Are you a bigot?

[Daz39]

Several issues I think:
Your last clause infers an inherent bias that the female would not be the outstanding candidate, by using 'or.'
By creating scenarios where the minority is not the most qualified/suitable - you reinforce the belief that it is unfair to discriminate on their behalf.
Also selecting 3 as the pool, and 1 as the female sets a bias against reversing the ratio - as 2 females would seem more unfair to a society where male dominance is normalised.

That is the problem - that there is only 1 woman in the interview pool - not that you feel forced to choose one unfairly.

Why do more men aspire to distance running?

[TimR]

Again. I'm not talking about forcing people to chose in order to balance statistics.

It's the other way around.

You use statistics to see is there is a balance. Then you delve further into the results.

As Daz says. The real question is why has only one woman applied? And that is more likely down to inbuilt sexism and what we see as norms in society.

The only way to change it is to challenge it and ask people to question why they think that way.

[mikel]

[quote name='Daz39' timestamp='1487340484' post='3239136']
Several issues I think:
Your last clause infers an inherent bias that the female would not be the outstanding candidate, by using 'or.'
By creating scenarios where the minority is not the most qualified/suitable - you reinforce the belief that it is unfair to discriminate on their behalf.
Also selecting 3 as the pool, and 1 as the female sets a bias against reversing the ratio - as 2 females would seem more unfair to a society where male dominance is normalised.

That is the problem - that there is only 1 woman in the interview pool - not that you feel forced to choose one unfairly.

Why do more men aspire to distance running?
[/quote]

Wrong on all counts, and it was a fictional scenario, so don't get in a twist. I don't actually have a business, really.

First, I didnt say how many females were in the final 3. I said the male was the best candidate based on his interview, his experience and his qualifications. It is possible for a man to have better qualifications, despite what you think. So If thats the case who would you chose, the man cos he is the best candidate or the woman just cos she is a woman? If I had a business to run I would always chose the best person for the job, you can do what you like.

Why do more men aspire to distance running?.............how the f**k should I know. I don't care, we are adults we make our own decisions.There are road, track and fell clubs for everyone. Oh sorry, some people would have too far to travel to run on the fells, now thats not strictly fair is it? Perhaps a re distribution of fells with a 50-50 split North and South would help. In my experience, and its fairly broad, suggests people run because they enjoy it and however good a coach I might be I cant force people to enjoy something. You may as well ask How long is a piece of string?

This is a Bass forum, why do you play bass? Is it cos you like it and want to do it, or do you feel compelled to make up some statistical error in the cosmos?

Edited February 17, 2017 by mikel

[skankdelvar]

[quote name='TimR' timestamp='1487341626' post='3239143']
The real question is why has only one woman applied? And that is more likely down to inbuilt sexism and what we see as norms in society.[/quote]

The 'reason' only one woman applied (in this hypothetical situation) is because it was constructed as a hypothesis. So the reason there is only one woman is obviously [i]not[/i] 'down to inbuilt sexism and what we see as norms in society' but because the situation was described that way*.

I would suggest that your frankly disconcerting inability to spot the difference between a hypothetical and a real world situation is because you were pleasurably distracted by the opportunity to trot out the 'approved' answer, i.e. 'Inbuilt sexism and societal norms must be challenged'.

An un-focussed platitude of this nature would be understandable if coming from a crafty young lad intent upon ingratiating himself into a feminazi's pants but quite unfathomable when the proponent and his audience alike are (with a few exceptions) flabby old men.

[quote name='TimR' timestamp='1487341626' post='3239143']The only way to change it is to challenge it and ask people to question why they think that way.
[/quote]

More to the point, Tim, there are about 29,997 men and three women on BassChat. What are [i]you[/i] doing to encourage more female members?

Because, trust me, ponderously man-splaining about 'sexism' isn't going to have the chickies storming the turnstiles crying 'Whoa, that TimR, I wants me a piece of [i]his [/i]ass'.


