Saturday, December 14, 2013

Feminist snow removal threatens Stockholm?

Is there not going to be an almighty backlash against feminism in Sweden?

Things have reached a point that the ploughing of snow is being subjected to feminist analysis. Apparently the older policy, of ploughing major roads first, has been deemed sexist because more men than women drive cars. The recommended new policy is to plough areas near bus stops and kindergartens first as this is more "gender equal" (women use these areas more than men do).

But that then leaves the arterial roads covered with snow. See more here.


  1. Excellent, continue with the stupid. The backlash against feminism will come when there are dead in the streets, not before. This will result in people dying, which is an unfortunate necessity.

    - TiredGuy

  2. Ordinarily I would describe myself as both anti-feminist and anti-Sharia law (and a little r racist). But stories like this make me think the West can’t fall fast enough at least in Sweden. Where are the invading Muslims hordes when you need them? Yes I know they’ll rule Sweden in 50 years but I think they need to hurry up and get on with the job. I hope the white race survives – but maybe not in Sweden – it could improve our gene quality.

    1. Well, for the record, as much as I shake my head at Sweden, my own view is that the loss of the Swedish people and culture would be tragic.

    2. That smells a little like genetic determinism, anon.

      Anyway, I don't think even genetic determinists claim that there is a "liberal' gene or something that could be culled from the white gene pool by the elimination of the Swedish nation.

      I think the most you could argue is a predisposition among Swedes for consistency, thoroughness and logical order. A predisposition for order might explain not only radically consistent feminism but also the ueberefficiency of Swedish municipal services for example. Can you imagine Nigerians in a Sweden-like climate worrying too much about timely snow removal?

      Without Swedes, you might lost radical feminism, but you might also lose exceptionally pure expressions of more admirable traits and values. I don't see anything to celebrate about that kind of loss. Do you?

      Also, as Mark has repeatedly demonstrated, it's much easier to see the essence of an idea in a pure form rather than in an adulterated/compromised one. It's easier to critique feminism, liberalism and the like precisely because Sweden makes its faults so painfully obvious.

      We should be thankful to the Swedes. Their canary-in-the-coal mine role at present might spare the rest of us from a lot of destruction.

    3. Bartholomew, good comment. One of the things we have to set about doing is showing where the end point of a liberal politics is. As you noted in your comment, the Swedes are useful in doing this as they are so clear in setting out the liberal principles they follow and relatively consistent in attempting to follow through with them.

    4. The American legal precedent of "disparate impact" says that a policy can be impermissible "discrimination" if it affects one (protected, minority) group more than another, even if no discrimination is intended. This precedent goes back to the Duke Power case, in which an electric company set a minimum qualification of a high school diploma for its employees, and the civil rights plaintiffs noted that there are more black than white high school dropouts. Thus, the employment policy had a "disparate impact" on blacks.

      It would seem that the snow removal tiff in Sweden is just a logical conclusion of the disparate impact concept, which is a concept that is itself a logical conclusion of the left-liberal idea that disparate outcomes are proof of some sort of "structural racism" even if we cannot detect any particular racist actions or intents anywhere in the society.