It’s only fair

One of the Rust’s recurring themes is our head-shaking disbelief at the 21^st Century’s female-dominance of the now-global political correctness orthodoxy.

Under the guise of promoting ‘equality’ and diversity whilst also seeking to reverse/redress the ‘sins’ of Western First World countries in exploiting overseas markets and colonising their Third World counterparts, our history – arguably, nothing more than everything, positive and negative, that inevitably made the UK what it is today – is being systematically picked apart and ridiculed for examples of what in 2018 would be regarded as ‘non-PC’ or exploitative behaviour and attitudes but which could (on an alternative view) just as easily be taken as simply reflecting society norms as they were in their own time and context.

This is not the promotion of equality in an inclusive, community spirit-growing, manner. It’s a vindictive attempt to ‘punish’ human society as it was/is (and in many respects challenge Nature) for anything and everything that has ever caused any group/type of humans to end up less well off than any other.

To give an example that no doubt will have the ‘right on’ brigade snorting with derision, I spent yesterday afternoon in a large country garden watching the local wildlife going about its business after a large amount of bird food (essentially seeds, peanuts, meal worms and some end-cuts of meat) had been strewn about on the lawn in front of the terrace upon we were sitting.

In the interests of self-preservation, all species were wary of each other in case of danger or attack.

Little birds gave way to bigger or more aggressive birds, youngsters to elders. Female squirrels instinctively went about collecting food for their offspring partly because their fathers disappear after mating and take no part in raising them.

Some species of duck, and for that matter swan, mate for life – others don’t.

Some bird species seemingly live side by side and take no notice of each other at such food sources, others will do the opposite.

So far as I am aware – I say that because in this day and age you never know I might be 100% wrong – I’m surprised that there aren’t ‘equality campaigners’ already out there filling up the media airwaves with campaigns to promote female squirrels’ rights not to have to bring their children up on their own and/ demanding that ‘unduly aggressive’ species like jays, jackdaws and magpies should be sent to ‘attitude-awareness training’ centres in order to have their anti-social traits re-wired so that they respect the rights of sparrows, blue tits and starlings etc. to conduct their lives free from harassment and potential violence.

That’s real hardship – quite a contrast with the kind of ludicrous flim-flam ‘equality’ issues that concern superior, middle-class, university graduated, female intellectuals when they are braying from their privileged positions about how ‘ordinary women’ are being discriminated by the ‘monstrous regiment of Men’ because they are not apparently allowed to have a full-time, satisfying career and a family simultaneously … and therefore demand and endless list of ‘special dispensations’ for women – starting with maternity leave, employment creches and time off for ‘family’ reasons which no make would ever consider, let alone take – in order that they be rendered equal.

And then expect someone else to pay for it – even though 75% of true ‘ordinary women’ out there are far too busy living their lives, trying to make ends meet, to be much bothered with any of the above.

The Rust sports department we rant from time to time about the wall-to-wall coverage of women’s issues in elite sport as regards unequal pay, television and media coverage … you name it.

Here’s an example that I spotted overnight on the website of The Guardian – a piece by Anna Kessell about the fact that the great sportswear manufactures of the world do not apparently do enough to make football boots and athletic ‘spikes’ specifically designed for women.

It’s worth a read – see here – THE GUARDIAN

Please send a postcard to the usual address if I’m missing something, but I would have thought that the fundamental reason why there’s a deficiency in specific ‘designed for female’ sports footwear is that – from a commercial perspective, i.e. the chief viewpoint of any business – there’s not enough demand for it amongst the female population as a whole.

Not that, once the female lobby has got its teeth into the issue, there won’t one day be sports manufacturers who feel brow-beaten enough to begin producing same even if it is against their own corporate interests.

That is why next year I’ll be demanding a place in the Team GB women’s netball squad at the 2020 Tokyo Olympics, even though I have zero aptitude for the sport, I’m in my sixties, bald, fat, about a foot too small and (last time I looked) have male genitalia swinging below my abdomen.

In the interests of equality, diversity and political-correctness it would only be right and proper, after all.