Gender politics – the cost:

Posted on August 19, 2016 by KG

Promoting women because they’re women is a recipe for disaster.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

27 Responses to Gender politics – the cost:

  1. K2 says:
    August 19, 2016 at 06:08

    You mean like Janet Reno and Waco?

    • KG says:
      August 19, 2016 at 06:54

      There a plenty of examples, K2, at all levels of business, the bureaucracy and government.

      • K2 says:
        August 19, 2016 at 08:37

        It has a name.

        The Curie-Hultgreen Syndrome might best be summarised as “a cognitive impairment disorder which results in the victim assigning undue importance and privilege to a woman in any given field of professional, scientific, academic, or martial excellence simply because she is a woman”.

        Symptoms include: promoting a woman over a better-qualified man for reasons of optics; insisting that men and women are interchangeable and can perform the same tasks at the same level of consistent quality; being wilfully blind to any evidence to the contrary; and insisting on putting women in positions of responsibility for which they are completely and totally unsuited.

        http://didactsreach.blogspot.com/2013/10/defining-curie-hultgreen-syndrome.html

  2. Darin says:
    August 19, 2016 at 10:24

    “You mean like Janet Reno?”

    You can throw Eric Holder in there too and label it as affirmative action hires run amok-

    http://jimbovard.com/blog/2014/08/27/eric-holder-waco-coverup/

  3. Phil Stephenson says:
    August 19, 2016 at 12:03

    Nixon managed to disgrace the uniforms of two state police forces in her career. Somethng of an achievement when you think about it. I can tell you there were few tears shed by the rank and file when she left the New South Wales Police Force to go down south to Victoria Police. As for Burns, she illegally bugged other senior officers in the early 2000’s or so, trying to sink a few other coppers to get some browny points for herself, and eliminate some competition for the eventual commissioner’s job. The issue has been through the courts on and off over the years, but she has yet to feel consequences of her own underhanded actions, and probably never will.

    I am not sure how these things work in other countries, but in Australia the Lindt siege was considered entirely a police matter and there was no question the military would be called in. However, even as an ex-cop myself, (and I claim no expertise in thes incidents), I think the army would have resolved the situation by expeditiously killing Monis at the first opportunity, problem solved. In my own mind, with the world we now have, thanks to the politicians, a re-think is needed as to the involvement of the military in a case like this.

  4. .Alan says:
    August 19, 2016 at 13:15

    I have nothing against women in the Police, but the simple fact is they cannot do all parts of the job. It is a bit parallel to the nursing profession where women dominate that that area, mainly because their nurturing qualities come to the fore. Most males lack on that score. I observed this after several decades serving in the Police. Most criminal offenders are male at least 86%. With violent offenders and gangs you need young fit males with some size dealing with them, not pygmies or female Police. When I joined the Police way back the minimum height was 5ft 10ins or 178cm. Today there is no height restrictions. During the infamous Springbok tour in 1981 in the protests, the weakest part of the police skirmish lines was where female officers were placed. Because of the p.c nature of society now the powers that be are aiming at 50/50 recruitment between the sexes, a recipe for disaster.

  5. mara says:
    August 19, 2016 at 16:46

    ‘Alan forget the 50/50%. Now that we officially have 23 different genders(at last count) I think the police recruiters are going to need smart calculators to work out which %age of these people they need to employ to comply with new progressive regulations. http://falfn.com/CrusaderRabbit/wp-content/plugins/wp-monalisa/icons/wpml_wacko.gif

  6. mara says:
    August 19, 2016 at 17:43

    The old chap and I looked up our genders on Google and are sitting here, looking at one another with deep seated suspicion wondering if one of us is actually what our genders actually were when we got married over 20 years ago. It is deeply worrying that when I see him razoring his nose and ear hair, I have to wonder if he is just pretending. http://falfn.com/CrusaderRabbit/wp-content/plugins/wp-monalisa/icons/wpml_cool.gif

    • KG says:
      August 19, 2016 at 17:49

      :lol: All you have to remember is – no matter what the new gender is, provided it’s not “male” or “female”…you’re a victim, entitled to special consideration.

  7. KG says:
    August 19, 2016 at 17:50

    (fresh middle-finger severe crush injury here, so typing is even slower than usual)

  8. KG says:
    August 20, 2016 at 00:55

    Another bloody female Kiwi judge. Her comments towards the end of the article are farcical.
    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11697425

  9. KG says:
    August 20, 2016 at 01:28

    ‘Priorities in Obama’s America:

    The U.S. Department of Agriculture is holding summits to promote the role of lesbian farmers as a part of its “Rural Pride” campaign.’

  10. Flashman says:
    August 20, 2016 at 07:24

    I was actually quite surprised how hard-hitting this was. Why? Because in New Zealand you’d *never* see a TV news commentary/story like it go to air – not even close.

    Thanks for posting, KG.

  11. Gregoryno6 says:
    August 21, 2016 at 00:38

    Actually, there is one thing that male cops can’t do.
    [b]A POLICEWOMAN is being investigated after having an alleged row with her boss over who had the best breasts.[/b]
    http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/702149/Superintendent-Sarah-Jackson-Rebekah-Sutcliffe-GMP-manchester-police-flash-boobs-breasts

  12. Warren Tooley says:
    August 21, 2016 at 16:35

    Unfortunately this is just the tip of the iceberg. Section 11 of the earth charter says:

    11. Affirm gender equality and equity as prerequisites to sustainable development and ensure universal access to education, health care, and economic opportunity.
    a. …
    b. Promote the active participation of women in all aspects of economic, political, civil, social, and cultural life as
    full and equal partners, decision makers, leaders, and beneficiaries.
    c…
    So there we have it, lets cancel the earth charter, and vote for some common sense.