* [size=2]Addendum: It now seems there may have been [u]two[/u] hypothetical women although I must admit the possibility that one or both of them may have been a hypothetical man [i]identifying[/i] as a hypothetical woman. Anyway, let us not be judgemental. Time's a-wasting and there are norms to be challenged in the top meadow.[/size]

[color=#faebd7][size=2].[/size][/color]

Edited February 17, 2017 by skankdelvar

[TimR]

[quote name='skankdelvar' timestamp='1487347245' post='3239198']


The 'reason' only one woman applied (in this hypothetical situation) is because it was constructed as a hypothesis. So the reason there is only one woman is obviously [i]not[/i] 'down to inbuilt sexism and what we see as norms in society' but because the situation was described that way*.

I would suggest that your frankly disconcerting inability to spot the difference between a hypothetical and a real world situation is because you were pleasurably distracted by the opportunity to trot out the 'approved' answer, i.e. 'Inbuilt sexism and societal norms must be challenged'.

An un-focussed platitude of this nature would be understandable if coming from a crafty young lad intent upon ingratiating himself into a feminazi's pants but quite unfathomable when the proponent and his audience alike are (with a few exceptions) flabby old men.



More to the point, Tim, there are about 29,997 men and three women on BassChat. What are [i]you[/i] doing to encourage more female members?

Because, trust me, ponderously man-splaining about 'sexism' isn't going to have the chickies storming the turnstiles crying 'Whoa, that TimR, I wants me a piece of [i]his [/i]ass'.


* [size=2]Addendum: It now seems there may have been [u]two[/u] hypothetical women although I must admit the possibility that one or both of them may have been a hypothetical man [i]identifying[/i] as a hypothetical woman. Anyway, let us not be judgemental. Time's a-wasting and there are norms to be challenged in the top meadow.[/size]

[color=#faebd7][size=2].[/size][/color]
[/quote]



Brilliant as usual.

Possibly coloured by spending too much time working at the BBC.

.

Edited February 17, 2017 by TimR

[Beer of the Bass]

[quote name='stingrayPete1977' timestamp='1487331426' post='3239004']
[URL=http://s997.photobucket.com/user/stingraypete/media/stock-photo-beautiful-woman-repair-soldering-a-printed-circuit-board-204001492_zpsy46ovk4q.jpg.html][IMG]http://i997.photobucket.com/albums/af100/stingraypete/stock-photo-beautiful-woman-repair-soldering-a-printed-circuit-board-204001492_zpsy46ovk4q.jpg[/IMG][/URL]


[/quote]

I've heard that in the days when electronics manufacturing was still a decent sized industry in the UK, the assembly line tasks mostly employed women, as that was the norm for lighter duty factory work. My mum had a job soldering PCBs for TV sets in her youth. Probably not massively relevant to the discussion, but there you go...

Edited February 17, 2017 by Beer of the Bass

[Monkey Steve]

we seem to be mixing up a whole load of different issues and ideas here.

Positive discrimination feels wrong, because it's making people select people for jobs, college places, whatever, based on a selection criteria that is not to do with being the best applicant. But it's sometimes a necessary evil when there are issues of institutional racism/sexism/ageism.

The fictional example from Mikel is actually a good one to pick apart. The reason that the male applicant is deemed to be better than the female one is based on a range of factors, one of which is experience. How is that relevant for the job? It's immediately discriminatory on the grounds of age - 50 year olds will have more experience than 25 year olds. If it's an industry in which women are chronically under represented then it's very likely that male applicants will have more experience than females so it adds the question of whether it's sexist.

So to just demand "experience" with no context can be ageist and sexist, and becomes a barrier to entry. If however it's "experience of doing X, Y & Z because they will be a core part of doing the job" then it's completely reasonable to demand it.

And worse than this, we don't realise we're doing it. We are a species of very limited imagination. We think that we are brilliant at our jobs, so we think that anybody like us will be brilliant at the job we are hiring for. We've got twenty years experience in the industry so clearly people with 20 years in the industry will be better than people with only five years in the industry. This is exactly why company boards are full of middle aged white men, because middle aged white men who make the appointments think that middle aged white men are brilliant at running companies.

And there's this:

[url="https://www.theguardian.com/money/2009/oct/18/racism-discrimination-employment-undercover"]https://www.theguard...ment-undercover[/url]

it's a few years old but it's a perennial chestnut that the media will update every few years - I recall seeing something very similar in the last couple of months.

