Diversity

Trudeau channels the Griswolds

008C1518-61AC-4EF0-95D3-9754C7DBE3A2.jpeg

Remember Chevy Chase in European Vacation attempting to be savvy, cool and fashionable by dressing like the Italians but it going so horribly wrong?  Well Canadian PM Justin Trudeau has tried to instill his sense of being culturally in touch by dressing his family as Indians. Even the Indians think it’s a bit much. Perhaps Indian PM Modi should return the favour and dress like a lumberjack provided he can get his axe through customs on his next visit to Canada. Typical patronizing liberal trying to show us all his grasp on diversity and cultural appropriation. When Trudeau swings through Japan will he wear a samurai outfit resplendent with a chonmage top knot? What an embarrassment!

We thought the cardboard cut outs of himself distributed to Canadian embassies was a joke. This ratchets it multiple levels. Can’t wait for Candice Bergen to shred him over his Indian clothing choices in coming sessions of Canadian parliament.

Which countries had the most search interest in Valentine’s Day?

13017C16-75E9-4B3C-BA49-29B5B2C6A0CB.jpeg

Iran

Syria

Iraq

South Africa

India

Bangladesh

Equador

Honduras

Nigeria, Egypt and Saudi Arabia also featured.

…according to Google Trends

Interesting to see so many predominantly non-Christian countries feature relatively higher than St Valentine’s Day searches.

Valentine’s Day according to Google Trends

642A6804-D75A-42D0-8CF4-10C04AA4AF7F.jpeg

Gender stereotypes? Google Trends just threw a spanner in the works in a study on Valentine’s Day gift searches for a loved one. It seeems like women are far more proactive and engaged in searching for gift ideas than their boyfriends appear to be. What could explain it?

Could it be that men simply are too hard wired/unimaginative? Many women could attest to their men sticking with boring flowers, chocolates, and dinner reservations through experience or a sense of duty.

Tales out of school. At my old firm I used to buy 120 individually wrapped cakes for my female clients on Valentine’s Day and spend all morning delivering them personally. Never did I receive more sincere thank you’s for thinking more creatively than dropping off boring chocolates. So a note to the lazy men out there – women seem more likely to praise the “effort” over the “result” – hopefully ladies can confirm this so we can get “equality” back into Valentine’s search engines.

Could it be that males are harder to shop for causing women to have to search harder? Could it be that women are kinder and more thoughtful souls than men?

Most women get that men probably don’t want flowers or chocolates, but what will he like? Season tickets to watch his favourite team? A sports magazine? Golf balls (dangerous territory if he’s a keen golfer), motorcycle parts (extremely high risk)? A tie? Socks? iPhone goods? Underwear? Don’t laugh. Studies show that women are behind 80% of the purchases of men’s undies. Indeed it may well be that men are pickier (or lazier) about gifts causing women to search 2-3x more.

If we look at the above chart it seems that women searching for gifts for their boyfriends keeps making higher highs as the deadline approaches. Men too albeit at a flatter trajectory.

Maybe the devil in the data is what Google could really do for men and women. Instead of judging a partner’s devotion by the scale of money dished out on such a grossly commercial day, perhaps Google could let one know how much they meant to their significant other by the timeline on when the Valentine’s Day search began and to avoid gaming the system informing hours spent online during the process.

There are millions of factors which trigger Valentine’s decisions but isn’t that what diversity is all about – freedom of choice.

All or nothing

1D851C4F-A2F7-4D1E-B3F7-B45775DA3115

The 2018 Gold Coast Commonwealth Games kicks off on April 4th and surprise, surprise the volunteer guidebook is requesting gender neutral language so as not to offend anyone. They shouldn’t use “ladies & gentlemen” or “boys & girls” but “everyone” to make the games more inclusive. Yet more surrender to politically correct nonsense. Never a truer heart than a volunteer. Yet even their goodwill must be indoctrinated to the grievance culture of the left.

Sadly the very events run completely contrary to that ideology. Events are openly segregated by gender – male and female only. Will the Men’s 100m be called that? Will the Women’s 200m medley be called something else? So while spectators will be encouraged to suck in the political correct fanfare, the athletes will run, jump, swim and wrestle in the name of their gender.

