x-ism, n-ism, y-ism... the annoying "-ism" story...

I am writing this post after being accused (gasp!) of something called “sexism”. In a casual conversation I said (quote) “there are a lot more brilliantly intelligent men in the world than women”. As politically incorrect as this seems, it is of course a scientific fact. There are more geniuses among men than women. This is due to a much higher variance in the standard deviation of IQ scores of men, i.e. although the average female IQ about the same as the male, there are more men in the groups of “genius” and (sadly) “imbecile”. This is what prompted Walter Block (if I remember this correctly) to call men "nature's crapshoot" and women "nature's safety net", although I prefer the term "nature's greatest experiment" for the former.

The discussion made me want to denounce all these politically incorrect and rather ridiculous ideas. First of all, there is no such thing as sexism. It doesn't exist - just like racism, homophobia (gay-ism??), tree-ism, or speciesism... the list goes on forever. In my mind I don't see discrimination, I see only free-thinking individuals making independent decisions based on their personal judgement. If I want to associate with one person and not with another, I shouldn't have to give any complex explanation of my actions; I simply do what I like! In the words of one of my gurus, Murray N. Rothbard: "Every property owner should have the absolute right to sell, hire, or lease his money or other property to anyone whom he chooses, which means he has the absolute right to "discriminate" all he damn pleases. If I have a plant and want to hire only six-foot albinos, and I can find willing employees, I should have the right to do so, even though I might well lose my shirt doing so." This is of course an excerpt about the use of property, but I don't see any difference between hiring, associating with, or even talking (or not) to any group of people. I should be able to do or not do anything I want with anyone I want (as long as they are willing participants).
All this "ism-ism" talk is made even worse by the fact some so-called liberals now assign rights to all kinds of groups. Of course the rights they assign and the groups themselves are chosen completely arbitrarily with no logical reason for any of them. Thus philosopher Peter Singer thinks we're all "speciesists" if we treat animals differently from humans (humans are according to him just another species). Well I don't like to argue with these environmentalists - they think they are animals, and I have not yet degenerated mentally to the point of engaging in polemics with animals... Another example of group of "ism" accusers are the feminists (otherwise known as FemiNazis).
However, I have to finish on a sour note! After much thinking I have indeed decided I am a "sexist"! I have a deep-seated and intrinsic need to discriminate against all men. If I was looking to hire, for instance, a secretary or a P.A., I would shorten the pool of applicants by weeding out all the men. After all, who doesn't want to come to the office in the morning to see a beautiful young woman? Not even the most astute-looking and kind man would oust her from my office, for the same reason I would rather hang a Rembrandt in my living room than a Picasso (sorry Pablo, aesthetics matter!). Also I have to confess that this morning I discriminated against Pepsi and got a Coke - Pepsi-ism anyone?