I'm not for that.

There was an observation years back that conservative women are more attractive than liberal women on the whole. In light of this story, I can see why that could happen. Plenty of liberal women are hypocrites on the cause of equality of women and who wants to deal with that? I've generally been seen as smart instead of pretty first so many look at me as intelligent but I've had to deal with jerkoffs who'll tell me how it's great I'm a lawyer but then ask me out as though I have to put out to get business. That infuriates me and I definitely make that known to guys who do it. If they hate me for that, I don't care & I wear that proudly. Attractive women deal with that even more when they aren't licensed professionals so why would they want more shit from insecure harpies? The women's rights leaders should really examine this & ask themselves these questions, don't you think?

"I'm Looking for a Ho"

That's what the heading of this ad should be. Instead, it's "PT Attractive Personal Assistant w Open Mind Needed ASAP." Here's the rest:

Quite simply, I need a great looking, female assistant to help with domestic chores laundry, dishes, general housekeeping, personal errands and some business related tasks. You must also be open minded sexually, be ok with providing me with massage and possibly some sensual play. I am not some gross 60 year old fat guy that can't get a girl, I am simply focused on other priorities in my life right now, need some domestic and business support and felt that I would try to also include a way to satisfy my own sensual needs as I do not want a deep intimate relationship right now.

I am 37, white, clean, respectful, intelligent, creative and professional. I am tattooed, have a beard am 5'10, 190 lbs, in pretty good shape (I play hockey and box) and am pretty fun to be around in general.

I would probably only require your help 3 times a week for 4-5 hours a day and would pay you a flat rate of $500 even if it is less time than that each week.

Please reply telling me a little about you and include a picture in your first reply.

Finally, I have alot to offer from a business standpoint and am willing to help mentor and guide someone with their own professional goals. I say this as I would expect that some of you who may entertain this type of a role may be using it as a stepping stone or temporary method to make money while working to achieve something else, if that is the case I am more than willing to share with you 20 years of professional insight and experience in a broad range of business.

Please reply with a picture and brief bio.

Thanks.


Location: Wburg -$500 p/week
it's NOT ok to contact this poster with services or other commercial interests
Compensation: $500+ per week

PostingID: 2371658836

Seriously, what the holy hell is this? Has this moron never heard of a thing called prostitution? The EEOC? Labor laws? Why doesn't he just pay for a prostitute & stop wasting people's time posting ads like this?

Maybe I take it seriously because I know people who've been victims of sexual harassment in the workplace. I also don't like seeing shit like this in sections of Craig's List where legitimate entertainment employers post ads & that are for LEGAL, LEGITIMATE jobs.

This crap makes us all look like wannabe pornographers who give out jobs based on how well one can manipulate our private parts. Couldn't be further from the truth. I certainly never got a job based on sex, thank you. Same goes for many, many people I know who work in entertainment including a number of actors.

Don't you just want this guy's dick to fall off from disease contracted from the lucky applicant or perhaps for him to suffer severe permanent injury there after he pisses the lovely lady off in some way? And we wonder why some women hate men.

He should at least be posting this in the personals section since if this isn't a personal matter, then what on Earth is?

General Musings Part 20

Can't believe I'm at part 20 already. Okay then, sit back because there are a LOT of articles today.

First off, this author of this piece is a total tool. I saw nothing in here about improved public transit or any effort to increase it in light of $5 gas. As long as you've got oil lobbyists controlling government and getting tax breaks, there's nothing good about gas prices squeezing out poor people from mainstream society and turning the middle class into indentured servants.

Oh, and no one will have any money to shop locally when they can not get employment since all the jobs are located in areas where you have to drive & pay for $5 a gallon gasoline. These so-called "benefits" do us no good when the average person can't survive without becoming a beggar on the street.

Not to mention that it wouldn't change the existence of pedophiles, PC hysteria, helicopter parents, crime, etc. In fact, most people will still have to drive fuel inefficient cars because they will be less likely to have the money to upgrade to a car with higher gas mileage even if they want to.

So until you get the oil companies & interests out of government, invest in new technologies and put funding into public transit akin to that in Europe and Japan (which make NYC's subway system & Amtrak look prehistoric by comparison), stop being a pro-oil company profiteering cheerleader. It's unflattering, elitist and could get you lynched in some neighborhoods.

