Last year the Australian women's soccer team, the Matildas, went on strike because they were paid less than the men's team. Unfair? Maybe not. The Matildas have just been thrashed, 7-0, in a match against an under-15s boys club team. That's right: 14-year-old boys from the seaside town of Newcastle in NSW can easily defeat Australia's national women's team.
It's a stark reminder that men and women are not equal in all things. I don't think this is difficult for traditionalists to accept as we don't think of men and women as being made for exactly the same things. But I do wonder what those feminists who believe that sex distinctions are socially constructed would make of it.
Is it the fault of the patriarchy that the best women soccer players cannot match it with boy ones, let alone with men? Can you really deconstruct this difference?
Hi Mark, it would appear you are dead wrong on this. I've been been chatting with the missus about this and promptly told that the Matilda's more than likely let the boys win so that their self-esteem wasnt hurt.
ReplyDeleteI questioned the presumption and I did ask, to what end or gain would this serve the Matilda's?
To which I was told: "Mind you language."
You stand corrected, it would seem.
Matt, glad you and the missus sorted it out. Very considerate of the Matildas I must say.
DeleteIf these sportswomen are so good, why are most women's sports so poorly attended, and by both sexes?
ReplyDeleteIf they went on strike would anyone care? Would anyone even notice? Frankly I'm surprised they get paid at all. I assume it's the taxpayer who pays them?
ReplyDeleteO/T
ReplyDeleteA good example of the right-liberal mindset.
http://mobile.nytimes.com/2016/05/21/opinion/how-to-get-americans-moving-again.html
Nothing about supporting the family, everything about the magic of "growth" and the autonomous individual.
Tim, thanks for the link. You are spot on - it's a species of right-liberalism.
Delete