When Gender Bias Becomes Gender Bashing
Accusations of Gender Bias
When is it Gender Bias?
When Geraldine Ferrara became the running mate as the first female VP, the ripple effect was mild compared to the effect of Hillary Clinton running as a presidential candidate. Even with Geraldine Ferrara running as second in line to the presidency, the undertones were clear: Take Ferrara down.
One of the operatives of todays mostly male billionaire owned media is to publish bias to influence how people think. This works for the most impressionable whose inability to employ rationalization into their cognitive thinking allows absorptions of bias more easily. For the most intellectual, this type of bias only causes further research to garner supporting facts.
When the media first vetted Geraldine Ferrara, they immediately reported not just her annual income, but that of her husband as well. When John McCain selected Sarah Palin as his running mate, the media rarely mentioned Palin's husband or his income. Bias? Then, when it became obvious that Ferrara indeed could become the VP, biased media dug deeper into her husband's income, she rightfully refused to discuss it. As a result of media digging, her husband John Zaccaro, a business owner was made to appear to be a crook because he obtained bank financing which he withdrew. To the press, this was a fraudulent deal of $1,000. In consideration of the many deals of one Donald Trump, this petty accusation was a deliberate attempt to force Ferrara out of the presidential race. What the press didn't dare publish about John Zaccaro was his true business profile:
His business, P. Zaccaro Co., Inc. has continued into a 3rd geneation, as a privately held real estate development, management and investment firm in Manhattan. He was the principal for half a century as a broker, developer, manager and principal. Among his past clients are New York University and Emigrant Savings and the Bowery Savings Banks, not exactly the lower status types of clients. His property development across New York, Connecticut and Pennsylvania is also to his credit. In addition, he was appointed by the coursts of New York, Kings and Queens Counties as a trustee in bankruptcy and he also served various independent schools in New York City including Convent of the Sacred Heart and Saint David's School. He was a member of the board of directors of the co-op where he also resided.
All of this points to a kind of gender bias that seeks to destroy women in big business and government by assigning the actions of husband and children to the gender that is least welcomed to the "man's world."
Many things point to a very different gender bias men refuse to acknowledge, much less address. If women vote for a president based on solid studies of the candidate's past history and political platform, woe be to the woman if the candidate happens to be a man who is attractive. In this case, men say, "She's only voting for him because she thinks he's handsome." This gives very little credibility to women using their brains to choose their candidate. He votes for male candidates his entire voting lifetime. She votes for a female candidate and "SHE" is gender biased.
There is a peculiar pecking order some women miss and men invariably employ. When they are making choices for any position, it goes like this:
1. White male
2. Hispanic male
3. All other males
After all, in this peculiar pecking order, whenever it's time for a job promotion, the pecking order is in full force. Even U.S. EEO laws have not changed this male mental peculiarity. To get a better perspective of the male theories on gender bias, consider the sudden onset of support for male candidates and the lack thereof for female candidates. In the U.S. Congress today, women politicians are outnumbered by 20 to 1.
Is this an aberration or just male gender bias unspoken? Women know they are not necessarily outnumbered in business, just in those hallowed Ivory Tower Executive offices where at present women are still outnumbered.
If she chooses a woman to replace a man in any job, she is gender biased whether or not the female replacement has equal qualifications.
Does it come down to a misunderstanding of the word "fair?"
It is true men have a very different opinion of what is and isn't "fair" than women do. Perhaps in early Neanderthal civilizations females were considered an unfortunate weak, though necessary appendage that only their female procreative skills were their saving grace. After all, Neanderthal tribesmen needed regular reinforcments to protect their existence from varying types of predators, human and animal. Meanwhile back in the Neanderthal caves, women were sorting out battles between the kids, dealing with sibling rivalries and the daily grind of life in a meager existence.
Neanderthal men decided what was fair at the end of a spear. Neanderthal women on the other hand had to decide what was fair to each of their offspring in order that these Neanderkids should survive. Of course, the Neanderkids knew never to get in the way of the males in their tribes. The outcome might be quite severe.
