Surely it should be those most qualified who should take up the important positions?
I'm all for equal rights and shit but giving women important positions just because wouldn't be the smartest move.
Good thing that's not what she's suggesting then, she's saying that women should stop being afraid of excelling in male dominated fields and go take those important positions.
[QUOTE=Craigewan;44612276]Good thing that's not what she's suggesting then, she's saying that women should stop being afraid of excelling in male dominated fields and go take those important positions.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE]
"It's really important that since women make up half of the population, women start having half the seats at tables where the decisions are made and that's not where we are today"[/QUOTE]
You won't be able to fix the problems that are the cause of this by implementing a fixed quota. There's nothing wrong with having more men than women (or vice versa) on a management board. However, you do have a problem if you have certain people who prevent others from acquiring those higher positions because of their gender, sexuality, skin color, etc. And that's who you need to fight.
[QUOTE=uber.;44612341]You won't be able to fix the problems that are the cause of this by implementing a fixed quota. There's nothing wrong with having more men than women (or vice versa) on a management board. However, you do have a problem if you have certain people who prevent others from acquiring those higher positions because of their gender, sexuality, skin color, etc. And that's who you need to fight.[/QUOTE]
yessss, but what she's saying is that women should work for that not that positions should be handed out. Aka going into the proper education and so on.
[QUOTE=Intoxicated Spy;44612070]These bots need to finish titles.[/QUOTE]
"America in dire need of actresses" says Facebook Boss.
[QUOTE=uber.;44612341]You won't be able to fix the problems that are the cause of this by implementing a fixed quota. There's nothing wrong with having more men than women (or vice versa) on a management board. However, you do have a problem if you have certain people who prevent others from acquiring those higher positions because of their gender, sexuality, skin color, etc. And that's who you need to fight.[/QUOTE]
It's a bit of a chicken and egg problem. Women with the right qualifications are (probably?) under-represented, but few female students strive for those qualifications because there are few role models. Society as a whole needs to fundamentally alter its view of women to make girls feel comfortable following those traditionally 'male career paths'.
I'm not opposed to giving less-qualified women the right of way in these cases. By this I do not mean you have the janitor lady a place on the board of directors. Rather that a female with 5 years of leading experience might be given a position rather than a male with 8 years of experience, for example.
In the end this could shape society to better represent the difference between individuals, rather than the difference between genders.
[QUOTE=Clavus;44613099]It's a bit of a chicken and egg problem. Women with the right qualifications are (probably?) under-represented, but few female students strive for those qualifications because there are few role models. Society as a whole needs to fundamentally alter its view of women to make girls feel comfortable following those traditionally 'male career paths'.
I'm not opposed to giving less-qualified women the right of way in these cases. By this I do not mean you have the janitor lady a place on the board of directors. Rather that a female with 5 years of leading experience might be given a position rather than a male with 8 years of experience, for example.
In the end this could shape society to better represent the difference between individuals, rather than the difference between genders.[/QUOTE]
First, giving jobs to people underqualified because of any reason is wrong. When you run a business you need the best people you can get.
Second, is not about role models is about affinity with jobs. The reason some fields are male dominated is not because males forbid women from taking those professions and rather because women are not interested to that job.
[QUOTE=Ragekipz;44613183]Second, is not about role models is about affinity with jobs. The reason some fields are male dominated is not because males forbid women from taking those professions and rather because women are not interested to that job.[/QUOTE]
said no one who has ever studied this ever
[QUOTE=NoDachi;44613218]said no one who has ever studied this ever[/QUOTE]
Just look up enrollment statistics by gender.
[QUOTE=Ragekipz;44613240]Just look up enrollment statistics by gender.[/QUOTE]
They don't support your point though. If anything, the opposite.
You pulled the 'its only because women are not interested' thing out your arse without even being educated on the subject.
[QUOTE=NoDachi;44613270]They don't support your point though. If anything, the opposite.
You pulled the 'its only because women are not interested' thing out your arse without even being educated on the subject.[/QUOTE]
Actually they do support my point, since you can see an obvious preferences in certain courses. But you are free to think whatever you want.
Women this women that, and nobody is concerned about lack of men in synchronized swimming.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.