Add to this that studies have shown that diverse companies, the ones whose boards aren't full of middle aged white men, perform much better. Diversity of age sex and ethnicity isn't just token, it brings diversity of thinking and companies who embrace this tend to do better. Maybe Mikel needs to think about appointing the woman because it's time for some fresh ideas that yet another middle aged white man isn't going to bring.

Edited February 17, 2017 by Monkey Steve

[Downdown]

[quote name='Beer of the Bass' timestamp='1487348822' post='3239218'] I've heard that in the days when electronics manufacturing was still a decent sized industry in the UK, the assembly line tasks mostly employed women, as that was the norm for lighter duty factory work. My mum had a job soldering PCBs for TV sets in her youth. Probably not massively relevant to the discussion, but there you go... [/quote]

While that is quite right, I suspect the particular woman in your photograph would be about as useless as a chocolate teapot in that job as she'd be off work all the time with serious burns on her fingers!

[Beer of the Bass]

[quote name='Downdown' timestamp='1487351107' post='3239246']


While that is quite right, I suspect the particular woman in your photograph would be about as useless as a chocolate teapot in that job as she'd be off work all the time with serious burns on her fingers!
[/quote]

Indeed it's an entertainingly awful stock photo, but a few years ago it wouldn't have been hard to find a young woman who knew which end of a soldering iron to hold.

Edited February 17, 2017 by Beer of the Bass

[stingrayPete1977]

[quote name='Beer of the Bass' timestamp='1487348822' post='3239218']


I've heard that in the days when electronics manufacturing was still a decent sized industry in the UK, the assembly line tasks mostly employed women, as that was the norm for lighter duty factory work. My mum had a job soldering PCBs for TV sets in her youth. Probably not massively relevant to the discussion, but there you go...
[/quote]

Yes my mom was a solderer too making missiles of all things, fifty years later she still knows which bit of a soldering iron you hold it by

[taunton-hobbit]

My mum assembled airplanes (but it was in 1940) -
I've never worked for the Beeb
I agree with Skank..........
(sigh)

[TimR]

[quote name='Monkey Steve' timestamp='1487349420' post='3239224']
we seem to be mixing up a whole load of different issues and ideas here.

Positive discrimination feels wrong, because it's making people select people for jobs, college places, whatever, based on a selection criteria that is not to do with being the best applicant. But it's sometimes a necessary evil when there are issues of institutional racism/sexism/ageism.

The fictional example from Mikel is actually a good one to pick apart. The reason that the male applicant is deemed to be better than the female one is based on a range of factors, one of which is experience. How is that relevant for the job? It's immediately discriminatory on the grounds of age - 50 year olds will have more experience than 25 year olds. If it's an industry in which women are chronically under represented then it's very likely that male applicants will have more experience than females so it adds the question of whether it's sexist.

So to just demand "experience" with no context can be ageist and sexist, and becomes a barrier to entry. If however it's "experience of doing X, Y & Z because they will be a core part of doing the job" then it's completely reasonable to demand it.

And worse than this, we don't realise we're doing it. We are a species of very limited imagination. We think that we are brilliant at our jobs, so we think that anybody like us will be brilliant at the job we are hiring for. We've got twenty years experience in the industry so clearly people with 20 years in the industry will be better than people with only five years in the industry. This is exactly why company boards are full of middle aged white men, because middle aged white men who make the appointments think that middle aged white men are brilliant at running companies.

And there's this:

[url="https://www.theguardian.com/money/2009/oct/18/racism-discrimination-employment-undercover"]https://www.theguard...ment-undercover[/url]

it's a few years old but it's a perennial chestnut that the media will update every few years - I recall seeing something very similar in the last couple of months.

Add to this that studies have shown that diverse companies, the ones whose boards aren't full of middle aged white men, perform much better. Diversity of age sex and ethnicity isn't just token, it brings diversity of thinking and companies who embrace this tend to do better. Maybe Mikel needs to think about appointing the woman because it's time for some fresh ideas that yet another middle aged white man isn't going to bring.
[/quote]

Indeed.

