Sexist discrimination of men by U.S. Federal government contracts program - The new program ensures that some contracts will go to female-owned businesses because MALE-OWNED BUSINESSES WILL NOT BE CONSIDERED FOR THEM.

etherspirit · 2010-08-22T03:25:31+00:00

This is retarded. I want my tax-funded contracts to go to the best company. I don't give a flying fuck who owns the company.

2010-08-21T22:31:28+00:00

FTA:

That was great news for women who believed they had never received a fair share of those contracts.

This sick statement illustrates the feminist notion of "equality". According to feminism, "fair" means "legally enforced sex-based discrimination in favor of US", allegedly dispelling some imaginary "oppression" which somehow prevents women to earn big bucks (or, in this case, make a better offer than their male-owned business counterparts). I thought this shit was illegal in the States :/

Anyways, 5% is nothing. Just that they don't add another 5% for the blacks, another 5% for Hipanics..until 100% of taxpayer's money is "fairly" distributed in the so-called "free market".

TangLikeAnAstronaut · 2010-08-21T21:59:22+00:00

\headdesk**

pahncrd · 2010-08-22T03:29:08+00:00

This kind of shit is pushing me further and further into the extreme side of libertarianism. It also makes me pray for a large meteor to hit the earth.

stemgang · 2010-08-22T01:22:53+00:00

Ah, quotas and set-asides. The old government standbys for guaranteeing current injustice in response to possible past injustice.

ENTP · 2010-08-22T09:00:46+00:00

There's a "Women's Chamber of Commerce". Wtf...

2010-08-22T18:00:54+00:00

Preferences for MBWE (minority and women owned enterprises) are common at the State level. To get around it the man who owes a business lists his wife or another female family member as the owner. State's wink at this practice because otherwise men's businesses cannot compete for contacts and less qualified companies are hired, which costs the state more money in the long run.

2010-08-24T12:12:55+00:00

Here's the thing, equality cannot be mandated; that only results in more institutionalized inequality. By mandating that certain contracts go to female-owned firms, the government is shortchanging the male business owners (who comprise the majority) whose businesses may be better qualified to complete the assignments.

The only way to achieve equality is to create an environment in which equality can exist. Remove the divisive factor from play altogether and decide which companies are awarded the contracts solely on merit. Feminists complain that this isn't fair to women and their businesses because their businesses are rarely chosen based on merit. Tough. One group should not be given special treatment because they cannot compete with another in a free and open marketplace.

cryptogirl · 2010-08-22T07:37:29+00:00

When men's rights activists oppose a program that would guarantee a mere 5% of federal contracts go to women-owned businesses, they looks a lot less like an equality movement, and a lot more like movement for preserving men's social and economic dominance.

Comments