How would this work in the UK? as gender discrimination is illegal, which is why a lot of people leave their gender, date of birth, nationality and religion off their CV, so whether or not they are picked is because of their actual qualifications and experience
[QUOTE=thisispain;35009724]that's also stupid. you don't even know what you are disagreeing with. if you're extremely qualified for a job they aren't going to hire some "dumb slut" (right obviously if you don't get the job it's her fault not yours). keep the boxes to yourself mate, you need them more than the OP does.[/QUOTE]
Consider this:
A company has two possible candidates for top positions, one male and one female. The male is much better qualified and the obvious choice for the position. The company has a quota to meet so they cant take the male, and are forced to go with the lesser candidate.
I think thats the point they are getting at and I agree. In no situation should someone lose a job opportunity because the company is forced to meet gender regulations.
go america!
[QUOTE=thisispain;35009724]that's also stupid. you don't even know what you are disagreeing with. if you're extremely qualified for a job they aren't going to hire some "dumb slut" (right obviously if you don't get the job it's her fault not yours). keep the boxes to yourself mate, you need them more than the OP does.[/QUOTE]
I'll admit I exaggerated there to make a point, but if a woman and I have the same qualifications and education, though I have more experience/have a better personality, then it's still discrimination if the person hiring decides to go with the woman "to hit the quota".
EDIT: also the dumb slut wasn't meant to be a misogynistic remark as in "oh god a woman got the job boo hoo I hate women" but more like "she's dumb and a slut, and she got hired because she's a woman, not because she's more qualified than I am."
[QUOTE=Cushie;35009902]Consider this:
A company has two possible candidates for top positions, one male and one female. The male is much better qualified and the obvious choice for the position. The company has a quota to meet so they cant take the male, and are forced to go with the lesser candidate.
I think thats the point they are getting at and I agree. In no situation should someone lose a job opportunity because the company is forced to meet gender regulations.[/QUOTE]
In this scenario, I don't see that as equality, but discrimination. You cannot take him because he is male.
Don't think so? Flip this backwards. You have a much higher qualified woman and a barely qualified male. You have to bring on the male to maintain the gender balance. You cannot hire the woman because she is a woman. Is that not discrimination? All affirmative action is, is discrimination to avoid discrimination. What sense does that make?
[b]Strict[/b] government policies will not usher nations into an era of equality, only social change will do truly do that. Government regulations can help, but affirmative action is just terrible.
[QUOTE=Cushie;35009902]
A company has two possible candidates for top positions, one male and one female. The male is much better qualified and the obvious choice for the position. The company has a quota to meet so they cant take the male, and are forced to go with the lesser candidate.
[/QUOTE]
quota's don't work that way and never have, they aren't absolute. you're implying that males would never get hired which is ridiculous.
a quota is when a company looks at the end of the day and says "how many of X do we have compared to Y? let's try to get more of X." that doesn't mean that Y (yeah letter examples are stupid but whatever) would never get the job and it doesn't mean that X is unqualified. if you are qualified for a position you will get it, quota's don't work the opposite way.
This is stupid. Hire on credentials, not gender.
[url]http://www.youtube.com/user/girlwriteswhat[/url]
This girl covers a lot of the so called "gender equality" in our society. It's really interesting.
[QUOTE=deltasquid;35009942]I'll admit I exaggerated there to make a point, but if a woman and I have the same qualifications and education, though I have more experience/have a better personality, then it's still discrimination if the person hiring decides to go with the woman "to hit the quota".[/QUOTE]
you didn't make any point you just said something completely wrong. it's up to the employer to decide who has more experience or personality, quota's don't have anything to do with that.
[QUOTE=deltasquid;35009942]EDIT: also the dumb slut wasn't meant to be a misogynistic remark as in "oh god a woman got the job boo hoo I hate women" but more like "she's dumb and a slut, and she got hired because she's a woman, not because she's more qualified than I am."[/QUOTE]
it doesn't matter what you meant. calling someone a slut because they got a job over you is stupid and misogynistic.
Remember kids! When all else fails,
[b]Make it the law[/b]
[QUOTE=thisispain;35010014]quota's don't work that way and never have, they aren't absolute. you're implying that males would never get hired which is ridiculous.
a quota is when a company looks at the end of the day and says "how many of X do we have compared to Y? let's try to get more of X." that doesn't mean that Y (yeah letter examples are stupid but whatever) would never get the job and it doesn't mean that X is unqualified. if you are qualified for a position you will get it, quota's don't work the opposite way.[/QUOTE]
Clearly this is not a quota. From the wiki: "Racial quotas in employment and education are numerical requirements for hiring, promoting, admitting and/or graduating members of a particular racial group. Racial quotas are often established as means of diminishing racial discrimination, addressing under-representation and evident racism against those racial groups. Some individuals consider racial quotas reverse racism. Racial quotas are closely linked to notions of group rights, and special rights."
