http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/judicial/2010-12-06-walmart-supreme-court_N.htm
That is an overview of the case, by usatoday.
This case is one of sexual discrimination. The people against Walmart claim that they promote more men than women. Coincidence? I think not. I am all for merit and I generally pick myself up by my boot straps instead of crying "unfair!" at every little thing, but this is sexual discrimination. Walmart's defense was this: "The female employees of Walmart are too diverse to represent one group of people." Excuse me?!
Lately Walmart has been all about diversity, and you see it in the commercials. They have a lot of commercials with black families. Apparently it turns out that all of the "diverse" families Walmart likes to appeal to are just assets. I knew that, but now the huge bunch of morons who defend Walmart can agree with me.
And the "women" thing. 91 years ago, NO woman could vote. Until the 70's ALL women were subject to being legally raped by their husbands. Women are more disadvantaged than ANY minority out there. And any female would agree. People and companies preach "diversity", "opportunity", and "colorblindness from the rainbow of flesh that paints or great nation", but these same companies all use women to sell their products.
Women ARE one group. You have Women-Men, then it branches into nationality, then ethnicity, then religion. At least politically correctly it does.
Nice try Walmart. You truly are scum. I hope Target takes an initiative to hire more women than men, and you go bankrupt. Then when WE dominate the media and businesses, you can come crawling on your knees, begging for your six year old sweatshop workers to come back.
No comments:
Post a Comment