Occupy Wall Street was always a head-scratcher to me. Self-righteous protestors raged against the evils of capitalism on their Macs and smartphones, blissfully missing how Wall Street created the environment where they could have Macs and smartphones.
That image, of the live-tweeting anarchist, was the best symbol I could find of how misguided leftist protests can be.
Until now.
A month ago the “Fearless Girl” statue appeared on Wall Street, staring down the “Charging Bull,” which has greeted visitors to our nation’s financial epicenter for 30 years. Last week designer Arturo Di Modica legally contested the Fearless Girl’s presence for corrupting the integrity of his artwork.
The goal of the Bull is to show America’s economic resilience, Di Modica says, whereas the goal of the Girl is … well nobody really knows.
It’s some kind of feminist contrarianism, but there’s no substantive answer.
The Bull of Wall Street is hardly some symbol of oppression against American women. Quite the contrary.
Free market-driven capitalism has done more for women’s equality than anything else. The reasons, historically, that society “repressed” women are pretty straightforward and not really that evil, I am sorry to have to report. Jobs in agriculture, manufacturing, or otherwise were usually benefited by superior strength and stamina, meaning most women couldn’t compete, while the biologically critical task of perpetuating the species was so difficult that distracting women from childbirth would have been cultural suicide.
Free markets incentivized the growth of technologies and labor-saving devices. Technology that made physical labor less important and maternal labor less difficult. As we developed from an agrarian economy to an industrial one to an information-based one, capitalism created new jobs that leveled the playing field. Nowadays, those countries with well-developed financial markets are a lot better places to be a girl than countries without them.
Capitalism isn’t some evil that repressed feminism for centuries. Capitalism gave birth to feminism.
Mitt Romney hit the nail on the head, uh excuse me, grabbed the bull by the horns when he said:
I’ve found that most politicians don’t seem to understand the connection between our ability to compete and our national wealth and the wealth of our families. They act as if money just happens, that is just happens to be there.
But every dollar represents a good or service that’s been produced in the private sector. If you depress the private sector you depress the well being of all Americans.
See but current Western feminism isn’t blessed by a surplus of context. Arguments are based on commodifiable rage, not on context. Mobs online, much like mobs in real life, don’t pause and think when they can rattle off -ists and -obics instead.
Feminist writers (you’ll note I didn’t say “thinkers”), for example, are never going to write articles about the gender inequality that Western women live longer, are more likely to have health insurance, are more likely to get education, and are much less likely to be murdered. That’s contradictory to their business model. If they aren’t constantly spewing invective, they’ll lose their precious, precious victimhood status.
For example, after years of feminists complaining that Wonder Woman should have her own movie, she finally will this year! And the film has a female director! This is cause to celebrate – right?
Yes, it is, but instead feminists are raging against the film (of course) because the character seems to shave her armpits. No, I am not kidding.
If a carefully designed movie by women, for women, and about women can’t escape the raging click-bait culture, then nothing can. (Note of course that Captain America and Thor’s upper bodies always seem excruciatingly waxed, but there’s no money in men complaining about that.)
Back to the Fearless Girl. While the totally wrong, completely unthinking sentiment behind the statue drives me bonkers, artist Kristen Visbal did make one statement I agree with: her statue is a “statement about the future of Wall Street,” because more women should be in the traditionally male-dominated field of finance.
I would be thrilled to see more women on Wall Street. I am thrilled to see more of everyone on Wall Street. I want Wall Street to be a vibrant, unencumbered magnet that attracts as many people (and as much of their capital) as possible. If the Bull is charging, the rest of America will be strong.
One of my nieces recently visited New York and was sure to send me a picture of herself and her friends with the Bull. (She’s the one doing the thumbs up, but I’ve blurred all the faces because they’re minors.)
Not pictured, to my endless delight, is a picture of them with the Fearless Girl. This means we have future traders and not future protesters.
These four could be a real boon to the world of high finance. Statistical evidence suggests that women might be better at investing than men, as Time reported last month. As a complete agnostic where my portfolio is concerned, I don’t care who makes it more valuable: I just care that it becomes more valuable.
See if there should be more females in finance, then why is the girl confronting the bull instead of, I don’t know, trying to ride it? I mean … Fearless Girl wants to join them, not beat them, right?