Seriously if the games organizers are so wanting to have volunteers pretend to treat certain people who subjectively identify as something they’re biologically not, why not remove gender and have women and men and any others compete in the same events? Then if men clean up 90% of the events that will be promoting equality. It has been suggested before to give handicaps to certain athletes to even it out. So a female could technically run faster than Usain Bolt if given the right weightings. CM wrote about this stupidity  here.

Alternatively why not accommodate events for all 63 genders. That way an athlete competing in the Feminine Bisexual Hermaphromale 100m maybe by (sorry I don’t know the correct pronoun)-self, therefore guaranteed to get the world and commonwealth records and a gold medal. In fact if by (xie?)self xie (?) could smash all records held by the likes of Michael Phelps in a single games by being the sole athlete. That is the only fair way to hold games if true progressive ideology is to be forced upon us. Everyone competes in their own race.

Finally how could the Commonwealth Games even be held given all member states are former colonies of the British Empire? How about a smothering of white privilege layered on top to truly make the games “inclusive”. Yet more proof the left apparatchiks can’t even get the grievance manual right. Let’s hope they don’t read this because it will call for an emergency reprint requiring more trees to be cut down.

Is yoga racist?

5197D77E-62FA-4049-807D-AB024E475245.png

A Michigan State University religious studies professor Shreena Gandhi has claimed that white people who do yoga contribute to a “system of power, privilege, and oppression… White Americans should learn yoga’s history, acknowledge the cultural appropriation they engage in and possibly reduce the cost of yoga classes for poor people, a group that often includes people of color and recent immigrants, such as Indian women to whom this practice rightfully belong.”

Wow. Who knew that those whites doing the downward facing dog were poking their posteriors to the poor and minority groups? How can whites overlook this? Why aren’t they donating to yoga scholarships or at the very least paying double their yoga lessons to subsidize them? Can we see the statistics or proof showing how the poor, people of colour and recently arrived immigrants value yoga as their highest priority injustice?

Every person who has done yoga in CM’s experience has done it for the health, meditative and stretching benefits. Anyway let’s see what minorities say about yoga.

According to an article in the Washington based  The Healthy African titled ‘Namaste : Black Girls journey to Yoga’ it noted the following,

In my journey to being a healthier individual I have come to realize that a healthy body cannot be attained without a healthy mind. Yoga is a practice that truly takes this holistic view of health . It is not about competition or singular priorities…I find that Yoga is a practice many more women of color should be looking to as a means of attaining a healthy lifestyle.

The author isn’t asking women of colour (presumably her audience) to even out the ethnicity imbalance in yoga classrooms but seek it for the health benefits. Perhaps Professor Gandhi should check that minorities follow the same guidelines on the history of yoga.

Afrogirl Fitness also wrote an article titled ‘Yoga for Christians’

As a Christian, I am always questioned about my yoga practice and its connection to my Christian faith. The question recently posed to me was “As a person of faith, are there aspects of yoga that you omit from your practice?” Currently, the answer is yes, simply because there are so many aspects of yoga that I am still learning and applying to my Christian faith. Yoga goes beyond the physical practice (asana) as stated in the yoga sutras, with the ultimate goal being self –realization.

No it doesn’t seem African American yogis that are Christians are crying out for equality in the classroom either.

Rina Jakubowicz was born in Venezuela to a mother from Cuba and father from Argentina. She moved to Miami at age 4 and now lives in Los Angeles. She noted that not many Hispanics were doing yoga due to language difficulties and has started to promote yoga classes held in Spanish. She said to Yoga Journal,

Well, a top priority for me was to get yoga out to people and use it to help inspire others and get them to incorporate it into their lives…Yoga hasn’t been presented to Latinos. They might feel like it is not accessible to them—there haven’t been a lot of Spanish yoga classes…If you make it available, people will start doing it.

Then there is the story of Rodney Yee who has been in the yoga game since 1980. He wrote on his homepage, “His appearance on Oprah in 1999 helped catapult Yoga into the mainstream. Other highlights in his long career as a premiere Yoga teacher include the co-owning of Piedmont Yoga Studio, his vast output of videos with Gaiam, and his eloquent workshops around the world.”