The lack of guaranteed efficient public transit improvement to all the boroughs (not just Manhattan) is also why I did not support the congestion pricing plan in NYC.

Seeing this makes me feel a little optimistic but the fact remains that entrepreneurs and small businesses are not being helped by this current government's regime. So many things need to be done to fix things, it's not funny but I'm sure people more knowledgeable than me can come up with the bulk of it.

One suggestion is not subjecting college students & grad students to non-discharegable loan debt that's as large as most home mortgages. There needs to be serious reform instead of making people debt slaves for the next 20+ years. If any of these politicians really valued education, they'd be pushing for that change & telling the banks to suck it. Maybe they'd think twice about who they gave student loan money to if this happened. Again, lobbyists & interests ruining everything.

But at least there is one instance of a government doing something right. Yeah, yeah, employers getting around it...blah blah blah. Thanks for saying something, though. Maybe it will make others follow suit, though I think the fines ought to be a lot higher (say $10,000 then $50,000 for subsequent offenses). That would get a point across. I don't notice small businesses doing this nearly as much as large, multi-million dollar corporations.

We also have an EEOC, employers. Read it, embrace it, love it. Because otherwise, it's just a matter of time before you get in trouble for violating it & I'd likely have zero sympathy.

Oh, but the BS! It continues!

Not sure if I've ranted about this particular interview question but employers, just give it up already. The "biggest weakness" question is nothing more than an attempt to learn how manipulative the applicant is & how good they are at reciting societal bullshit.

Seriously, if you're asking this question & expecting honesty, you're naive at best. You know you're not getting an honest answer to this one. If you get pissed by the "I work too hard" or "I'm a perfectionist" response, then you're an even bigger douchebag than you were when you asked the question.

If you want a lesson on shortcomings & how one improved, why not just ask about that? Hmmm...that would be HONEST.

That would get the answer you're looking for.

That would save everyone the time of this little pretense & mind game.

Why the hell would you ask an interview applicant that one?!? Shouldn't you be asking their references or past employers about it? I think they'd be a tad more objective & have records in front of them to support the answer, don't you?

And what about people with delusions of grandeur or who are sociopaths? You're just discriminating against them by asking them about their weaknesses since they don't believe they have any.

They should form a class action & file a lawsuit against any employer asking this one. Being a sociopath is a mental condition, you know & people do seek treatment for that stuff. I'd like to see this one as an ADA discrimination claim; that would put this asinine question in the grave once & for all. Hey, if we can have some of the bullshit that has become lawsuits, there's nothing to stop this one from being a viable legal claim if you have the right plaintiffs!

I also saw this career article on what not to wear to an interview. Here's the simple answer, at least as I see it: anything reflecting that you have a personality. No, no don't show a personality. Be a robot!

Thank God I take steps to vet potential employers & avoid interviews for any job where I'm expected to be a robot. I simply ask what I should wear to the interview so I'm not overly dressy or intimidating since female lawyers have enough problems without me playing to stereotypes of being frumpy and fashion clueless.

Oh, and this is one more thing that irks me about the education system. I'm pretty sure the high school children have heard far worse at home or speak even more graphically in the hallways. For all you know, some of these children are already sexually active & you're going to fine this teacher for "using curse words in front of kids?"

Gee, I'd swear this happened in Mississippi or even NC instead of Manhattan. In some circles in the South, cursing is tantamount to treason. Using the "f-word" is as bad as murdering someone. I'm surprised no one's been incarcerated down there for saying it on the public streets; they probably would be if we didn't have 1st Amendment lawsuits on it.

More asinine censorship:

* A man in the UK was arrested for singing the song "Kung Fu Fighting" because some Chinese man & his mother were offended. If you'd have been "offended" in America (particularly NYC or more vocal places in the South), you'd have been told off by the audience & if the singer saw you, you'd be told to get over yourself (actually, it might be "Fuck you" in NYC or Jersey). Now if this singer were telling the crowd to murder Chinese people, that's a different story.

But singing a song you don't like? I just wonder when some whiny PC obsessed jerkwad is going to try that in America.

