Is our society doing something wrong? (bullying, bachelor, girls, student)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
But for 13 years with flags going up each PISA result indicating that it was not working ?
The politicians didn't want to admit failure and neither did the schools.
If corporations worked like that they'd all be bankrupt.
Shouldn't have taken 13 years to determine something isn't working.
Actually, corporations work like that all the time.
I graduated in the late 70's and then went to work.
That was post-feminist movement. That movement produced sweeping new laws. One example is that Employers could not ask you if you had plans to become pregnant during an interview.
Another was an employer could not fire you if you became pregnant.
IMO those were equal opportunity laws. They gave women an equal chance to get ahead in a male dominated workplace.
I equate what they are implementing today more along the lines of affirmative action for females.
It's not the "best man for the job"; it's "let's find a female for the job".
Actually, corporations work like that all the time.
I can't speak for all industries but in software, unannounced products are given about 2-3 years and then it's either let's continue or let's cut our losses now and end the project.
Was always a hard pill to swallow having invested so much effort and time.
Some people can't handle facts as simply as they are told, either.
I have actually had a female boss (whom I had a good working relationship with) discuss with me how she would back-fill my position after I announced my departure:
"Do you have anyone you'd suggest to interview? Maybe I could have a team of all ladies!" with a smile on her face. We call it unconscious bias. Starbucks called it unconscious bias when they forewent an afternoon's worth of revenue to teach their employees about it. Sephora did the same thing a few days ago.
Sometimes we have this grand vision for something, but part of that vision can include elements our subconscious has already decided upon. Things that should really be open to being whatever is the best fit. The litmus test for this is "can I legally say I want <insert trait here> to be a requirement of the job?"
Contrary to what has been echoed as of late, this bias can come from anyone.
I think putting a gender quota on hiring is a more haphazard approach. Did they get the job because they are qualified or did they get the job because they are female ?
Nobody should ‘get’ more scholarships than anyone else, based on anything other than achievement in the eyes of those who are awarding it.
A foundation for medical research should be able to select from students who have shown a talent & dedication for medical science. A Literature society should be able to award a student who has shown a talent & dedication for writing.
Nobody is paying women any less for doing the same job as a man. Women are earning less overall in those jobs because they tend to be the family member who provides caregiving for other family members, as well as taking time off for children. In other words; women are earning less for the job, due to doing less on the job.
Which doesn’t mean doing less work: If we were not to do it; the cost to the taxpayers could be as high as up to $600/day per disabled person. Since 2013; the economic value of services provided by uncompensated family caregivers (mostly women), has exceeded the annual compensated claims for Medicare. Now that is a sobering fact.
And it’s off topic; so I will stop there.
There are many studies that show that women are paid less than men when controlling for factors such as education, previous job experience, and the like. I find the statement in blue highly insulting to women. In point of fact, there are studies that show what Margaret Thatcher said "In politics, if you want something said, ask a man. If you want something done, ask a woman." Now that's for a very specific field, but per the research, it applies a lot of places, if not across the board. https://www.payscale.com/data/gender-pay-gap
Quote:
Originally Posted by TMSRetired
I graduated in the late 70's and then went to work.
That was post-feminist movement. That movement produced sweeping new laws. One example is that Employers could not ask you if you had plans to become pregnant during an interview.
Another was an employer could not fire you if you became pregnant.
IMO those were equal opportunity laws. They gave women an equal chance to get ahead in a male dominated workplace.
I equate what they are implementing today more along the lines of affirmative action for females. It's not the "best man for the job"; it's "let's find a female for the job".
I didn't read the article (ad blocker popup) but I did hunt down the study. Right at the start it says less women get promoted because there's less women to promote and even less who are qualified to be promoted.
As for the rest, I retired in 2010. The workplace environment was already changing by then and this study is 5 years past that. I know a lot of social issues have become workplace issues. Social issues tend to be more emotion based.
And no, I'm not anti-woman. This thread is about how changing trends are leaving boys behind.
I think we should be color blind and gender blind when it comes to who is best for the job.
I didn't read the article (ad blocker popup) but I did hunt down the study. Right at the start it says less women get promoted because there's less women to promote and even less who are qualified to be promoted.
As for the rest, I retired in 2010. The workplace environment was already changing by then and this study is 5 years past that. I know a lot of social issues have become workplace issues. Social issues tend to be more emotion based.
And no, I'm not anti-woman. This thread is about how changing trends are leaving boys behind.
I think we should be color blind and gender blind when it comes to who is best for the job.
Interestingly, one study of women getting positions in symphony orchestras showed that many more women got the jobs when the person evaluating them did not know they were female (blind auditions behind a screen). It is very difficult to eliminate gender bias, but that is where this result comes into play.
In the 1970s and 1980s, orchestras began using blind auditions. Candidates are situated on a stage behind a screen to play for a jury that cannot see them. In some orchestras, blind auditions are used just for the preliminary selection while others use it all the way to the end, until a hiring decision is made.
Even when the screen is only used for the preliminary round, it has a powerful impact; researchers have determined that this step alone makes it 50% more likely that a woman will advance to the finals. And the screen has also been demonstrated to be the source of a surge in the number of women being offered positions.
By the way, even a screen doesn't always yield a gender blind event. Screens keep juries from seeing the candidates move into position, but the telltale sounds of a woman's shoes allegedly influenced some jury members such that aspiring musicians were instructed to remove their footwear before coming onto the stage.
I didn't read the article (ad blocker popup) but I did hunt down the study. Right at the start it says less women get promoted because there's less women to promote and even less who are qualified to be promoted.
As for the rest, I retired in 2010. The workplace environment was already changing by then and this study is 5 years past that. I know a lot of social issues have become workplace issues. Social issues tend to be more emotion based.
And no, I'm not anti-woman. This thread is about how changing trends are leaving boys behind.
I think we should be color blind and gender blind when it comes to who is best for the job.
I'd like to see a link to this study. That's certainly not what the article says.
You want gender blindness but you talk as if there's a conspiracy against men.
I'd like to see a link to this study. That's certainly not what the article says.
You want gender blindness but you talk as if there's a conspiracy against men.
You posted an article about a study and didn't bother to read the study yourself ?
Just copy the article headline and paste it into google. That should get you the actual study.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
