...IN AMERICA
WOMEN & MINORITIES...???
I find human history fascinating ‘and’ frustrating…so much so that years ago after listening to a BBC program titled “Born A Girl” curiosity overwhelmed good sense.
The radio broadcast featured a study of cultures in Central African countries following a pattern of steady diminished social roles for females. Spanning thousands of years, adult women went from supportive equal partner to that of shadow significance.
Naturally I went ‘hunting’ for more information. What I found looking back some 12,000 years was not merely a decline in central Africa, but a steady decline all over planet Earth—culturally…
Beginning with the Sumerians, except for the odd queen here and there in Europe, Africa or the Middle East--planet Earth was essentially a man's world. And males remained securely in-charge of everything regardless of the fact that our global biological birthrate has always been split 51% female to 49% male...
Okay, granted, my high school biology was a few decades ago. However, besides my senior year segment on the human immune system, I also noted that gender percentage because I was curious about nature's math.
So, t-h-e-n 'fellow-travelers' imagine my surprise when upon moving from Alberta to Colorado [1990] I kept hearing journalists on news networks and corporate professionals and politicians speak ever so casually labeling a huge population segment as "women and minorities"... I was puzzled. Why were women included with cultural minorities? Women are neither a separate culture nor a minority. Since the definition of minority is: the smaller number or part, especially a number that is less than half the whole number... Using that shouldn't it be; "men and minorities"?
I’m being flippant because men aren't a culture either. Females and males are a gender designation. [At least that used to be the 'science'.]
Anyway—statistics [and polls] seem to be the mainstay of journalists, corporations and politicians - but the 'circumstances' by which statistical-probability information is gathered has a huge effect on the outcome. I took only one [required] statistics course with my geology major, and it's not rocket-science, but I learned enough to realize it takes rocket-science to plough through the formulas some analysts use. Quick example: when people in public office or the news media report that 68% of parents are 'for' students wearing masks in school classrooms--they also need to inform us/the public how many parents were contacted, and in which school district[s] and in which county and in which state[s]... But the mean, median, mode and range are not reported by daily news. Therefore - because those standard details are missing, the impression left with us/the public is that 68% of parents [across the nation] are in favor of masks in school classrooms--which is 'not' accurate.
Technically no one has lied, but is only 'some' information still a lie? Maybe it's not a lie, but this repetitive pattern with only part of the information part of the time creates and maintains artificial social divisions.
Divide and conquer is a longstanding war strategy, but it's tactic domestically continued to increase steadily, after the [1916] formation of the National Women’s Party. Finding loads of stunning history surrounding women’s suffrage in America prompted the plot of my mystery-suspense THE COUNT OF BALDPATE… I couldn’t help myself. There was panic up and down the halls of the Capital when entrenched Congressmen and Senators realized the growing membership in the National Women’s Party was developing into a viable national-third-party. Before 1920, the threat to the reelection of both federal and state Democrats and Republican’s was real.
Returning to the 21st Century, the 2020 U.S. Census results [rounded up] was 169M females to 163M males with females consistently outnumbering males since the 1950 census.
But, beyond this a simple breakdown in data for the 2020 U.S. Census there was actually a greater surprise. Once again, when politicians and the national media only provide part of the information to the masses - it creates mass ignorance. Because so much emphasis has focused on black vs white issues--I expected Americans of African descent would represent the second largest population group after Americans of European ancestry. But they weren't, and they weren't even third in population size. The second highest group by population was Hispanic, the third group was citizens of Asian descent. Those of African descent were fourth, with Jewish and Middle Eastern fifth and our Native American population sixth.
Twenty years ago, at the turn of the 21st Century only 7% of the U.S. population listed their ancestry as American on their 2000 Census. [I couldn't find an updated number for 2010 or 2020.] But why doesn’t anyone 'born-here' or anyone who went to the effort of obtaining legal citizenship think of themselves as American? It's actually easier to govern citizenry who are homogenized, but only if 'harmony' is the ‘goal’ of those in leadership. If not, then it’s division and blending isn't possible - ever.
Even after five generations in several families too many citizens of the United States remain divided by the sustained use of labels like Asian-American, Hispanic-American, Muslim-American, Jewish-American, African-American, Native-American, but not European-American. For some odd reason any immigrants from Europe are just labelled, white... As a person of [mostly] European descent if I was continually reminded, via social programs or the media or politicians--to think of myself as say Norwegian-American, then I'd keep my connection to the homeland of my immigrant grandmother uppermost. **Each week Professor, Dr. Henry Louis Gates Jr. who hosts and produces the PBS program Finding Your Roots, enlightens people about their ancestry. But his production includes 'Roots' in the title for a reason - because it's where our DNA begins, not ultimately where it is today.
Control and influence in public office can be an intoxicating addiction. Historically for the human species it has actually been mind-altering to the point that for thousands of years males in every culture assumed complete authority. But, looking at human history wars and invasions cover a great deal more book space, than inventions or science! And, in the year 2025—we ‘still’ chose military aggression over communication…why is that? Habit?
The female of our species remained [relatively] patient until toward the end of the 1700s. By then more and more girls were learning to read and write--then ask questions. However, questioning wasn't enough and never seems to be enough to motivate those in leadership who find change annoying and inconvenient--for them...
Slavery was abolished in England, France and most of Europe [including Portugal] 20 to 40 years prior to the U.S. Civil War. Though historically isolating various cultures wasn't limited to, well, hardly anyone.
Only 100 years ago Irish immigrants were a minority. My great grandfather was born in Ireland when the ruling British were smearing the character of all Irish in general. But after years as an indentured servant in Iowa he escaped abuse only to face further discrimination. Sign after sign read; "Irish Need Not Apply" posted in every storefront, warehouse and factory. The only people who welcomed him and gave him work were immigrants from China who ran laundries, market gardens and labored on the railroads.
Oddly, one would expect since the United States was a 'new' country social innovation would have happened here sooner and faster...though for women and minorities it's been quite the opposite. A woman's right to vote in the United States was nearly two decades behind most countries in Europe including Russia, one of the first in 1906. Sooo, two decades into the 21st Century the reason we still have organizations like; The League of Women Voters, Affirmative Action, NAACP [National Association for the Advancement of Colored People], the ERA [Equal Rights Amendment] and several other organizations is the same reason we still hear division-distinctions like, "women and minorities".
No one should have 'more' rights than anyone else - no one, nor any group - but not less either. Actually, not anywhere on this planet, but especially 'here' because George Washington with other founders fought for their right to freedom. [Got’ta luv irony…]
How does this cycle stop? It stops when We-The-People no longer vote for political-relics. It stops when we vote for people who have the same ethics we expected from our grandparents. It stops when we eliminate those pointless little boxes we're expected to check for male, female, white, black, Hispanic, Asian, Indigenous, other…from most forms?] It stops by purging thickheaded phrases such as "women and minorities" because in America there are no minorities. In America there are only Americans, citizens of The United States as our passport designates...
