I’d like to start a series seeking viewpoints from across the political spectrum in general discussions about modern society and where everyone stands on what is not working, what is working, and where we see things going in the future.

Please answer in good-faith and if you don’t consider yourself conservative or “to the right”, please reserve top-level discussion for those folks so it reaches the “right” folks haha.

Please don’t downvote respectful content that is merely contrary to your political sensibillities, lets have actual discourse and learn more about each other and our respective viewpoints.

Will be doing other sides soon but lets start with this and see where it takes us.

  • Wanderer
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    5 months ago

    you need to hire a higher number of women / Black people / handicapped people to catch up

    Thus reads like diversity hire.

    Look we both agree give everyone the sane opportunity, education houses etc.

    But you get a company like this 100 people. Over 30’s: male 80:20 female

    So you get 10 new entry level openings, applications male 70:30 female. There a load of shit going on here, but to make it simple we both agree women have previously been under represented (let’s ignore children and whatever).

    There are some people who say we are going to have an intake of under 30’s so because the workforce isn’t 50:50 male to female we should ideally hire only women until we get it to 50:50.

    So now you hire 10 women and have a workforce of male 80:30 women. Right?

    That’s not fair. Even hiring 50% women isn’t fair. Everyone should have equal opportunity, thats thr only way it is fair. It should be 7 men 3 women, on average.

    Discriminating against men now doesn’t stop women in the past being discriminated against it just adds to the amount of people discriminated against. There is no other way to treat people than fairly.

    • Uruanna@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      5 months ago

      It should be 7 men 3 women, on average

      No, it should not. That’s just ridiculous. You don’t fix unequality by maintaining it just because that’s what you’re always known. You want to keep the privileges you have now while denying improving the situation of others, because you think losing your unfair advantage over others becomes unfair to you, that’s nonsense.

      Hiring 50/50 is not discriminating against you just because you were at 70 before. You don’t get to decide that half the female population of the planet shouldn’t be allowed to work - because that’s what your 70/30 is, if the 70 is most of the male population (let’s imagine a >90% employment rate), then the 30 is around half of the female population, you’re saying the other half will never be allowed to work. You’re assuming they can keep being SAHM or whatever else.

      The thing is that the 70% of workers being men shouldn’t mean there are less men if it becomes 50%. Men aren’t losing their jobs. It means there are more workers, including the same number of men, and more women. This isn’t supposed to be a zero sum game when population grows.

      • Wanderer
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        5 months ago

        You’re an idiot. Every single person gets a fair 10% chance.

        Just because 1 woman wants to be an engineer and 10 men do doesn’t mean the woman is 10 times better than men. Or that she should be 10 times as likely to get a job just for being a woman. It should me she gets equal opportunity as men. If you only hire a woman because she is a woman that’s not equality.

        It never goes the other way around. Do you think we should we only hire male teachers and male nursery staff and male nurses because they are under represented?

        • Uruanna@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          5 months ago

          Everyone getting the same chance means 50/50 hiring because believe it or not, women do want to work in all fieds; the current 70/30 soon goes down to 50/50 from there. And yes, men do want to work in healthcare and child care and education, surprise. Why do you need to make sure they can’t? Because that is in fact the same process that happens, one side is actively shunned from some jobs and the other side gets shunned all the same, even though there are people on both sides who do want to work in both types of jobs. The reality that you pretend doesn’t exist is that there are 10 women who want to be an engineer at the beginning of their education and they get stomped down to 1 until she gets passed over for some 10 men who at first wanted to work in healthcare but were bullied into engineering. This 1 woman to 10 men scenario is your own creation.

          It takes actual work of being unfair to maintain the imbalance you benefit from. Man you don’t even understand the math of your own argument, maybe the women who get hired over you actually are more skilled.

          • Wanderer
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            5 months ago

            Actually countries that have more equality or have increased their equality over time shows that there is an increase in gender divide through certain jobs.

            So no it isn’t 50:50.