If we started going down that route, we'd have no classic cinema, music or anything else because racism has been alive and well since those long before those mediums were born. Oh, and everyone's offended by something. Live your life trying to find something to be offended by & you'll certainly find it. I'm offended by people who do nothing but bitch about everything & make zero effort to do something about it. I'm also offended by these busybodies daring to tell me what I can or can't hear, watch, read, listen to, whatever by filing lawsuits to suppress what THEY don't like.

If you want to live in a bubble away from mainstream society, I suggest you form your own religious community like the Amish or particular Mormon sects (or move to an island where you'll be the only one there, whatever).

Otherwise, get the hell over yourself and shut up unless someone attacks you or your loved ones personally (and I mean a real attack not "pulling the race card" bullshit). Get some earplugs, change the channel & go on your merry way.

* Fox is apparently not showing this hurricane themed animation block tonight because of the recent storms in the South. Thankfully, none of that hit my family members.

You know something, though? Maybe some of the people in the South who lost things might have appreciated some humor in their lives. It might have made them laugh and feel a little better. Did you ever think of that? I think this is just yet another instance of asinine censorship garbage that's catering far too much to the PC crowd.

Have the people who made this call ever watched these shows? PC they aren't. Why worry about offending anyone now considering some of the jokes on Family Guy? Can't speak for The Cleveland Show or American Dad so much since I don't really watch them anymore (stopped after 1 season) but yeah, this is just stupid.

If you'd be offended by that or think "oh, it's in poor taste" then you have never watched Family Guy in the first place & likely wouldn't start watching it anyway.

* But here is much worse overly PC garbage. Apparently, you shouldn't call your dog or cat a "pet." Seriously, read this.

Yeah, my cat has never complained about being called a "pet." If anything, I think this encourages people to assign human qualities to their animals which is just as bad. A classic example of why this is bad is the show Fatal Attractions on Animal Planet. Stupid humans want to go around assigning human qualities and motivations to their dogs, cats, snakes, bears, chimps, tigers, etc. while ignoring the fact that you are dealing with a dog, cat, snake, bear, chimp, tiger, etc. They have instincts, drives and other characters that make up their species & will never be humans.

They don't want to go vegan, need to be entertained every 5 seconds, want to wear clothes, socialize with other animals (my cat, at least), or go to school to learn the alphabet. Treat the animal like its species: I love my cat dearly & let's face it, cats own you but I know he's a cat. I don't have to cook his meat or put him on a vegan diet. Cats are carnivores: vegan diets would hurt them. I'm not going to dress him up or walk him on a leash. You can bond with animals and mourn their loss as companions but stop trying to make them into furry humans! They don't want or appreciate it. My cat would be offended if I treated him like a human; he expects better than that.

My cat wouldn't give a damn if I called him my pet, critter, fuzzy beast, etc. As long as I feed him, let him snuggle on me, scratch his head & tell him what a good cat he is, he could care less what I refer to him as if I'm not directly talking to him. Yes, I've talked to every cat I've ever had & if you don't like it, piss off you animal hating jerkoff!

And he IS a fuzzy beast since he does kill things (which is one reason we love him). He's usually "Mr. Cat" or given deferential titles. I just think this article goes too far & encourages some other bad human behavior. Just makes you wish for a flaming stick to beat the offenders with.

Finally, I saw this article on supervised teen drinking. Personally, I think the drinking age should be lowered to 18 and we should have a more European attitude about the whole thing. This coming from the child of an alcoholic. I realize not everyone who drinks is an alcoholic & not all people who drink become fight picking jerks who put their fists into walls or throw things at people (yes, my father did do this stuff).

The reason I think that should happen is the high rate of binge drinking and the idea that if you ban something so hard, you make it that much more of a curiosity and alluring to the person who can't get it. How many stories are there about pastor's kids who are total hellions either as teens or once they get out from under their parents' roofs? I certainly rebelled some when I left home. It's probably why I dated in college and why I have different attitudes about sex than most of my family. If there isn't some balance in the home and some room to deal with kids rebelling, you're just going to have an out of control hellion on your hands sooner or later. So many people I knew who went to the religious private school I went to had their rebellious moments & many ended up in major life situations. If my mother had continued being as strict when I was a teenager, I'd have probably gotten a police record, become a teen mom, skipped school or God knows what else.

