In 2019, in the midst of the neofeminist wave, the Hasbro brand had a brilliant idea: to produce a new version of 'Monopoly',

'Ms Monopoly'

, which generated rivers of ink because it came from the factory with a built

-in gender gap


Initially, the


started the game with

more money

than the men, $1,900 versus $1,500.

When going through the

starting box

again, the women also received more pasta: 240 compared to the 200 that the men received.

From Hasbro the quip was sold as "a fun new take that creates a world that gives



edge ."

that men usually enjoy". From me, and I trust I have not been the only one, it was understood as an idea with grace in some undetectable place.

I do not need an advantage

in any starting square, neither in the 'Monopoly' nor in the one for a job or in the bread line. day one he told me: "I'm here waiting for a friend. And of course, I almost died of shame).

Now we have a new version of the

'game' of the advantages


an institutional format.

It may be the icing on the cake of a year full of controversial ministerial decisions.

And the truth is that the Government has achieved it: angering almost everyone.

So much so that there is already a professional association, Jucil, which plans to take the matter to court, considering it unconstitutional.

Because the

Ministry of the Interior

has decided

to lower

the grade requirement

for women

who want to join the Corps by 15%, it has felt fatal even to


, the pet wild boar of the Rapid Action Group (GAR) of the Civil Guard.

It is worth that the

objective is not bad

(specifically, to achieve 40% of the female workforce in the Corps).

But, for now, a very

dangerous precedent is set.

Are we going to apply the same method to all public areas where we feel the need to 'fill' positions with women?

To lower the level of knowledge to raise the level of estrogen?

Above all without need, because if someone needs a little push in their studies, if we get involved, it's the men, not the women.

We are the majority in the university (55.6%), it will mean something.

I keep thinking about it: whose idea would it have been that if they lower our grade we are going to flock to become civil guards?

Because it hurts as much to be called dumb as it is to be called simple, and more like that, out of the blue.

That positive discrimination is already screwed enough for them to humiliate you by questioning your intellectual capacity...


Bosch Fiol


Victoria A. Ferrer Pérez

(Universitat de les Illes Balears) recount in an interesting article that throughout history the idea of

​​female inferiority

has been defended through three arguments that also fed back to each other:







: "That is, the woman considered morally inferior, the fragile and weak woman by biological destiny, and therefore limited and in need of protection, and the intellectual, which could be summed up in the

supposed lesser rational capacity

of women in front of their greater intuitive and emotional capacity, which would

incapacitate them

for the performance of many

intellectual activities

and responsibilities in the public sphere".

The jurist, sociologist and pedagogue

Concepción Arenal

would respond to all this nonsense in her work 'The woman of the future' saying what we all know today (of course, because we are that woman of the future): "Intellectual difference only begins where that of education" (1861).

Well, don't come now to throw stones, even if they are stones with the appearance of sugared almonds, against the perception of that education, with what it has cost us!, or we will have to say, paraphrasing

Jessica Rabbit:

"I'm not stupid... It's that they have drawn me like that."

According to the criteria of The Trust Project

Know more