Surely Mr Yee is the root of the problem and the target of any attacks by the professor. Had he not catapulted yoga into the mainstream then we wouldn’t have as many whites doing yoga. Shame on Mr Yee for creating jobs and helping more people of all backgrounds access healthy lifestyles. Shame on Oprah for promoting him.

In summary it seems more and more  blacks, Hispanics and Asians merely embody yoga’s spirituality to help develop PERSONAL growth. It doesn’t appear to be anything else that’s driven it.

Perhaps Prof. Gandhi should be seeking her own personal growth by crawling out from beneath her own yoga mat before the Dean sees how completely lame her teaching methods are.

Liberalism: let’s find a cure.

Zip It or be Zapped

EE607F58-63C2-419F-8427-7C4C0E6A322F.jpeg

It seems that everywhere we turn these days someone else is raising a flag to suggest “we need to move with the times.”  What are “the times?” Whose times are we required to move for? Mine? Yours? Theirs? A chat on social media the other day raised the conversation of an HR director saying that he would not sign off on a hire who didn’t agree with his subjective view over a trivial subject. He argued that it was for the best interests of diversity and inclusion not to hire someone who wasn’t offended by said subject. CM retorted “so if I don’t agree with your thinking on a topic which is completely unrelated to the job task that I might be hypothetically the most qualified for, you’ll sink it on that alone…sounds like a totalitarian power trip.” This confirmed the ‘unconscious bias, conscious bias‘ piece on HR last week.’ 2+2=5. HR departments are becoming all powerful autocrats.

It is hard to know whether to laugh or cry! The conversation went further to suggest that I simply must accept change on the grounds of diversity. That word is chucked around as loosely as a Casanova saying “I love you” to his multiple conquests. It simply seeks to force compliance. Surely all things work better when there is mutual buy-in rather than threatening to burn people at the stake. Why is my subjectivity any more or less valuable than someone else’s?

The idea of forcing conformity is dangerous ground. As long as one’s views don’t openly impact others why should it matter? Why should HR apparatchiks use bullying behaviour which goes against the grain of every appropriate workplace behaviour training seminar staff are required to take? Well it is only “some” behaviour. So much for equality in the workplace.

Just like the same sex marriage (SSM) debate. Anyone with a rainbow screen saver could proudly display it in the office without attracting a whimper because they were ‘on message’. Anyone that didn’t believe it and had a “Vote NO” as a computer screen background would have been summoned before HR for hate speech and reprimanded or worse, sacked. Is that freedom of opinion? Is that diversity? Or inclusion? Accept or face the consequences is hardly a way to encourage it. Diversity and inclusion only creates division and exclusion because only some people are allowed to voice free speech.  When the government funded Diversity Council tells Australian workers that the use of the word ‘guys’ is offensive then just how far are we willing to trade everyday freedoms and cultural norms? If one is triggered by the use of the word ‘guys’ or a preferred pronoun then they need a shrink not an HR department to help them.

The sad reality is that diversity should be won on the grounds of the argument rather than legislation. Just like the F1 race queen ban from this year. It doesn’t much matter to CM personally on what the F1 wants to do. Go on the MotoGP website and there is a “Paddock GirlssectionTo suddenly reverse a decision it so actively promotes would be utter hypocrisy. While the need to halt the objectification of women argument is bandied about, the women who do it are clearly happy to be objectified for a price. Instead of viewers being told to “get with the times” shouldn’t they be hammering the message to the umbrella girls to tell them they’re letting down their own side? Could it be they can exploit their beauty for some decent coin because they don’t share offense over the issue? Their looks are a virtue in their eyes. Are they wrong to use it their advantage? Would a Harvard MBA graduate apply to McDonalds for a cash register role so as to check his or her privelege to those that weren’t so lucky to study there?

Whether one likes it or not why not let sponsors decide how they want to spend their ad dollars and let consumers bury them if they find the use of advertising across a cleavage as “not with the times”? Why state control? Casey Stoner ended up marrying his pit girl and has a wonderful family now. If 10% of teams decided to keep pit girls but got 75% of the TV coverage before the start of the race could you blame them? Advertising is literally all about ‘exposure’. Or would race control demand the camera operators avoid them?

