column

Do we need women quotas? Of course not. You do not have to be for the quota, you can just wait and die before there is equality. Goes too. Then every few years we have the World Economic Forum calculate that it will take more than 200 years for women and men to have the same opportunities in the labor market.

No thing. For more than 200 years, nod and listen when they say that women and men in Germany have long been legally equal, that we can take everything from life, if only we want the world to be open to us, if we just ... sorry , fell asleep ... so, of course, that we can do anything and leave as long as we shut up, work hard, look good, are nice and make no demands.

When one hears why people oppose women's quotas, one can not help believing that there are still many people who do not find it so bad when women simply take the place assigned to them by the rest of the world: Beautiful back and politely rotting.

It is often said that Angela Merkel may not be a great feminist, but that she has done a great deal for women by becoming a Chancellor. That's a bit wrong, but it's about as wrong. Since Merkel is chancellor, any discussion about equal rights for the quarter of an hour, which any eyrie always takes to explain that everything is possible nowadays, and the time in which one then reminds him that this country always still had no president.

Ideas that will last for generations

There are a few objections that are heard over and over again when people argue against quotas for women. Because this will remain for several generations according to current calculations, it makes sense to collect these objections once. There are:

  • The idea that it is unfair for women to get jobs "just because of their gender".
  • The idea that women are probably not disabled people who need tools to get along and
  • the immortal complaint that no one demanded a women's quota for garbage disposal.

The first objection, the "just-for-sex" suit, is not even a real argument, it's more of a kind ... cough? No idea. Anything that comes out of people. Women's quotas have never meant that women get a job only because of their gender, but that they are given the same qualifications until they are adequately represented. If it were otherwise, there would be vacancy notices that say, "We are looking for: one woman, skills: all the same," and nothing more, and I've seen a lot, but not that.

The second objection is a little more demanding, but also bad, and ableistisch to it. Women, it is said, are not disabled, just because they are women. Anyone who asks women quotas, according to the idea, treats women and the disabled, and one could not want that. Why not?

You are not born disabled, you are handicapped

Aside from the fact that some women have a disability, many women without disabilities are treated as if they had one: underestimated, hindered and found strenuous when they wanted to. Likewise, women do not get into certain networks of men like people who can not walk, can not enter some buildings without aids. Anyone who thinks it's misogyny to compare women with "disabled people" has probably been over-influenced by the uncool kids who "are you disabled?" synonymous with "you asshole". Should not be done.

"Disabled people" are people who have something different from what most people in society usually imagine. They can still be professors or top athletes, but it may be that the way there is harder for them than for others. A community that makes it difficult for them does not deserve the name community. If Simone de Beauvoir says about women: "You will not be born a woman, you will be", then this also applies to people with disabilities: you are not born disabled, you are disabled.

Garbage men are at least insured

The third objection, the refuse collection topic, persists very persistently. As long as no one complains that mainly men work in garbage collection, one can not take the whole quota thing seriously. If women do not want to get their hands dirty, but just want to work harder on the great, well-paid jobs, then that's unfair. There is some truth to it, at least in so far quota discussions often revolve around a few positions - executive floors, boards, parliaments - and it is actually a very small area.

But. If you ever turn your gaze from the "upper" jobs to the "lower" jobs, you have to be very adept at not seeing that the vast majority of care-minded butts in this country are still being wiped off by women. Women care and clean many times more than men, and this is partly because this society needs the unpaid or low paid work of women in order to continue to be so unfair.

Müllmann is at least a job in which one is insured in Germany, while many cleaners work illegally and without any security. Incidentally, I often feel like I'm working on garbage collection when I look through my inbox, but that's almost another topic.

Women in themselves do not have to stand for progress

Of course, things do not get better when there are women quotas. It is not enough to have quotas if university graduates do not even apply, because they do not fulfill all 20 requirements of a job advertisement and their fellow students send the application as soon as they fit one tenth of the conditions. It is not enough to report that, thanks to the quota, more than 30 percent of Dax supervisory board members are women for the first time, even though there are thousands who do not know what a Dax board is, let alone how one works Come in, if not as a cleaning lady, prostitute or burglar.

And it is not enough to have quotas as long as women holding top posts are sometimes as biased as their male counterparts. Women in themselves do not have to stand for progress. See: the women in the Union. Annegret Kramp-Karrenbauer may be the only hope for a female Merkel successor, but she is holding on to homophobic attitudes.

The "Flexi Quote" - something to the floor?

Kristina Schröder used to be Minister of State and writes today for the "world", an admittedly interesting career leap, and consequently, in her function as a columnist, she does just as much for women as in her time as Minister of Women, namely nothing. She invented the "flexi quota" that not only sounded like something to dust off in the name, but also meant that companies could set a brave zero-percent women's target and then be proud if they got them by three Percent exceeded.

Just now she wrote in the "Welt" that a state that introduces quotas would "ignore the preferences of its citizens." That's true, of course, when "burghers" mean the buddies who will continue to play each other's jobs as long as there are no odds. That is half sad and half funny, considering that there is even a quota for Franconia in Schröder's sister party CSU, which is rarely complained about.

And Dorothee Bär recently tweeted about the future of her party: "The CSU is rejuvenating and becoming radically radiant." After the excellent cabinet occupation in Bavaria, there must now be a start at the top of our party. "Markus Söder is the right person for this. when he becomes our chairman on January 19th. " In addition to being Minister of State, Bär seems to be aiming for a satirical career too, and of course that is laudable, because satire is also an area where there are still too few women.