Saturday, March 06, 2010

Oscars: No woman ever won Best Director

From experience I know how KAK it is when you have been given something simply because you were a woman. But soon the Oscar for Best Director will probably be given to a woman since the following has come to light:

By Guy White, 6 March 2010

Just heard that no woman has ever won Oscars for Best Director. We are half a century into women’s liberation and still women can’t do it. Women achieve success in politics, but that is very subjective. (And that's all the Oscars are now days - politics.)

But it seems that in places were one has to be the best (as opposed to most popular), men dominate.

This is not caused by women being diverted to different fields. Women right (sic), poetry much more than men, they cook more, design clothes more. Yet, at the very top, men dominate. Top chefs, top designers, top poets are overwhelmingly male. A few women will pop up, but 90% of the best are make, regardless of the field.

There are two reasons for this. One is the greater IQ range for men than women. This also explains why most degenerates are male. The homeless, the drunks, the criminals are 90% male too.

Another reason is that women multitask, while men concentrate on a given task. Women had to do it to raise many children, as well as while gathering food.

Men had to concentrate on one task not just when hunting thousands of years ago, but as recently as … the Iraq and Afghanistan wars.

If you are sitting in a foxhole and not concentrating on just one task, you will get killed within minutes.

This is why autism is predominantly a male disease. It is sometimes thought of as a hyper-male condition because it is (probably) triggered by excess testosterone at a particular point during pregnancy. Autism is concentration taken to extreme. People concentrate on one thing and find it impossible to anything else, leafing to everything from school problems to social inadequacy.

In normal males, however, focusing on one issue at a time means that men are more successful in their careers, more likely get promoted and most definitely more like to become great at what they do.

Women want to spread themselves among many interests from job to kids to clothes to culture. This is not bad in general and I would not advise against it, but it is also not the way to win a Nobel Prize, become a CEO, develop cure for cancer or become the best clothes designer.

To outcompete (sic) every other designer, chef, poet, artist, one needs ro (sic) obsessively dedicate oneself to success, a
mong (sic) other things. (he had problems concentrating on doing one thing only i.e. writing properly! LOL).

Women don’t do it, which is fine. Not every person should be a CEO and it may be best for everyone if more people tried to be good parents rather than climbing the corporate scale.

But the problem comes when feminists incite women to complain that they weren’t moved up the corporate scale when they were not on the scale at all, when instead of working over-time, they worked part-time or not at all while raising kids.

You have a choice in life. If you choose to play with your kids and to read Cosmo instead of corporate finance documents, please shut up about the glass ceiling. It’s not the glass ceiling that’s responsible, it’s the fact that you are still reading Cosmo at 50 years if age. (Ouch! He he)

2 Opinion(s):

Exzanian said...

Nice post FE! it reminds me of my CEO. She is incredibly successful, but she flits from one project to another, pulling us one way and then another. I sometimes miss the old Alpha male leadership of white South African males. Boy, did they get things done!

FishEagle said...

@ Exzanian. Oh I feel for you. But I've encountered men in the work place flitting from one project to the next as well. The fucker moves on before his failures become exposed. Absolutely no integrity.