We don't realise we're doing it. It's the way we've always done it. It's the right way to do it and the way things should be done. Anyone who says any different is some kind of lefty or feminist etc

Yep. That's bigotry right there.

[mikel]

[quote name='Monkey Steve' timestamp='1487349420' post='3239224']
we seem to be mixing up a whole load of different issues and ideas here.

Positive discrimination feels wrong, because it's making people select people for jobs, college places, whatever, based on a selection criteria that is not to do with being the best applicant. But it's sometimes a necessary evil when there are issues of institutional racism/sexism/ageism.

The fictional example from Mikel is actually a good one to pick apart. The reason that the male applicant is deemed to be better than the female one is based on a range of factors,[b] one of which is experience. How is that relevant for the job[/b]? It's immediately discriminatory on the grounds of age - 50 year olds will have more experience than 25 year olds. If it's an industry in which women are chronically under represented then it's very likely that male applicants will have more experience than females so it adds the question of whether it's sexist.

So to just demand "experience" with no context can be ageist and sexist, and becomes a barrier to entry. If however it's "experience of doing X, Y & Z because they will be a core part of doing the job" then it's completely reasonable to demand it.

And worse than this, we don't realise we're doing it. We are a species of very limited imagination. We think that we are brilliant at our jobs, so we think that anybody like us will be brilliant at the job we are hiring for. We've got twenty years experience in the industry so clearly people with 20 years in the industry will be better than people with only five years in the industry. This is exactly why company boards are full of middle aged white men, because middle aged white men who make the appointments think that middle aged white men are brilliant at running companies.

And there's this:

[url="https://www.theguardian.com/money/2009/oct/18/racism-discrimination-employment-undercover"]https://www.theguard...ment-undercover[/url]

it's a few years old but it's a perennial chestnut that the media will update every few years - I recall seeing something very similar in the last couple of months.

Add to this that studies have shown that diverse companies, the ones whose boards aren't full of middle aged white men, perform much better. Diversity of age sex and ethnicity isn't just token, it brings diversity of thinking and companies who embrace this tend to do better. Maybe Mikel needs to think about appointing the woman because it's time for some fresh ideas that yet another middle aged white man isn't going to bring.
[/quote]

You are simply being pedantic. It was a fictional situation and I stated [b]relevant[/b] experience, better qualification, and coming over much better in the second interview stage. I said nothing about age of applicants so again stop being pedantic. What would be the point of having lots of bricklaying experience at an interview for an electronics management position? It has to be relevant.Do keep up.

I could just have easily have swapped the genders and percentages about and said the woman had the best qualifications etc and that's why I employed her, and made the same point, but that would not have given you anything to froth at the mouth about. But I dont have an axe to grind.

Edited February 17, 2017 by mikel

[skankdelvar]

[quote name='TimR' timestamp='1487348766' post='3239216']
Possibly coloured by spending too much time working at the BBC.
[/quote]

BBC? Not me, Chief. Commercial sector. Finn Dave's the ex-BBC chap.

In any event, I'm a great supporter of women in the workplace: they most of them work harder than men and they'll do the same job for less pay. It's a win-win situation.

[mikel]

[quote name='skankdelvar' timestamp='1487363448' post='3239386']
BBC? Not me, Chief. Commercial sector. Finn Dave's the ex-BBC chap.

In any event, I'm a great supporter of women in the workplace: they most of them work harder than men and they'll do the same job for less pay. It's a win-win situation.
[/quote]

Nice one mate, someone on here with a sense of humor.

[Daz39]

You did actually say how many women there were in your scenario because you said 'one of the men', implying 2 men and 1 woman.
You can't even see when your doing it!!

[skankdelvar]

At times like this I rather wonder how many of us have [i]ever[/i] raised our hand in a work meeting and presented a plan whereby the management might address inequality and challenge social norms. Hardly anyone, I suspect.

In the same way there are vanishingly few debates on BC about re-balancing its overwhelmingly old, white, male profile. Why? Despite all the froth and fury no one here really gives a toss about encouraging 'diversity' because

* Changing things entails we get off our arses and actually do something and that would get in the way of chundering on about our little hobby bands and string gauges and stuff and

* Lots of people here would hate it - not least, I suspect, many of those so fervently and visibly in favour of 'change' - were BC's comfortable 'Old Bobs Club' atmosphere to be dispelled by an influx of teens and women.