From the earliest civilizations, there has been a general acceptance of an awed reverence for the male of the species, while women were valued only as procreative mates who made life less harsh.
Women as Spinning Wheels
In many ways, women are spinning wheels that have to go around and around to get from Point "A" to Point "B" if they expect any level of advancement. What works in the "Man's World" doesn't work for women who try desperately to get ahead. Become an Alpha Woman and you crown yourself with more labels provided by the male gender who claim they are not "gender biased." They are gender biased, but they prefer not to confront it.
Just as in the earliest days of civilization, women were not expected to protect themselves, varying generations have taught women they are too weak to protect themselves or their children. Many women fall into the "Dependency Trap" that impels them to view their entire existence through the prism of their fathers and husbands. Obedient little girls who rarely mature without a man's assistance. They learn that "Daddy will always take care of them" early on.
The Growth of Alpha Women
Life is ever evolving. For many centuries women were little more than chattel, weren't allowed to "own" anything and if fact, had to be "bought" by a future spouse with a "dowry." The first women to actually emerge from the "Little Woman" stereotype were the women of the 1940s who manned the assembly lines in factories that produced military weaponry. They were labeled, "Rosie the Riveter" and were the first women to wear pants as part of their work uniforms. The minute their spouses came home from the war, all the "Rosies" returned to their former invisible status. In the US, Canada and the UK, these once very important assets to winning World War II were forced to hand over their jobs to men.
The growth of the Alpha Woman began with the rebellious women of the 1960s. Not only did they break all of the stereotypical rules their mothers demanded of them; but, they were the first "Viet Nam War Wives" to divorce men that war had so seriously changed for all time. These were the young women who were allowed to attend college. Albeit, most of their studies and degrees were limited to liberal arts. Few went on to medical school, took bar exams or became CEOs of their own businesses. Yet, the unrest among women throughout the 1960s, 70s and 80s was to spawn a generation of women who demanded equality and the removal of men in decisions that affected women's rights and their lives. Up to this time, all government legislation regarding women's rights was in the hands of men.
The Alpha Women Who Dared
The reality of Alpha Women everywher is that they dare to tread where "no man has gone before." For their bravery and courage, they are labeled "gender biased" because they support the female gender. When all is considered, it does seem rather obnoxious for men to continue to insist that women support only the male gender. Alpha women dare to be independent and rather than "Take Care of Me," they project the "I can take care of myself" image of the financially independent woman who makes her own decisions.
The most outstanding Alpha Women who followed in Geraldine Ferrara's footsteps are Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, New York Senator and U.S. Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton, Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Dancer Debby Allen, Actress Sharon Stone, CEO, actress and TV celebrity, Oprah Winfrey and Consumer Advocate Senator Elizabeth Warren. There are many, many more Alpha Women and their numbers are growing. These women will dare to overturn centuries of male dominance over female lives. Education plays a huge role in the advancements women make. In the words of the famed Prime Minister, Margaret Thatcher, "If you want something said, ask a man. If you want something done, ask a woman."
When Gender Bias is Gender Bashing
As more and more women begin to emerge as public figures, it becomes more evident that a double standard still exists. Some of the best of these examples are blatant or more subtle. For example, when men say, "She can't be trusted," what they really tell women is that they can't measure up to men's standards of "trust." Until you look at the enormous lack of trust men continue to exhibit in business and government. Some men say, "I'll vote for a woman, just not this woman." When the only other option is the male candidate? Worse are the men who insult female intelligence by patronizing the "little lady" by viewing her physical features before they listen to what she is saying. Or, by becoming conveniently deaf when women speak truths men have refused to confront for centuries.
Gender bias becomes gender bashing when it demeans women who possess the same education and job experience but are refused the same opportunities. Gender bias becomes gender bashing when a women of equal intelligence is relegated to the least important positions in business and government.
Most women agree this is not what we want for our daughters and granddaughters. We want their futures to be based entirely on their abilities. Not on their gender.