Quite like JP.
Gotta get a full night’s sleep, man. Being a revolutionary is really draining work.
So now the SJWs are roaming the campus with bats. Progressives in action.
Correct me if I’m wrong but it seems to me that it was a planned event, so it’s not like it came as a surprise to the other students, unless they never check their email. Besides it’s not like I’m saying it was justified that they tried to get that professor fired or just acting like a bunch of mobs. I’m just saying that I consider it a decent idea and wouldn’t mind part-taking in one if it happened here. After all it was just one day.
And the competence argument is always used to defend a male-majority and I’m so done with that.
If you support the right for people to discriminate, then the logically consistent position to take is that anyone can do it. IE, a day with no black males. Or no women.
When you start picking and choosing who and who can’t discriminate, that’s when you abandon any claim to be principled. At that point you’re just making emotional decisions, and you don’t have any moral high ground.
Positive discrimination is very often an effective or sometimes, necessary, measure to counter real discrimination.
Competence is the best revenge. You should try it sometime.
I’m sorry, but that’s a steaming pile of male cow excrement.
So your stance lacks any real principle or logic. In your eyes you can just attach “positive” to the type of discrimination you do support, and “real” to the type of discrimination you do not support.
Using your framework someone else could define apartheid as “positive discrimination”, and a no-whites day as “real discrimination”.
Each time I read a message of you it reminds of this great video:
Did you teach in this school?
I feel like you don’t know what positive discrimination is. Gender quota is one form of positive discrimination and it has been very successful.
I can totally understand why has this mindset. There’s a prevailing narrative about white people in western education systems that is overwhelmingly negative. It starts in primary school and can extend all the way until graduate school if you want it to.
No, it isn’t. It doesn’t work. There’s not a single case where positive discrimination or affermative action ever led to a good outcome. They’re just politically correct words to describe revenge. You don’t make things in a society better by making some people feel worse, and teaching young kids that they’re in a bad situation bacuse other people in the past did X is nonsense. You cannot raise kids letting them think that any failure is caused by some sort of mystical white men patrarchy that is ruling a country which until few months ago had a black president, ffs. Those kids end up thinking:“Oh well, why even trying? The patriarchy won’t let me succeed! Damn white men!”.
If the competence argument always defends a male majority, then males are more competent than female in that particular issue. If we were talking about a topic were females were on average more competent than men, then it would be the other way around.
Gender quota is trash. You hire people based on their skills, not based on their genitalia.
Surprised the 77c/1 dollar argument hasn’t showed up yet. Or maybe it did and my brain simply filtered it out and released some endorphins.
I know exactly what positive discrimination is - it’s the kind of discrimination you like, because you lack a consistent moral framework.
“positive” discrimination is whatever you say it is. That’s the problem with discrimination: it’s arbitrary.
Your “successful” gender quotas likewise depend on your definition of “successful”. Is it a Good Thing that we have lots of women sitting at desks, pushing buttons on computers like monkeys in the zoo, so that they can earn enough money to pay other women to look after their children?
In this example, you’re basically making a value judgement that pushing buttons is of more benefit to humanity than looking after one’s own child (and also that people who look after children in nurseries are of lower social status than said button-pushers). Please don’t go on about female brain surgeons etc - they make up 0.01% of the female workforce, and they’ve always been there anyway through sheer force of will and talent. Fun fact: did you know that some of the critical patents for vapour-compression refrigeration were granted to an African-American inventor (or whatever today’s correct term for non-white Americans is)? That was around 1900-something.
These issues are complicated. Simply cheering because there are more people living in a real-life version of The Office is a very shallow way of looking at life, IMO.
No, but are you 5? Maybe they have an affiliated kindergarten that you could join in?
I didn’t go through a western education system.
Who do you think made the domestic violence report system, the laws regarding gender equality in workplace and schools, and the abolishment various ridiculously sexist family and inheritance law happen in Taiwan? Female legislators. Had there not been the 1/3 quota requirement, the situation would be so much worse today.
I’m not even gonna bother responding to this.
So it’s just the way it’s supposed to be that we have lots of men sitting at desks, pushing buttons on computers like monkeys in the zoo, so that they can earn enough money to pay women to look after children. Is that what you’re saying? Because that’s exactly how it comes off.
It is not complicated. The reality is that the gender ratio of the world is practically 1:1, but in politics and in countless of other professional fields, it’s like 3:1, or worse.
The worst thing is that people keep thinking that the situation is fine and should remain so, even trying to argue with it. It’s frankly pretty disgusting.
A lot of rightwingers here. I thought only liberal progressives emigrated.
I’m pointing out the absurdity of half the human population enslaved in jobs they hate to pay for things they don’t really want (mortgages, car loans, etc), and the other half clamouring: “ooh, ooh, me too! Not fair that he gets to be a miserable downtrodden serf until he dies of a heart attack, and I don’t!”.
That in itself suggests to me that women are no smarter than men.
Your implicit value judgement here is that the only actions worth performing are those with monetary reward. You just dismissed a couple of billion full-time mothers as worthless parasites.
Look, I’m not saying a woman’s place is in the home, barefoot and pregnant. If she wants to be a brain surgeon then I’m all for it. The fact remains, not many women are that bothered about being brain surgeons. Not many men are interested in being brain surgeons. That 3x more men than women want to be brain surgeons is of no consequence to the human race; nor, come to think of it, is it of any consequence that 3x as many women as men want to be hairdressers or nurses. There are some careers with a natural 50-50 split: teaching and design spring to mind.
People find their fulfilment in all sorts of ways. Although some of us enjoy our work (I do, mostly), work is not life: it’s just a way to pay the bills. Very few people find self-actualization (or whatever word you want to use) in their career. Of all the women who have come and gone in my life, the most important thing to every single one of them was their children; nothing else even came close. That includes one or two who had high-profile careers. Are you going to criticize them for being gender traitors, or failing to live up to their potential?
Progressives have swung so far to the left that normal, reasonable people look like right-wing nutcases to them. It’s all a matter of perspective.
It’s curious that positive discrimination hasn’t reached professional sports yet with all the big paychecks to be made there Professional sports has to be one of the last bastions of competence over parity left in the workplace.
My guess is it’s because the results of fielding parity teams against competence teams would be so lopsided that it would bring the whole concept of positive discrimination into question so it’s best to not even go there. Still it’s unfair that professional sports rosters are so lop-sided. Maybe a no (fill in the blank) day would work in professional sports too. One day a year crowds would show up at arenas or fields and be met with affirmative teams playing one another in celebration of parity in the workplace day. That’s when we’ll know that fairness has finally triumphed over competence.