Monday, February 26, 2007

---Tennis Anyone?

Yet another example of Gender equality....Femikook style...

This weekend, I was discussing this Wimbledon crap with a female friend of mine. A real friend, mind you. I was somewhat surprised to see that she believed that the so-called "equal pay" plan now in place was equitable the right thing. I argued the simple point (as we all know) that women play almost 50% less time than the men and thus, should not be getting the same payout for less work.

Her argument, although she is most certainly NOT a femikook, was that it is economics. Women’s tennis brings in the same amount of revenue that the men’s do and should be paid accordingly. I disagree with that as well, but I digress. No amount of arguing was going to sway her. I was somewhat taken aback at her apparent femikook argumentative style…. I just couldn’t understand how an obviously intelligent woman couldn’t see this for what it really is. Bullshit gender politics with a dash of bullshit, mixed in a pot of misandry.

Anyhow, while traveling through the blogosphere today, I came across an individual that took the time to analyze this a little further. Interestingly enough, when you break it down to the nuts-n-bolts of it all as he did that women, in fact, are NOT paid equally; they are paid MORE THAN THE MEN for less work! Therefore, by raising their purse to the supposedly higher purse level of the men conveniently extends the already HIGHER PAY FOR WOMEN to and even HIGHER rate for less work. I know, I know; it is just so difficult to understand that three is less than five. So once again, we are using the feminists’ “new math” to remove the mythical pay disparity. Kudos to the femikooks, once again!

As for his belief that women cannot play to the level of the men or should I say Venus Williams, I call shenanigans. Women can play just as well and as long. I have seen them do it!

Anyhow, have a look (Linked to his original post above & edited for typos only.)
So a few notable women have started bleating how its "unfair" that men are paid more than women, and the male winner's purse at Wimbledon is "£30,000 m ore" than the women's purse. Sadly, Tony Blair has now backed this.

Before everyone starts losing their heads over this feminist machine, do we care to even analyze the figures? Lets do that:

1) +Total Prize money for men = £5,197,440
+Total Prize money for women = £4,429 440

2) Male winner's takings = £655,000
Female winner's takings = £625,000

From the above figures, without any other factors, yes it looks like women are getting a bum deal, however, if we assume same number of entrants (128 men and 128 women as with this year's) and no tie-breaks are played:

3) Maximum number of sets played by men = 5
Maximum number of sets played by women = 3
Minimum number of sets played by men = 3
Minimum number of sets played by women = 2

4) Total prize money per set (male) = £1,039,488
Total prize money per set (female) = £1,476,480

Is it me, or did anyone just notice the ladies purse perset get dramatically larger (by almost £450,000) than the men's? Lets carry on.

5) Male winner's taking's per set (of 5) = £131,000
Female winner's takings per set(of 3) = £208,000
Male winner's takings per set (of 3) = £218,333
Female winner's takings per set(of 2) = £312,500

So we can clearly see, by playing fewer sets, women are in fact currently getting paid MORE to do less work. As this is these players main income, i.e. what they do for a living, correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't a lot of women today currently protesting about unequal pay to male counterparts for doing the same amount of work in the same job? Let's hear what Venus Williams has to say:

(Start of Quote)
"Women and men should be treated equally. This is an amazing sport and there is as much interest in women's tennis as there is in men's. Just because we can't play five sets because of our genes, what can we do?"
(End of Quote)

So its settled then, I guess she means IF by some physical advantage (that no one has control over) men are subject to do more work, then pay is irrelevant and women should be REWARDED for their GENETIC INABILITY to do the same work, or better yet, men should be PENALISED for their UNCONTROLLABLE ABILITY to do more work, amount of time playing should not matter, and number of sets played should not matter.

I am sorry, but this sounds like the feminist machine wanting to turn a situation COMPLETELY in its favor whilst penalizing men, and at the same time, protesting in the name of "equality". Note how the "equality" angle only refers to pay, not the amount of work done to earn that pay. Seems very convenient isn't it. What do you all think?
Welcome to the new world order of Equalllleteeeeeee! WHEW! I am just so glad that THAT injustice was corrected, aren’t you!



Thursday, February 08, 2007

---Dear Fox News

Dear Fox,

First and foremost, let me state that I start my morning with a cup (or pot depending on the amount of sleep) of joe and Fox and Friends. Pssst! I miss E. D. Anyhow, I watch your program due to the "Fair and Balanced" prospective I feel is present for the most part. That is until these past few days.

Lisa Nowak is supposedly the story. The 'other woman' is supposedly the story. Why is it that when you reference this whack-job, you keep putting William Oefelein's image up? Is there some rule that says that a male has to be shown? So he was playing two women. Big whoop! SHE IS MARRIED, SHE ATTEMPTED MURDER (allegedly), and SHE is the one that supposedly did something wrong.

If anything, place the other woman's face up (whose name escapes me now - wonder why that is) as well! Oh, wait SHE is the VICTIM. Well, news flash (pun intended) so is William! HE is the victim of MSM gone awry. He has done nothing wrong. Yet anyone with two grey matter particles to rub together can easily recall his name. WHY? I could care less if William was/is "into Lisa" or not. SHE IS THE STORY, remember?

What exactly did William Oefelein do? He is divorced so he was not cheating; he was seeing these two women OUTSIDE of the "office", so he was not "using his position of power to manipulate these women (a tried and true argument used against men ad nausea). He did not force her to do this (sure, MSM is doing their best to put the blame on him or her husband). Just what is the angle here? I expect this sort of anti-male bull from MSM such as ABC, CNN, CBS and their ilk. "Fair and Balanced"? I used to think so. Nevertheless, you are starting to appear like the rest of the garbage news programs that cherry-pick their tasty tid-bits based upon what some statistician or PC Police researcher claims that people want to hear, and not the facts. William has done nothing wrong. At least for now, that is. Give MSM some time to digs hard enough - deep enough - to find SOMETHING, ANYTHING and they will place the responsibility and blame where it rightly belongs, on the male. Trust me, they will.

Shame on you.

Oh, did you know that Lisa Nowak is married? Are you aware that Lisa Nowak is the one charged with attempted murder? Did I mention that the alleged fight and subsequent separation was hmmmm, how should I put this so that even your most idiotic researcher can see it, most likely caused due to HER HUSBAND DISCOVERING HER INFIDELITY? It does not take a rocket scientist (pardon the pun once again) to see that. On the other hand, maybe it does.

Maybe you need to verify your stories prior to reading them from the teleprompter. I know, I know, there is no anti-male conspiracy in MSM. Of course not.

Here is a clue, women can and are just as evil as males. I know it is hard to fathom, but it is true. If your little researchers dig hard enough, they might even find one of the more than 200 studies that say so. Put the blame and responsibility, as well as the constant barrage of imagery where it rightfully belongs, on Lisa Nowak, and Lisa Nowak ONLY!

Put the fact finders on the correct trail; looking into the why NASA allows this person to be a part of what used to be considered the most elite of the elite; the cream of the crop in military personnel.

How is it that someone that is so obviously psychologically unstable (particularly with men) is allowed to be cooped up with others in a tin can for months on end. Their psyche evals (most assuredly lowered under the guise of equaleteeee) have failed miserably. Furthermore, how is it that she is out on such a pathetic bail level for ATTEMPTED MURDER? How is it that she is able to leave the state? If she were male, honestly, do you believe that he would have been given such an obvious pass? Seriously? After more than 40 years of space travel, we have yet another "woman firster". I, as an American, am just so proud.

I could go on, but I am sure that even the most feebly minded e-mail reader on your staff could understand the points I raise. I can only hope.

The Man On The Street