The Chauvinist Corner                  


Baseball and Equality

WHEN THE COLOR LINE WAS BROKEN IN MAJOR LEAGUE baseball an interesting thing happened. Over a very few years suddenly teams were filled with black athletes. Why? Because they could play baseball very well! Teams took the best players, regardless of color because it helped their teams. It would hurt their chances of winning a pennant to exclude the black man from their roster. There is no need for a law to force baseball teams to use the talents of minority players because the minority players are good enough to win a spot on the team in a fair competition against all comers.

When the blacks entered baseball, they did not demand special treatment or expect the baseball world to change its normal mode of operation to make it “comfortable” for them. In fact they had to go through some pretty rough times while people got used to the idea of a black man in a Dodger uniform. It was hard but it was worth it and today, all-white baseball is just a part of history to be forever left behind. All of the professional sports have learned that it is in their own best interest to hire minorities.

Contrast that if you will, with the concept of affirmative action. Here we have laws in place that discriminate in favor of minorities and women when they cannot do the job. What effect would that have on professional sports? Suppose that a team had to hire women just because it is fair? The quality of the team would suffer. It could never compete against major league all-men teams, and if instead all the teams were handicapped the same, the sport would suffer. (See The Old Ball Game.)

When black players entered pro ball, they brought in a determination and talent that blew the critics away. They asked no special favors or treatment, just a chance to perform. They won their rightful place and reaped the rewards. The feminists have taken a different approach. Why is that? Feminists know that the vast majority of women cannot compete equally with men. As much as the feminists hate the idea, women want to get married and have children. That means women will miss more work, often even quitting their job for years while attending their children’s needs. This normal function of womanhood is an extreme disadvantage in the world that feminists want women to live in. So, instead of providing an equal or superior talent and productive resource to win acceptance in the workplace, like the black player did in baseball, the feminist demands laws and lawsuits to force companies to hire women, even when it is a detriment to the company to do so. If you do not see something wrong with that, your mind is turned to the OFF position.

Look closely at the major pro sports in American today and you will see that baseball, football and basketball teams would not be able to compete if they excluded minority players. If you look just as closely at the business world you will see that no such relationship exists between any major industry, not based on selling sex, and women. If a company is going to do better with female employees, it will hire women quickly without laws to force the issue!

The black baseball player went through quite a bit of name calling, and shunning when he first came into the big leagues. He bit the bullet and made the grade. Feminists take a different approach. They use the courts to batter name callers, and anyone who opposes their goals. When this is a clear and obvious declaration that women are too fragile to deal with the workplace, we are left to wonder why feminists would want to put themselves in such a weak looking position. Clearly they have no choice because women can never compete with men in a man’s world. The world must be changed to allow them to enter it and since it has changed, they never have entered the real world of working men, and never will. Jackie Robinson entered the baseball world as it was and earned his place rightfully, making baseball better for it, but feminism has attacked the world, attempting to change it, to soften it up for women. Like fitting a square peg into a round hole, both the peg and the hole suffer.

The fact is that if women can provide a service that will benefit a company, no law will be required to make companies search out her services. If she is capable of working in an environment, and doing a job, then no law suits will be required to change that environment. The fact that both of these conditions are not met, demonstrates clearly that feminists are completely out of touch with reality and both women and American industry must pay the price for their confusion.

Return Home