Melbourne University advertises female-only jobs in bid to remedy gender imbalance...
- Thread starter canada-man
- Start date
fuji likes likes the word idiotic. Guess we will need to buy him a thesaurus as well. Maybe we can get a set?
More insults, still no content.
Undisputed: the unequal number of women entering STEM fields is due to cultural biases throughout the system and not due to any innate difference between men and women. Instead it is due to sexist assumptions that exists in the way women are portrayed, educated, and socialized.
This point is strongly backed by the Science and APA articles linked above, while the misogynists here fall down childish name calling.
So lets fix the problem by discriminating against some young man that had nothing to do with the problem.
The misogynists line is getting awfully tired. If anything you area a misandrist.
Fantasizing,...
1st he states that he goes over his plan to favour a specific women over men with other "managers" and HR , then after questioning him, he states that it is in fact company policy to discriminate against men.
IF it was in fact policy, why the hell would he bull shit about conferring with other "managers" and HR before proceeding, a "manager" would just do it, and STFU.
With the possible exception of course to "warn" HR of is discriminatory action.
Then states that gender is not the "sole" reason he promotes a selected female over a male, then after questioning, he states that yes, that is the sole reason he has selected a female for selective advancement, over an equally qualified male.
FAST
Don't believe ANYTHING fuji posts on this thread.
1st he states that he goes over his plan to favour a specific women over men with other "managers" and HR , then after questioning him, he states that it is in fact company policy to discriminate against men.
IF it was in fact policy, why the hell would he bull shit about conferring with other "managers" and HR before proceeding, a "manager" would just do it, and STFU.
With the possible exception of course to "warn" HR of is discriminatory action.
Then states that gender is not the "sole" reason he promotes a selected female over a male, then after questioning, he states that yes, that is the sole reason he has selected a female for selective advancement, over an equally qualified male.
FAST
Last edited:
After 67000 posts I doubt Fugi is gonna pack it in and come back with a new name.
I don't know the members here very well but I suspect this is not Fugi's first online debate. He seems quite comfortable dealing with people who disagree with him.
Fuji: The 2008 study you cite states that the math tests that were given to 15-year-old students in different countries and were "designed by the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development to be free of cultural biases.
I don't understand what type of cultural bias might be found in a math test. I assume this is code for removing the more difficult questions but it doesn't explain this in the article so I don't know.
It kinda sounds like changing the physical aptitude testing that applicants have to pass to join the police force or fire department. If you lower the bar for all appicants then your testing will pick up fewer differences between men and women.
I didn't read the other study you cited because I don't have a subscription to the site you referenced and thus couldn't get onto it.
I don't think you are incorrect in stating that there are sociological causes to mens' being over-represented in some professions but I think there are probably biological factors as well.
Without actually digging into it (cause I'm lazy like that), I'd assume it is something more along the lines of changing the wording of questions with elements that might be more easily parsed by people in certain cultural groups. For example, if you are creating a question that uses vehicles as an example, don't say "Subway A runs east while subway B runs west" or "The Metro has a track running north and south", but use a more generally understood term like "train". It seems minor, but when people are in a test situation and stressing out already, wording that seems unusual or hard to understand is going to fuck them up, EVEN when it isn't really relevant to the answer.
Because that's how people management works in any large company. If you work in a company large enough to have policy, you work in a company large enough to have management meetings and HR meetings to discuss that policy and what steps are being taken to comply with policy. You will likely even have to fill out a report containing metrics on how your organization is performing against the policy.
That's just how it works.
It would be nice if I could make everything up on my own and ignore the rest of the management structure, but that only happens in small or poorly managed companies.
I never said gender was the sole reason. I have consistently said that it gender together with good performance.
Continuing to misrepresent what I said in order to pretend you have an argument is a sign you have nothing left so you have switched to dishonesty.
An example would be basing a math question on pence and pounds, which would disadvantage somebody who didn't know how many pence were in a pound. Alternately a question phrased in terms of lakh.
An equally difficult question could be constructed without assuming knowledge of British currency, or the Indian number system.
I would assume word problems for example. Obviously simple calculations are just that but I remember a text we used in the 80's had all sorts of 'topical' examples about Expo '67. Teacher had to spend half the class explaining what Expo was instead of being able to focus on the math.
I've worked in various organizations that paid lip service to these principles but I haven't seen them practiced in any particularly organized manner. Then again, I've worked for some shitty organizations too so I can't really judge objectively...LOL!
