Seldom a day passes without examples of ‘equality’, feminist style. In fact, it’s GENDER INEQUALITY but feminist voices remain silent about it or actively support it, suggesting that equality was never really their goal.
For example, look at inequality in men’s sacrifice in their their work roles and more generally in their roles as providers and protectors. Year after year 100% or almost 100% of workplace deaths are suffered by men, as are the vast majority of serious workplace injuries. Yet year after year we see no analysis of the gender implications of this, not even some mark of respect or gratitude towards the male gender for men’s sacrifices. Instead, we hear endless complaints that men earn, on average, about 12% more than women do in their employed roles. A whole government ministry only for women, with no comparable service for men, is maintained to close the claimed earnings gap even though we know that the 12% figure greatly underestimates wealth acquisition by women. And feminists, when confronted with the much greater gender disparity in workplace deaths and injuries, refuse to acknowledge that such sacrifice may justify slightly more recompense. In a recent conversation with me, one feminist claimed that male:female workplace death ratios only persisted because men kept or forced women out of the dangerous jobs. Yeah right, we can see the queues of women clamouring to risk their lives in mines, sewers, and all the other dirty, body-damaging and dangerous jobs men continue to undertake. Those queues are easily detected if you look for the little fairy pigs flying above them.
Here then we honour the following men who have recently suffered significant injury or ultimate sacrifice in their roles. These examples are all from the last six weeks or so. Should any of the links be broken by the time you read this, I have a copy of the full articles.
1. Man crushed by vehicle in New Plymouth: truck mechanic dies horrible death.
2. Body found near where fisherman disappeared: man dies in a typical male provider role.
3. No need for inquest into exploding shell death: No need to give any more attention than necessary to male deaths in the army.
4. SAS soldier’s death detailed: Unusually, this article acknowledged “The work is always dangerous and they’re brave men who do their best to serve New Zealand.” Note, they’re brave MEN.
5. Powerline victim leaves two children: male worker burns to death; headline emphasizes those he ‘left behind’ and doesn’t think his gender important enough to mention.
6. Police officer injured in knife attack: It’s interesting that male police officers seem to be injured much more often than their gender proportion would predict; why is this? And why isn’t his gender mentioned in the headline as is almost always the case when a woman is subjected to violence or injury, for example: Supermarket woman ‘shaken’ by knife-point robbery
7. Truck driver dies in Hauraki Plains crash: This article goes to considerable effort to avoid mentioning the gender of this victim at all. Even where the article could use the masculine pronoun ‘he’ it avoids doing so.
8. Man rescues neighbour trapped under station wagon: As well as being an example of another man injured in a typical male role, it also shows the heroism of another man who put his own safety at risk in rescuing the injured victim.
9. Crushed driver ‘not belted in’: Instead of discussing the high risk profession in which this truckie died, the article blames him for his death due to not wearing a seat belt even though police are not even certain about that.
10. 22 Chinese miners rescued after 7 days: All over the world including our Pike River Mine men frequently die terrible deaths in mines, but often, as is the case with this article, their gender is not thought worthy of mention. No recognition or concern is given to the fact that it is overwhelmingly men who work and die in the claustrophobic darkness of mines to provide materials for the infrastructure of our privileged lifestyles.
11. Four men in flooded Welsh mine, rescue efforts continue: What, you think I was exaggerating about the frequency of male victims in mines?
12. Logger cuts off toes to free himself: Ah yes, the privileges men enjoy…
13. Health board forced to reveal assault figures: Auckland District Health Board is told to provide better records of the number of mental health staff assaulted on the job, but no mention is made of providing a gender break down of these assaults. The gender ratio is likely to mirror that in police and military forces, with men much more likely to be attacked and injured than are women. Why do you suppose this is the case?
14. Quad bike victim’s family tell of legacy: Department of Labour insists on using only the the term “people” in disclosing the numbers injured and killed on farm quad bikes, even though all or almost all will be males. Why is the sacrifice of men kept hidden like this? If some profession saw a significant proportion of women dying, their gender would be highlighted, their sacrifice as women honoured, demands for change would be deafening and the problem would probably be blamed somehow on women’s underprivileged status.
15. Sydney-based Kiwi killed when tyre explodes: This article describes one workplace death, but the gender of the additional workplace serious injury is not thought worthy of mention; of course not, because he was probably only a man. Our deep condolences to the victims and their loved ones.
16. Second body found at Lake Arapuni: Two men die in their role as providers; One supposes that such provider roles are not even counted in gender comparisons of ‘unpaid domestic contribution’.
17. Worker dies in drain collapse: Imagine what the headline would say if this ‘worker’ had been a female…
18. Auckland staircase collapses, three hurt: No mention whatsoever in the article (or this one, oh or this one) about the gender of the injured workers, so guess what their gender was? Congratulations to those who guessed ‘male’, because we were finally able to find one article that saw fit to mention this, though male gender was not considered important enough to mention in the headline.
19. Person stuck in machinery in Christchurch: ‘Person’? Er, I think it was a MAN, but the article failed to mention this at all thereby ensuring male sacrifice remains largely hidden from the public’s view. Oh, and by the way, the man died from his injuries, though I didn’t see that publicized subequently. Another horrible, painful male death; our gratitude is extended to him for his dangerous work and our deep condolences are offered to his loved ones.
20. Man assaulted during bank robbery: Wow, unbelievable, an article actually mentions that a ‘man’ was assaulted in his role as a security guard delivering money. In every other such case articles have claimed simply that a ‘security van’ was robbed or perhaps that a ‘worker’ was assaulted. But don’t expect this article’s enlightened approach to set any trend.
21. Man injured in Dunedin train accident: Actually, he was working on the train, but at least his gender is headlined in this case.
22. Levin man pinned under his own horse: This man may have been in a work role; does anyone know more about this incident?
23. ‘It’s all right’ – drowning dad’s last words to son: Another man dies in his role as provider
24. Man crushed to death by forklift
25. Second SAS NZ death in Afghanistan: Oh, another soldier dies on duty, and surprise, surprise, it’s a man, though this wasn’t thought important enough to mention in the headline, and no hint of concern by anyone that men are disproportionately the ones to die in active service. But plenty of gender-specific concern when it comes to events in the forces that women object to. Of course, it’s important to take seriously allegations by servicewomen of sexual abuse or harassment, but why is the matter of servicemen’s disproportionate death rate considered so unimportant as to deserve no consideration? Are male deaths trivial compared to claims by females of harassment?