If that's not proof moderation is better than outright authoritarianism, I don't know what else you need. I think the drinking age should be 18 since if you can be drafted, go to college, etc. you can get alcohol from older friends anyway. Plus, tons of kids over 18 have opportunities to drink and it's foolish to think that they don't, especially if they're in college and living far away from home.

Otherwise, let's move the age of adulthood to 21.

Rants & Some Redemption

Earlier this week, I saw the following Craig's List job ad:

This is not a job post. But it could be. (SoHo)
Date: 2011-01-03, 1:09PM EST
Reply to: job-sneeh-2141458675@craigslist.org [Errors when replying to ads?]

After I graduated NYU, I lived abroad for a number of years. I didn’t know what I wanted to do, I was 23, and I figured it made sense to have an adventure. By the time I turned 26, I knew it was time to come home to the States.

But I had no idea what I wanted to do.

I knew I was smart, but I also lacked any experience at anything. (Teaching English to Asian kindergartners doesn’t count for much, I learned.) I was competing with people younger than me and with people more qualified than me. Eventually I bit the bullet and went to a temp agency. They asked me what I wanted to do – I said I wanted to use my brain, and do a job where I felt like I was helping people.

I ended up at ZocDoc, a company I’d never heard of. They needed an office manager. Two weeks later, I was hired full time. It’s been 2 and a half years, and after having worked in office management, client services, operations, marketing, and public relations, I now run the recruiting team. We are aggressively hiring, and I’m looking for great people.

Specifically, I’m looking for bright people who might not know exactly what it is they want to do, but are confident that they are capable of much. I want people who have good grades, interesting experience, and a desire to be a part of something amazing. ZocDoc was just named the #1 Best Place to Work in NYC (that was a project I was working on), and if you’re interested in being a part of the team, email me. Tell me why you’re looking for a job, and what you want to do.

I know there are quality people out there who just don’t know where to start. I can teach you plenty (we have a lot of job openings in many different departments), but I can’t teach you personality or drive. Please have those, and I look forward to hearing from you!


* Principals only. Recruiters, please don't contact this job poster.
* Please, no phone calls about this job!
* Please do not contact job poster about other services, products or commercial interests.

PostingID: 2141458675

I smelled a challenge since there's no way to transition a librarian's job into a non-library/librarian setting. Do you know how much competition there is for library work? Want to talk about a racket, this one's almost as big as law school except you'll find employers offering entry-level jobs at 30 hours a week where you have to do the same things as a typical full-time person but get undercut so they don't have to offer health benefits. In Canada, entry-level librarian jobs require about 5 years experience. I know this since my husband's Canadian co-worker told him that he had to immigrate to America to get this experience, though he wanted to work in his own country.

Man, I wish that weren't true or my husband & I would probably move there sooner or later. Might have to in order to save ourselves from the BS like editing classic literature & idiots opposing this recent law change.

For my part, I'm all for not sending people to jail for using curse words. I know that in the Northeast, you can say the f-word all you like. In the South, it's on a par with killing someone. Let's not push Southern mores on the whole country, all right? Better yet, let's not push the mores of the biggest wackjobs you can find on the entire country.

Furthermore, I didn't choose to birth children so I don't have to watch my language around a total stranger's child. Don't like it, leave. Lay a hand on me & you'll go to jail or get sued by someone. Better yet, I dare you to take on a group of big burly guys & tell them they're responsible for your child's foul language.

So I submitted that challenge to this ad poster & have yet to hear a word. I think I'll have to call BS on that tale soon since anyone who actually lived that stuff would empathize w/the situation & understand that professionals don't have time to answer lots of ads or deal with idiots who think someone who needs their current income to survive is going to take a pitiful wage to change jobs.

Are you surprised by this one? I'm not.

Finally, this makes me feel a lot better. I know people who automatically got rejected for jobs due to credit checks when they weren't applying to be bankers, handling cash or even managing a store til. Maybe if you got the explanation, it would answer concerns over someone planning to embezzle. Remember, plenty of embezzlers had spotless credit & criminal background checks before stealing from companies.

Now if they'd only attack attorney licensing committees for using credit checks as the sole basis to deny admission to the bar. If you think it doesn't happen, I can prove you dead wrong.