"I've always depended on the kindness of strangers." uttered Blanche DuBois, in “A Streetcar Named Desire”. A line once so antiquated and indicative of a long dead era -and irresponsibility- is slowly and insidiously making a comeback, that is, if it ever really left. It seems to me that the women’s liberation movement is making a tremendous backslide in American culture as a result of two major factors. The first being movies and television making it a male’s duty to cater to a woman’s needs if she is attractive, or should I say, sexually alluring, enough. And the second being women who are eager to exploit this opportunity to sell their bodies, and their dignity, for an easy ride without being honest about the nature of the sale. In fact, these days, shaking your ass for preferential treatment isn’t so much an attack on dignity, as it is accepted commerce. Strippers make more money than many socially vital positions. Which is fine because they are honest about it, my problem is with those who are every bit as much sex dealers, but without the sand to be honest about it.
I say we repeal sexual harassment laws entirely. If women don’t want to be called toots they shouldn’t wear jeans 2 sizes too small and spend more money annually on makeup than they do on healthcare.
In today’s environment when so many jobs are based on the strength of your resume, and that being in part based on your GPA, and that in turn being a result of your scholastic ability, attractive women have an extremely unfair advantage, even over equally attractive men. And yet still they are underrepresented in most colleges and income brackets. I’m sure some will say that turnabout is fair play, commenting on the years of male dominance, but I’m with Gandhi on that one, “An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind.” Further-more I’m not so sure dominance through sexual appeal is a form of true power anyway, since at best it is an ability to influence those with what I would call real power. Sexual selection is the only real power in this context. It could even be viewed as a form of parasitism, but then again oratorical skill is just a way to influence others as well, so in a way it is power. Anyway..
I worked in a computer lab at a college for 3 years, and during that time I consistently saw brilliant young men "helping" attractive young women with their assignments, sometimes bordering on plagiarism. I, as a hard working studying college student, resented the fact that attractive young ladies have a virtually inexhaustible supply of private tutors available to them for free, simply because they behaviorally and physically match the television’s description of what beauty is. I also resent that fact that media makes it obligatory that males help without the ability to acceptably demand a sexual return for their work, despite that being precisely the arrangement that is implied by the woman, via her behavior and choices. How many times has something like the following been uttered at the end of these little session? “Oh you expected affection of some type? I thought you were just being nice, you’re a pig.” Head for lobster just isn’t socially accepted these days, despite the request for lobster being delivered from within a slinky red dress, using a tone of voice usually reserved for phone sex, and a physical proximity that would earn a male a harassment suit.
And that’s only the beginning; I’m not even going to seriously consider the free meals, free rides, and discounts that inevitably will result from these study sessions. Services that someone eventually has to pay for. Imagine the math major sitting doing little tiffany’s online test, only to be interrupted by a pout, “I’m hungry.” We all know where this would go. I’ll bet I could maintain a 4.0 also if I had a squad of people to do my work for me, feed me, and drive me around, all for an investment of clothing and tone.
These girls will sail through the system buoyed on the work of others, and they will leave a trail of resentment and fraudulence in their wake. Not to mention lower male GPAs as a result of time lost trying to acquire that object that screams success in our culture, the young trophy wife.
Can one really overestimate the potential damage of this trend? The very concept of a college graduate will begin to lose value. Isn’t it already? ‘Educated’ will mean less and less, emotion will begin to triumph over logic. And history has shown the consequences of that. People will become more religious as science blunders again and again as a result of giving money and power to attractive idiots who circumvented the system. People will die of medical neglect more often because attractive nurses pass more easily than skilled ones. In all professionally moderated arenas skill will suffer replaced by style and sex. Is this really good for us?
I don’t think this was what was intended by the matriarchs of the woman’s civil liberties movement. I don’t think women fought to enter college alongside men so they could giggle and dress their way through it. Women advance themselves sexually in every other walk of life and nature allows that, so be it, sexual selection is destroying humanity from both sides anyway so I’ll let that slide, but in an abstract setting like academia it presents an unfair and correctable advantage.
The only real solution is gender divided schooling. Equal rights don’t have to be the same location. We have separate bathrooms don’t we? If we’re so equal, and sex isn’t a factor, then why do we have separate bathrooms anyway? Why have gender specific scholarships? Why ask gender on admission papers? Or race for that matter. If it truly doesn’t matter, why ask at all?
About bathrooms, why not institute one person at a time unisex bathrooms? After all, I don’t like peeing for an audience no matter what their gender. Why do I have to have a urinal? Why can’t the guys have a row of stalls? Because girls are more important now, they are society’s carrot, that's one reason gay marriage is even an issue. In any case true merit should warrant advantage, and sexual attractiveness isn’t a true merit because it’s presence is subjective.