Re: Woman-hating, Racist, insecure, little man

Richard Henley (
Sat, 09 Nov 1996 10:55:02 -0600

> I read this piece of mindless drivel at first out of curiousity. I'm
> surprised by your ignorance and your need to place blame on other members
> of society, namely Black People or as you called them "colored." You are
> a very sad, shallow, pathetic, fearful and insecure woman-hating little
> man. I
> especially found intriguing your need to demean others and place yourself
> in an authoritative position, over again Black people and white women or
> as you referred to, "our own women." I believe it was with the suffrage
> movement, and bra burning in the 1920's, that "your women" won the right
> to vote. Hell, in 1905 Grover Cleveland said, "sensible and responsible
> women do not want to vote."
> You also speak of "deteriorating workplaces" where you've worked, and that
> you found this even when you switched jobs. Did you ever stop to think
> that maybe, just maybe, it's you. Your job performance or ability was
> lacking or didn't quite make the grade. You strike me as a bit paranoid, &
> like maybe as a child you took the little yellow school bus.
> I just hope your taking your medication when the doctor tells you to. You
> are very sociopathic.
> On 1 Nov 1996, John Anonymous MacDonald wrote:
> > Females Lead US to Last Place
> >
> > About twenty years ago, I was a member of a white-collar,
> > professional team at a very well known (and supposedly
> > prestigious) corporation. Each week, the group manager would
> > assemble the team around a conference table, and each team
> > member would give a personal status report regarding his progress
> > during the previous week. I remember the first meeting which I
> > attended. Virtually no work progress was reported by anyone. All
> > that was heard were extremely lame excuses, such as "I called
> > so-and-so, but his line was busy, so I couldn't get my work done;"
> > "My pencil broke, and the supply cabinet was locked so I couldn't get
> > my work done;" or "I sneezed, and I went home sick, so I couldn't get
> > my work done." I expected the group manager to go into a fit of
> > rage, but his reaction was one of pure complacency.
> >
> > I was on that project for two years, and the first-week sample was
> > quite an accurate predictor of what things would be like in the
> > larger time frame. Somewhere along the line I went to a coworker,
> > and I asked him: "Who do you think is the stellar performer of this
> > group?" He replied, "What we have here is a twenty-way tie for
> > last place." At the time, I thought his response was very humorous.
> > Little did I know that that response would form the insight for an
> > analysis which would emerge twenty years later.
> >
> > I eventually left that job and moved on to the next one. Pretty much
> > the same things were observed: extremely low levels of morale,
> > productivity, and quality of output. I kept saying to myself: "It can
> > only be these two employers. Things have to be better elsewhere.
> > The profit motive of a business enterprise has to force high
> > performance standards, otherwise the entity will go defunct." So I
> > moved on to the third employer with high expectations, and what
> > did I find? More of the same! All along I had a nagging suspicion
> > that equal employment opportunity had something to do with all of
> > this, but I could not put my finger on it. What made things
> > especially difficult to understand was the conspicuous absence of
> > people of color in my profession. How in the world could I correlate
> > the promotion of equality for the downtrodden with the problems of
> > my profession when the downtrodden were nowhere to be found?
> > This really hampered the formulation of my analysis.
> >
> > What made matters much worse for the formulation of my analysis
> > was that I, like so many others, was a product of the sophistries
> > which had made the rounds at the time during which the first civil
> > rights bills were being debated. The promoters of those new laws
> > made assurances that equal employment opportunities would be
> > reserved only for the most qualified of job candidates among the
> > protected segments of the population, so there would be absolutely
> > no negative impact on the world of employment. To the contrary,
> > they further assured that the new entrants into the employment
> > arena would enhance the competitive environment thereby raising
> > prevailing performance standards and compensation levels (this lie
> > being in stark contrast to the later abomination which evolved:
> > affirmative action.) To compound matters even further, I really had
> > myself fooled. I was so self-confident that I firmly believed that
> > nothing, but nothing - equal employment opportunity included -
> > could ever impair my own worth in the marketplace.
> >
> > While the workplace steadily deteriorated before my very eyes, it
> > similarly could not escape my attention that as the years were
> > going by, neighborhood after neighborhood and whole cities were
> > deteriorating with increasing decay of the infrastructure and ever
> > escalating crime statistics. Again, a suspicion nagged at me that
> > the promotion of equality had to be responsible for all of this, but
> > still there was no germ of logic for the formulation of an analysis.
> >
> > As luck would have it, a number of unlikely occurrences converged
> > upon me, especially in the last two years or so, and as a result of
> > these occurrences (which need not be detailed here), it seemed like
> > the floodgates of inspiration opened for me, and all of my
> > suspicions regarding government enforced equality congealed into
> > an analysis.
> >
> > Let's go back to my coworker's humorous comment: "What we have
> > here is a twenty way tie for last place," and let's consider a TV
> > game show with three contestants. What would happen if the
> > producer of the show revised the rules such that the second place
> > contestant and not the first place contestant would be declared the
> > day's champion winning the grand prize? Would any contestant ever
> > depress his response button? Of course not! You would have a three
> > way tie for last place! Declaring the second place contestant the
> > winner in a three way contest is pretty extreme, so let's consider a
> > baseball league of 1,000 teams which institutes a rule that the
> > second place team takes home the trophy. What will you see? A
> > 1,000 way tie for last place!