[Monkey Steve]

[quote name='mikel' timestamp='1487362985' post='3239378']


You are simply being pedantic. It was a fictional situation and I stated [b]relevant[/b] experience, better qualification, and coming over much better in the second interview stage. I said nothing about age of applicants so again stop being pedantic. What would be the point of having lots of bricklaying experience at an interview for an electronics management position? It has to be relevant.Do keep up.

I could just have easily have swapped the genders and percentages about and said the woman had the best qualifications etc and that's why I employed her, and made the same point, but that would not have given you anything to froth at the mouth about. But I dont have an axe to grind.
[/quote]

Oh dear. If we're going to be pedantic then I suggest that you re-read what I posted rather then getting upset at what you thought I was saying (but wasn't). You are arguing against positive discrimination. I am arguing against institutional discrimination. These. Are. Not. The. Same. Thing.

I was actually saying that your completely fictional example was a good way to test whether there was any obvious or unconcious discrimination , and whether the selection criteria are valid. It is perfectly acceptable to choose the man without needing to maintain quotas. However, the problem is that you need to test whether your definition of what is relevant is not inadvertently discriminatory - you say that the man has relevant experience but how was that set, and does your definition of what is relevant avoid any unconcious discrimination. You say it does, but you would, wouldnt you, because it's unconcious. Do keep up.

But, clearly I'm a right on feminazi. Whatever

Edited February 18, 2017 by Monkey Steve

[stingrayPete1977]

I don't know what was wrong with a firm pat on the bottom if an employee did a good job, world's gone mad I tell ya.

[fleabag]

[quote name='skankdelvar' timestamp='1487287343' post='3238748']
What if a minority doesn't want to be represented? You can't [i]make[/i] people do ballet if they'd rather be doing something else.

Or what if there is a [i]higher[/i] than 'average' representation of any particular minority group within any particular activity, say, for example, Welsh people performing at Eisteddfods?

Should there be fewer Welsh performers there? And - if so - who's going to decide which Welsh people will have to pack up and go home? And who's going to tell them?

And will they tell them in Welsh?

Because if they tell them to go home in English someone will kick up a stink and shout something like 'That's "[i]Mynd adref chi bobl mewn rhesi 1 drwy 21[/i]" you English c**t!' even if the person doing the asking is themselves Welsh but can't speak Welsh, which is another oppressed sub-group actually but let's not get into that otherwise we'll have Plaid Cymru druids out the ying-yang for days on end, banging on about the threat to indigenous culture and Tom Jones.

So basically f**king pointless, really.
[color=#ffffe0].[/color]
[/quote]

On the button Skank

Thats because of the festeringly annoying F%55%ing PC brigade that now infiltrate every aspect / permeate everyone's lives.

I don't care what colour, sex or creed they are. But they're out there in all forms, trying to correct the most miniscule aspects in life, to be right & fair.
Life will never be those things. Ever.

[TimR]

[quote name='fleabag' timestamp='1487428979' post='3239733']


On the button Skank

Thats because of the festeringly annoying F%55%ing PC brigade that now infiltrate every aspect / permeate everyone's lives.

I don't care what colour, sex or creed they are. But they're out there in all forms, trying to correct the most miniscule aspects in life, to be right & fair.
Life will never be those things. Ever.
[/quote]

Full points for the use of 'PC brigade' there.

[skankdelvar]

[quote name='TimR' timestamp='1487431165' post='3239767']
Full points for the use of 'PC brigade' there.


[/quote]

How many points do I get for 'hand-wringing, do-gooder SJW liberals'? Quite a lot, I would have thought.

[fleabag]

A knighthood ?

Sir Skank of Wiltshire on Sea

[PaulWarning]

of course give that the definition of Bigot is, and I copy and paste, 'a person who is intolerant towards those holding different opinions' means if you call somebody a bigot you are in fact a bigot

[taunton-hobbit]

.............be reasonable, do it my way............