Skip to main content

Equality: the natural method

This article was first published in the Times of Malta on Saturday 24th December 2011.


An article entitled Women want quotas (December 6), reported gender equality organisations asking Parliament to introduce quotas. I totally disagree with this and I'll explain why.

Quotas go against the very concept of meritocracy. Meritocracy means that whoever is the best suited for an appointment or responsibility, gets it, regardless of his gender, political beliefs, race or sexual orientation, but solely on his merits and competencies. Quotas, on the other hand, eliminate the "regardless of his gender" part. If for example, it happens that the best four candidates for a post are all men, why should they be balanced out by short-listing two men and two women? Likewise, if the best four candidates are women, why should two men replace two more capable women? This happened for example in Malta's nominations for ECHR judge. The Council of Europe ironically called this anti-democratic concept as the "democratic principle of gender balance". What's wrong  if the three most competent judges for the post were men? What would be wrong if the three most competent judges for the post were women? It seems the Council of Europe too is more inclined on balancing statistics than common sense.

Quotas are anti-democratic. If applied to Parliamentary elections, it would mean that male candidates who garner a certain number of votes would not be elected, to make way for female candidates who garner less votes. Does this not contravene the basic principle of democracy: respect to the will of the people? And where would quotas stop? Should we set quotas to balance out also homosexual candidates with heterosexual candidates? Should we balance out candidates who hold a degree with candidates who do not? Should we balance out candidates wearing glasses with those who do not? Should we balance out candidates according to their hair colour as well? Just for the sake of balance and statistical equality? You can already see this being implemented in the elections to the executive of Malta's two main political parties. On each election, valid male candidates who garner more votes than female candidates have to be left out for the sake of balancing women representation.

So why are there much less women in certain posts than man? There could be many contributing factors, pre-dominantly our cultural mentality which yes, must be changed and educated. But there may be other factors too. Right now, 60% of graduates are female. Was this the case up to twenty years ago? No. Right up till the eighties, only around 30% of graduates were female. It would be quite valid to assume that in the current pool of qualified people with reasonable work experience to expect certain posts, there are much more males than females. It therefore stands to reason that there will be more males in certain top posts than females. This trend is already being automatically reversed naturally, and in time, the pool of qualified people will balance out, moreover it will probably consist of more females than males. There's no need for quotas to force it now. It will come naturally, and through merit, not through discrimination.

As for quotas being termed with the oxymoron "positive discrimination", I believe there's no positivity in any form of discrimination. There's either discrimination or equal opportunities. I am all for women having equal opportunities for education and employment, as can be witnessed by the high percentage of female graduates. I am all for women having equal opportunities and rights in elections. That's why they can contest equally with men and on the same alphabetically ordered list. I am all for incentives to help mothers return to work, since they are the gender that can bear children.

But I am not for competent men to make way for less competent women, as much as I am not for competent women to make way for less competent men. Equality is to be sought in opportunities and their availability, not in the resulting statistical outcome. All the outcomes that follow are to be based only on meritocracy and competency, regardless of everything else, including gender, and regardless of statistics.

We are different unique humans, and not numbers.

Popular posts from this blog

Daphne ma nqatlitx ilbieraħ

Daphne ma nqatlitx ilbieraħ.
Daphne inqatlet meta esponiet traffikanti tad-droga, bil-provi u bir-ritratti tagħhom, u dawn flok ġew arrestati sabu Gvern jgħattilhom. Għax il-papa kien midħla tal-Partit. Għax kien ħabib tal-Ministru.
Daphne inqatlet meta esponiet korruzzjoni fil-Korp tal-Pulizija, meta esponiet spetturi u kuntistabbli li kienu kompliċi mal-kriminali, u dawn flok tkeċċew sabu Gvern li jtihom il-promotions. Anzi, min minnhom kien laħaq tkeċċa qabel, sab Gvern li reġa' daħħlu lura.
Daphne inqatlet meta esponiet bil-provi każi ta' ħasil ta' flus fuq livell internazzjonali, minn reġimi dittatorjali, u l-Kummissarju, l-Avukat Ġenerali, u l-politiċi tagħna, flok ħadu passi raw kif għamlu biex l-evidenza tinqered jew titħalla taħrab.
Daphne inqatlet meta l-Avukat Ġenerali u tliet Kummissarji tal-Pulizija in fila, raw quddiemhom il-provi ta' kriminalita' organizzata min-nies fil-poter, u għalqu ħalqhom u m'għamlu xejn.
Daphne inqatlet meta l-politiċi tagħna ħ…

Daphne wasn't murdered yesterday

English translation of this original blogpost in Maltese.
Daphne wasn't murdered yesterday.
Daphne was murdered when she exposed drug traffickers, with photographs and evidence, and instead of being arrested they found a government ready to cover up for them. Because their daddy was into the Party's circle. Because he was a friend of the Minister.
Daphne was murdered when she exposed corruption in the higher echelons of the Police Force, when she exposed inspectors and police officers involved in criminal circles, and rather than seeing action being taken we saw a government rewarding them with promotions. And re-instating those who had been expelled in the preceding years.
Daphne was murdered when she exposed cases of money-laundering on an international level, involving high-profile politicians from dictatorial regimes, and our Police Commissioner, Attorney General and politicians, failed to take action. Rather, they sought to ensure these crimes were covered up and the evidence…

Tiġdid

Ir-riżultat ta’ l-elezzjoni ġenerali żgur li ħasad lil ħafna minna. Żgur li ħadd ma kien qed jistennieh u żgur li ħadd ma bassru. Dan għax ir-reazzjoni li kull kandidat kien qed jieħu miż-żjarat fid-djar tan-nies kienu tajbin ħafna. Diversi nies bdew jesprimu li ġejjin lura. Diversi nies li s-soltu kienu jivvutaw lill-Partit Laburista esprimew magħna li kienu diżgustati bil-korruzzjoni. U allura x’wassal biex id-distakk bejn iż-żewġ partiti baqa’ fejn kien?
Fi ftit kliem naħseb li waqt li diversi nies kienu ġejjin lura lejn il-Partit Nazzjonalista, ma konniex qed nirrealizzaw li kien hemm oħrajn li kienu qed jitilquh. Min għax sab Gvern li kien lest jirranġalu l-permess, il-promotion jew il-job illi l-Partit Nazzjonalista qatt ma għenu fih. U min għax ħass li l-ekonomija u l-but kienu sejrin tajjeb, u allura ma kellux skop għala kellu jbiddel il-Gvern.
Hu x’inhu, dan ir-riżultat ħa jirrekjedi tibdil radikali fil-Partit Nazzjonalista. Fl-istrateġija, fil-lingwaġġ, fl-uċuħ. Pero’ l-valuri…