Replace racial with gender and this is what we're getting at.
wikipedia gives the definition, not the practical implementation.
[QUOTE=thisispain;35010044]it doesn't matter what you meant. calling someone a slut because they got a job over you is stupid and misogynistic.[/QUOTE]
It does matter what I meant. Calling a black person an idiot because he is, in fact, an idiot, and being pissed off because said idiot got hired over another, more intelligent person, is not racist simply because he is black. In the same vein, calling a woman who is dumb and a slut a "dumb slut" does not make it misogynistic merely because she is a woman.
[QUOTE=Metanar;35009745]if you can't find enough good female candidates to fill the quota then there's something wrong with you, not the candidates
this is completely justified[/QUOTE]
Nope, since there's [B]still [/B]a large difference in what men and women prefers to work with.
You're far off in the future boyo, Say hello to Mr. Jetson for me.
[QUOTE=thisispain;35010104]wikipedia gives the definition, not the practical implementation.[/QUOTE]
My mother works in human resources and the company gets bonuses from the state if they hire a higher amount of women. She is being nudged into doing exactly that by her employer. Seems fairly implemented to me.
[QUOTE=Van-man;35010128]Nope, since there's [B]still [/B]a large difference in what men and women prefers to work with.
You're far off in the future boyo, Say hello to Mr. Jetson for me.[/QUOTE]
Right, can you go ahead and prove that women aren't qualified for this job in great enough numbers to fill quotas? Or is that just you making up stuff.
[url]http://www.unece.org/fileadmin/DAM/stats/gender/publications/UK/Facts_about_W&M_GB_2006.pdf[/url]
[IMG]http://filesmelt.com/dl/thereyougo1.png[/IMG]
I guess you were just making that up.
[QUOTE=deltasquid;35010123]It does matter what I meant. Calling a black person an idiot because he is, in fact, an idiot, and being pissed off because said idiot got hired over another, more intelligent person, is not racist simply because he is black. In the same vein, calling a woman who is dumb and a slut a "dumb slut" does not make it misogynistic merely because she is a woman.[/QUOTE]
so you don't actually know what a slut is?
calling someone dumb is one thing, saying someone's sexual promiscuity makes them unqualified is another.
[QUOTE=Haxxer;35010036]This is stupid. Hire on credentials, not gender.
[url]http://www.youtube.com/user/girlwriteswhat[/url]
This girl covers a lot of the so called "gender equality" in our society. It's really interesting.[/QUOTE]
"Feminism will help bring about a economical and social apocalypse"
I don't think so
[QUOTE=deltasquid;35010135]My mother works in human resources and the company gets bonuses from the state if they hire a higher amount of women. She is being nudged into doing exactly that by her employer. Seems fairly implemented to me.[/QUOTE]
yeah they get bonuses from the state.
it doesn't mean that they hire less qualified "sluts" over men.
that's simply not true.
[QUOTE=deltasquid;35010123]It does matter what I meant. Calling a black person an idiot because he is, in fact, an idiot, and being pissed off because said idiot got hired over another, more intelligent person, is not racist simply because he is black. In the same vein, calling a woman who is dumb and a slut a "dumb slut" does not make it misogynistic merely because she is a woman.[/QUOTE]
if I called a black man a stupid fucking nigger because he got hired over me would I be racist
[QUOTE=thisispain;35010164]so you don't actually know what a slut is?
calling someone dumb is one thing, saying someone's sexual promiscuity makes them unqualified is another.[/QUOTE]
(slŭt) pronunciation
n.
A person, especially a woman, considered sexually promiscuous.
A woman prostitute.
A slovenly woman; a slattern.
Read more: [url]http://www.answers.com/topic/slut#ixzz1oHNaiuV1[/url]
Was referring to the slovenly part of the word.
[editline]5th March 2012[/editline]
[QUOTE=thisispain;35010180]yeah they get bonuses from the state.
it doesn't mean that they hire less qualified "sluts" over men.
that's simply not true.[/QUOTE]
holy shit, which part do you not want to understand. If someone says "If you hire this guy I get five bucks, but hire as many women as you can, because we get thirty bucks extra for every ten women we rake in" will inevitably result in this behaviour.
