But the problem is not that there are differences.
I’m glad you think so. These days, that understanding is not held in mind by the oppression pointer-outers.
The problem is that it is fairly predictable who gets the short end of the stick in certain situations.
The problem is not that. It’s that the perception of oppression is the gift that keeps on giving the toxic belief of inequity. Do you really think that girls get short shrift in education? There’s a profound underrepresentation of women in high tech. Do you really think that tech companies aren’t falling over themselves to hire women? Or could it be that women don’t care about ones and zeros zipping around microprocessors in the form of electricity?
Do you think it is a coincidence that there aren’t seven workshops for girls and “The science of smashing stuff” for boys?
No. I think it’s a function of the differences in boys and girls. As you say, of course opportunities should be open to boys and girls. I will fall short of saying that there should be no grouping of boys and girls. Boys and girls don’t naturally congregate. I hope you see that, although again, in this crowd, you’ll be in the minority. Given that, any tailoring of those groupings to boys and girls will be jumped on by the oppression pointer-outers. They’re wrong.
The neo-quasi-pseudo feminists of today are doing a disservice to feminism and women. If I had a daughter, I’d be sure to show her this.
I’d let her know that she needs to be careful to not get caught in the vortex of the oppression pointer-outers, or she risks being shaped by a defeatist, self-pitying attitude as this young woman has. This girl has taken the path of giving up on the supremely difficult journey of becoming a competitive chess player, and can feel oppressed in the process. Much more appealing than failure, or a lessened interest.
That gift that keeps on giving is no gift at all.