Further to that, perhaps F1 should ban the popular cockpit radio transmissions of drivers like Kimi Raikkonen who drop the F-bomb every other lap. Or is profanity now ‘in with the times’?

Should the forthcoming Tokyo Motor Show ban the use of scantily clad women standing next to cars? Last year Porsche, VW and Audi had several slick cut male models parading their products. Ladies were lining up to take selfies with these foreign himbos. If not for objectification, then what? Girls could be heard saying “cho kakkoi” (so handsome). As a male was I feeling insulted and triggered? No. I figured it was time to sign up for the gym, visit Hugo Boss for a sharp suit and book an appointment at a $300 hair stylist after I got back in shape. If I had made a song and dance about feeling uncomfortable at handsome men being treated like slabs of meat would I be granted the same rights to being offended? Not for a second.

Should pretty women be banned from starring in adverts?  Cosmetics companies have products that are pitched pretty much solely toward women but no one bats an eyelid when Giselle pouts a lipstick. Luxury goods stores also cater predominantly to women. No shortage of flesh showing off shoes, handbags or miniskirts. Why no outrage? Should Subaru be raked over coals for targeting same sex couples in its adverts? No. If it feels that is a market it wishes to tap then it should feel free to push for it. If I was offended then I could simply refuse to buy an Impreza WRX. I shouldn’t have a right to tell Subaru who it can and can’t sell to. That’s accepting diversity. Not enforcing my view of the world on others with respect to Subaru. Choice.

Put simply why should the subjective opinions of people (within reason) be such that we must comfort the wowsers at all times? Yarra Council is telling it’s 1,000 staff it mustn’t use the word “Australia Day” to refer to Janury 26, a Day celebrated since 1815! Aussie nurses and midwives are being told to check their white privelege and admit their colonial roots should a patient demand so. Shouldn’t the safe delivery of children be the only priority than have a “code of conduct” to force behaviours that have probably never if ever been an issue in decades? Bad bedside manner for healthcarers is one thing less likely to do with race, gender or sexual orientation than individual attitudes.

Still the message is zip it or be zapped. Next time you’re being told it is for diversity start running for the hills. Your subjective opinion is as equal as anyone elses provided you don’t disagree with the Marxist’s definition of ‘with the times

 

Midwives, check your white privilege

54509EFF-E678-4737-9523-E0F8CB0B3341.jpeg

The Code of Conduct from the Nursing and Midwifery Board of Australia has some interesting clauses regarding nurses acknowledging our colonialist past and check our white privelege. Who knew that bringing people into the world requires nurses to undergo such PC nonsense and reeducation on something they do out of love and passion? What happened in all the child births to date that required professionals to pass identity criteria before ‘helping’? What if the selected midwife that ticks the boxes comes down with the flu and the patient goes into emergency labour due to an unforeseen complication? Does the baby’s life or the identity of the replacement midwife take priority? See below.

3.2 ​Culturally safe and respectful practice

Culturally safe and respectful practice requires having knowledge of how a midwife’s own culture, values, attitudes, assumptions and beliefs influence their interactions with women and families, the community and colleagues. To ensure culturally safe and respectful practice, midwives must:

a. understand that only the woman and/or her family can determine whether or not care is culturally safe and respectful.

b. respect diverse cultures, beliefs, gender identities, sexualities and experiences of women and others, including among team members.

c. acknowledge the social, economic, cultural, historic and behavioural factors influencing health, both at the individual, community and population levels.

d. adopt practices that respect diversity, avoid bias, discrimination and racism, and challenge belief based upon assumption (for example, based on gender, disability, race, ethnicity, religion, sexuality, age or political beliefs).

e. support an inclusive environment for the safety and security of the individual woman and her family and/or significant others, and

f. create a positive, culturally safe work environment through role modelling, and supporting the rights, dignity and safety of others, including women and colleagues.

When my second daughter was born not for one second did the midwife’s identity play any role. Yet somehow we must now indoctrinate PC lunacy inside our hospitals. Surely safe deliveries are 100% of the mission. Not submitting to the whims of someone who subjectively sees themselves as something they’re not. Why can’t we just evaluate nurses on their abilities rather than search for ways to make them tick all the identity boxes to fit a structure that has not been required for millennia?