> >
> > Of course, the real world arena of employment will not work as
> > swiftly and precisely as the game show or baseball examples above,
> > but don't let this fool you. Workplace perceptions are such that
> > jobs are not being awarded on the basis of competitive merit, but
> > on the basis of legal/political considerations, and so everyone in
> > the "corrupted" competitive arena of employment is finding himself
> > moving towards a multi-way tie for last place, AND you will see
> > this sort of thing happening even if the least preferred job
> > candidate is never awarded a job by anyone! All that it takes is the
> > awarding of a job to the second place job candidate under the
> > dictates of a competition corrupting law! As a general rule, who is
> > perceived to be the second place job candidate? The white female!
> > And there were plenty of these in my profession!
> >
> > If there is no clear-cut, discernible reward associated with being
> > number one, then there is no point to being number one, so no one
> > will strive to be number one. Prevailing performance standards
> > will decline all the way down to the bare minimum which will still
> > allow a worker to keep his job and paycheck with that bare
> > minimum itself declining day by day.
> >
> > To view things from another perspective, under equal employment
> > opportunity you have job candidates who assume the following
> > attitude: "I don't have to elevate myself to the expectations of
> > anyone. Employers have to take me as I come." Equal housing
> > opportunity has dwelling seekers assuming the very same kind of
> > attitude, and so you see a downward bidding spiral of performance
> > standards in housing as well as in employment.
> >
> > But there is more - much more! The subject of declining wage
> > levels has become quite an issue in the media. Depending on whom
> > you listen to, real wages have dropped by as much as 50% over the
> > last 25 years. I have personally witnessed real wage erosion of
> > more than 50% in the last thirteen years or so in my own
> > profession, yet newscasters have said that economists are at a
> > loss to explain this wage erosion.
> >
> > The smallest of memories holds the explanation for this wage
> > erosion. An Economics teacher of mine stated that markets will not
> > tolerate transactions whose prices are greater than what the
> > market will bear. When asked what would happen if such
> > transactions did, in fact, take place, he answered that the markets
> > will go into "self-correction" mode whereby price would be brought
> > into line with value. This subject was never touched upon again in
> > the remainder of my Economics education apparently because such
> > transactions were considered to be so rare as not to warrant
> > further attention.
> >
> > If a seller makes a decent effort to peddle his offering in the
> > marketplace, he will eventually get a handle on what the market
> > will bear for his offering, this being what the highest bidder will
> > be willing to pay for that offering. The same holds true for a job
> > seeker (labor seller).
> >
> > It may be a brutal fact, but prior to equal employment opportunity,
> > the coloreds, no matter how hard they tried, could not command the
> > same compensation levels as whites. The simple conclusion here is
> > that white pay is more than what the market will bear for coloreds.
> > Coloreds were led to believe that the passage of a civil law
> > mandating equal pay could circumvent the natural laws of
> > Economics for them - a false bill of goods, indeed!.
> >
> > The passage of the equal employment opportunity laws created an
> > obligation (or should I say liability) on the part of employers to pay
> > coloreds wages equal to those of whites, this being, at least
> > initially, a price which was greater than what the market would
> > bear for the coloreds. So what has happened in the last thirty years
> > or so? The employment market unleashed self-correcting forces to
> > bring the price of coloreds into line with their value per the natural
> > law of Economics.
> >
> > The self-correcting forces of the marketplace to which I allude are
> > inflation, wage concessions, downsizings, mergers and
> > acquisitions, exporting of jobs to foreign countries ("Globalism"),
> > the rush to automation, the outsourcing of work to non-union shops,
> > unpaid overtime, the utilization of immigrant, temporary, and
> > part-time workers, conversion of workers to independent
> > contractors, the elimination of benefits, the relocation of
> > operations to low-wage states, and more.
> >
> > So you see, while the [real] wages of the unpreferred job candidates
> > are being brought down into line with their value, the wages of the
> > preferred job candidates are likewise being brought down because,
> > by civil law, wages must be equal!
> >
> > Now for the shocker. Some of you may be thinking that this wage
> > erosion does not apply to you because your employer does not hire
> > any unpreferred workers. The irony here is that the least preferred
> > job candidate does not even have to be awarded a job to affect the
> > wage structure where you work; all that he has to do is be in the
> > employment market with certain laws attached to his back thereby
> > offering a threat of a claim for equal wages. A discriminatory
> > employer holds the lowest concept of value for the least preferred
> > job candidate, so this employer will be least likely to set forth
> > incentives for the least preferred job candidate to sue for a job
> > with equal (that is, premium) wages. In other words, your boss will
> > not pay you white wages just because he likes to maintain a lily
> > white shop. No! He's more concerned about being sued by someone
> > who isn't worth the money being sought.
> >
> > Conclusions: We see that the concept of equality as it pertains to
> > society and Economics is an extremely faulty notion - a notion
> > which will only work in the downward direction for performance
> > standards and compensation levels. The insistence that further
> > efforts be made to effectuate "equality" will only accelerate our
> > society's movement towards collapse. (And who is most savagely
> > aggressive when it comes to enforcing their so-called "rights"
> > under the law? Why, our very own females!)
> >
> >
> >Dear John:
Very well said. Ignore your detractors. They can not stand the truth.
Richard Henley