Hi, and welcome to my Userpage!!
Ok, who is this guy?
1) New-school Chauvinist;
2) Bodybuilder;
3) Devoted son to wonderful parents, brother to a couple of good dudes, and with special dearness, uncle to two beautiful nieces and two strapping nephews...and I shall have my cake in THIS life, and eat it too!
But it's probably numero uno that you're interesting in...what's a 'New-School Chauvinist', you ask???
Well, maybe a bit of background is in order before we get to that. I'm the son of Indian immigrants to the UK; and as such, my ancestors have always had traditional views of a womans place in the world, and about what she may and may not do. This society, which preaches 'equality' of the sexes, has tried damn hard to drum into me that a woman can do what the hell she wants, and is THUS the equal of a man.
Too hard.
Now, I've come to the conclusion - not a finding, not a passing thought, but a CONCLUSION - that women are not the mental equals of men. That they are not our physical equals is glaring, but the taboo that most know, and cannot say out loud, is that they are not our mental equals. That's something that has hit me over and over during my life in the 90's and post millenium. Unlike my ancestors and the 'Old-School' of Chauvinism, both of whom had the right approach, but for either incorrect reasons at that time or plain didn't know why. I recognise that women are mentally inferior to men (ooooh, I can almost smell the fumes of rage!!) for reasons of brain architecture and body chemistry. That's the 'New-School' part, that's the subtle difference between me and my brown subcontinental cousins/older white compatriots.
So, does that make me a sexist? I don't know. You tell me.
See, I look at it like this; women have the same RIGHT to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness as men do. And I hope they get it; you only get 70 or so years on this miserable rock before it's Hometime.
But you cannot legislate TRUE equality; for that you'd need to inject Testosterone in-utero to female foetuses. You'd doubtless end up with a population of women who all looked like bulldyke lesbians, with corresponding levels of fertility. None.
So, what we're left with, necessarily, is a half of the human race that, by and large, chooses to study Sociology at university instead of Physics. To pursue careers in Typing, not Plumbing. Basically, to pursue careers in easily learnt areas and to THEN complain about 'glass-ceilings' when the laws of Supply and Demand inevitably kick in to lower their pay to between 40 and 80% of the male.
Now there is an interesting statistic, insofar as how it's advertised. The feminist lobby will scream, "Equal pay for equal work!". Ok. That's fair. Heck, even I agree with that. What they DON'T dare mention is that women invariably gravitate towards low-skill, low-pay work because of their brain architecture - hence the emphasis on 'Equal work' - they know DAMN well that the vast majority of work UNDERTAKEN by women is not equal, in terms of the finance generated by said work, to the males. Of course there are exceptions; but they are are exceptions to the RULE.
Women earn less because they don't work as smart, nor with such an emphasis on making money, as men.