Every normal man must be tempted, at times, to spit on his hands, hoist the black flag, and begin slitting throats. –H.L. Mencken
The latest edition of Computerworld magazine came across my desk the other day. As usual I flipped to the opinion page, always a source of entertainment and blog fodder, and this week was no different.
Jonny opines that the entire technology industry is sexist (how an abstract entity can be anything is not explained) because women and men don’t have equal numbers across the corporate boards of IT companies, and further that there just aren’t enough women in technology jobs to begin with.
The cause, according to Jonny: oh, wait, he doesn’t give one. He just spouts off some statistics and then blames it on sexism. I mean, what else could it be, right?
What he’s really saying is that the men in technology are keeping women out. This presupposes that women are just clamoring to get into technology but those sexist men just won’t hire them.
Funny how we never see articles like this about other occupations that women clearly have no interest in participating in. Why no report on the lack of women in Alaskan crab fishing, men’s pro sports, or construction work? Or the reverse, a thorough investigation into the absence of men in nursing, childcare, or hairdressing.
No one is questioning these industries because it would be ridiculous. The answers are obvious. But when it comes to other fields, the conclusion is immediately an ‘ism’. Racism, sexism, ageism, able-bodyism (yes, that’s a real one), take your pick.
Why can’t it be that there are certain industries where men tend to excel more than women and vice versa? The answer is that to allow that is to admit that there are fundamental differences between men and women. But the likes of Jonny Evans can’t abide the thought, and so we’re fed this kind of crap about discrimination.
Jonny has decided that there is an optimal percentage of women needed in IT and anything less is necessarily sexism.
Jonny is, of course, displaying the typical abysmal understanding of economics as is required of virtually everyone who writes progressive op-ed pieces. As Walter Block has pointed out innumerable times, the so-called wage gap and glass ceiling issues (and I would add, by extension, this issue of ‘underrepresentation’), are ones of opportunity cost, aptitude, and interest in the field, not discrimination.
So what is Jonny’s solution to this non-existent problem? Why the state, of course.
Jonny thinks that “legislation could help”. Specifically, he says that if “the Employment Non-Discrimination Act became law, it would prohibit companies with 15 or more employees from discriminating on the basis of sexual orientation or gender.”
Apparently there are no fundamental realities that progressives don’t think can be done away with by order of the state.
The irony is that, besides being immoral affronts to private property rights, these types of quota and non-discrimination laws always have the opposite of their intended effect, causing more harm than they intend to solve.
Hey Jonny, stick to writing fanboy articles about the new iPhone and keep your nose out of other people’s business.