A further couple of pieces from the quintessential feminist-careerist, Tanja Kovac, who has made her way solely on her ideology.

http://www.thepunch.com.au/articles/A-limelight-thief-at-the-arse-end-of-feminism/

"They have devoted their lives to women-centred policy jobs, committees and NGO’s"

"The conclusion I came to last night is that Greer is a famous feminist because she is the one fellas in the mainstream press permit us to have. " - the irony here is that this was a piece published in the mainstreamest of press - News Limited. However, David Penberthy, the Editor of that site, is about to marry Gillard Minister Kate Ellis, who is not a member of Ms Kovac's poisonous little Emily's List "cool girls' club".

Janet Albrechtsen, a genuinely high-achieving woman with no need for special "feminist" treatment to make her way, has this to say about the sort of feminism that is practised by Kovac and other careerist feminists

"She wants to win people over with emotion, not reason. She wants “rallies, online happenings and a fundraising event or two ... and while you’re at it put out a goddamn badge or something I can wear! The human rights revolution is just a T-shirt away.” "

While that was in relation to a specific campaign, it goes to the heart of institutionalised feminist thinking. They don't want us to think too hard about consequences or outcomes - just wear the T-shirt and then everybody will know you're on the right side and can cheer you, whatever you say.

Gillard tried this and it failed because she didn't recognise that most women are not feminists in the careerist way that she is. They actually like being "princesses" to a "prince". They like strong men and they like being taken care of by such a man. Sure, they like the idea of being able to work if they feel like it, but they aren't too keen on having to if they don't.

The feminist women who have risen to dominate educational bureacracies (Gillard's personal special interest group, for good reason) have little in common with those ordinary women and they have based years of policy on slogans and T-shirts. "Girls can do anything" (but the "boys can do anything campaign was scrapped before it began). "Girls: building the future" (while boys get TAFE stickers).

The sexism that the article addresses is very real and it is very damaging. It will not be changed by the current educational policy-makers and they will use their influence in selecting their successors to ensure that those people are themselves T-shirt wearing sloganeers who will propagate the error.

Unlike past "patriarchal" domination of such positions, the present iteration has a deliberate policy of self-perpetuation. It is not simply reflecting the society, it is trying to create it. It is a disgrace.

Oh, I don't know, Anti.

The boys can do anything meme is still running fairly strong in mainstream society.

Take a peek at LEGO, for a child's introduction to societal formulation.

Boy's LEGO is all about doing and building (linking well with established roles in society) usually accompanied by a blokey gruff "HEY!".

http://city.lego.com/en-us/?icmp=COUSFR2City

Or adventurous

http://starwars.lego.com/en-us/default.aspx?icmp=COUSFR3StarWars

(To name but a couple of the myriad available)

The girl's products are something called "friends" where they get to spend time with "friends" in pretty pink settings or where they get to go shopping or some such girlie lark

http://friends.lego.com/en-us/?icmp=COUSFR4Friends

So perhaps things aren't as bad as you think : )

Don't be too sure, Poirot...

"So perhaps things aren't as bad as you think : )"

What are we to make of this young, black, refugee, muslim, Queensland tertiary educated, mechanical engineer, female who obviously doesn't realise she is meant to be a 'welfare for lifer' and not working in a male environment?

https://griffithreview.com/edition-40-women-power/on-the-rigs

Sure, she is only one in a crew of twenty-five. But it could be the thin edge of the wedge...

Yes, WmTrevor - thin edge of the wedge, indeed.

Just a little more on the LEGO products.

Check out the difference between the girl aimed "Friends" products and the more masculine flavoured "City" products.

http://friends.lego.com/en-us/products/41008-heartlake-city-pool/
(scroll down for other products)

http://city.lego.com/en-us/products/

Obviously the takeover hasn't reached LEGO yet.

Lego is a commercial product and it pitches its products at the prospective buyers. It is not trying to create any societal changes, just to sell as much stock as possible.

The fact that it uses the models that it does shows that those are the ones that young girls and boys aspire to, and so do their parents. The fact that our social constructionalists have failed to change that despite 50 or so years (nearly 3 generations) of deliberately structured policy designed to do so is a pretty strong argument for the case that they are badly misguided.

I'm not sure what the woman on the drill rig has to do with anything.

In the meantime, we are still training girls to be professionals and boys to be process workers, in the certain knowledge that most of the young women who become such professionals will decide within about 10 years or so of completing uni to take a lot of time away from their career to have children and will expect to be supported by government and their employer to do so. We also know that about 40% of them will not have the support of the father of their child, other than the financial support that is extorted by government under threat. We also know that most of them will never return to full time work having had those children.

We also know that the men who might have supported them will instead be locked into unstable, casualised jobs and that many will become either long-term unemployed or will end up as disability pensioners, often for reasons of mental health that are directly attributable to their life outcomes.

But that's OK, LEGO makes toys that show boy construction workers and girl princesses...