[QUOTE=deltasquid;35010189](slŭt) pronunciation
n.
A person, especially a woman, considered sexually promiscuous.
A woman prostitute.
A slovenly woman; a slattern.
Read more: [url]http://www.answers.com/topic/slut#ixzz1oHNaiuV1[/url]
Was referring to the slovenly part of the word.[/QUOTE]
which means messy or careless. so are you saying women are unprofessional?
[QUOTE=deltasquid;35010189](slŭt) pronunciation
n.
A person, especially a woman, considered sexually promiscuous.
A woman prostitute.
A slovenly woman; a slattern.
Read more: [url]http://www.answers.com/topic/slut#ixzz1oHNaiuV1[/url]
Was referring to the slovenly part of the word.[/QUOTE]
right so you were saying it's unfair that someone with bad hygiene was hired over you.
piss-poor excuse.
[QUOTE=thisispain;35010180]yeah they get bonuses from the state.
it doesn't mean that they hire less qualified "sluts" over men.
that's simply not true.[/QUOTE]
holy shit, which part do you not want to understand. If someone says "If you hire this guy I get five bucks, but hire as many women as you can, because we get thirty bucks extra for every ten women we rake in" this will inevitably result in this behaviour.
[editline]5th March 2012[/editline]
[QUOTE=thisispain;35010216]right so you were saying it's unfair that someone with bad hygiene was hired over you.
piss-poor excuse.[/QUOTE]
Maybe I'm wrong about this, but coming to a job interview in a ripped T-shirt and dirty jeans usually doesn't work in your favour.
[editline]5th March 2012[/editline]
[QUOTE=Lambeth;35010212]which means messy or careless. so are you saying women are unprofessional?[/QUOTE]
Excellent job at spinning my words!
[QUOTE=deltasquid;35010218]holy shit, which part do you not want to understand. If someone says "If you hire this guy I get five bucks, but hire as many women as you can, because we get thirty bucks extra for every ten women we rake in" this will inevitably result in this behaviour.[/QUOTE]
you say inevitably yet nothing of the sort has happened. your simplistic example fails to mention the fact that there are limited positions and ultimately they have to hire the person qualified because that's how they'd do their business. "thirty bucks" doesn't make up for the countless dollars in lost productivity so that simply doesn't happen. plenty of men keep getting hired over women so your example is neither universal or realistic.
[QUOTE=deltasquid;35010218]Excellent job at spinning my words![/QUOTE]
I am not spinning anything, [url=http://www.thefreedictionary.com/slovenly]that's what slovenly means[/url]
[editline]5th March 2012[/editline]
maybe you use a different dictionary
[QUOTE=thisispain;35010264]you say inevitably yet nothing of the sort has happened. your simplistic example fails to mention the fact that there are limited positions and ultimately they have to hire the person qualified because that's how they'd do their business. "thirty bucks" doesn't make up for the countless dollars in lost productivity so that simply doesn't happen. plenty of men keep getting hired over women so your example is neither universal or realistic.[/QUOTE]
and yet it still sucks for whatever poor schmuck is stuck without a job because the company decided to hire a woman instead of him purely because she is a woman.
[QUOTE=deltasquid;35010218]
Maybe I'm wrong about this, but coming to a job interview in a ripped T-shirt and dirty jeans usually doesn't work in your favour.[/QUOTE]
apparently it does because you suggested that someone in a ripped t-shirt and dirty jeans earned a job over you due to quota's.
so not only are you being extremely defensive, you also can't even get what you wanted to say straight.
[QUOTE=Lambeth;35010278]I am not spinning anything, [url=http://www.thefreedictionary.com/slovenly]that's what slovenly means[/url]
[editline]5th March 2012[/editline]
maybe you use a different dictionary[/QUOTE]
I meant that at no point I said all women were unprofessional.
How do quotas work in real life?
[QUOTE=deltasquid;35010294]and yet it still sucks for whatever poor schmuck is stuck without a job because the company decided to hire a woman instead of him purely because she is a woman.[/QUOTE]
that doesn't happen.
the only companies which would go to this extend over quota's are the jobs that already have high standards for entrance. meaning if someone was rejected at one of these jobs they aren't impeded economically because statistically they are far more likely to get a job if they are a white male with a christian sounding-name.
however at the same company with the same high standards a woman might not be able to get a job because not only is she economically impeded due to them statistically being less likely to have higher education, they are also impeded because statistically they are less likely to get a job with the same credentials.
you're making up a bullshit story that isn't supported by statistical evidence.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
