The BBC again: ‘No whites need apply’

listermint

listermint wrote: »

Well you would have different problem solving and or crises handling perspective. Or do you still think you're lived experience is the same as me? You never answered that the first time I asked

Why would my problem solving and or crises handling be different to yours?

Do all women have this same mode of problem solving while men have a different one?

I have no idea how similar or different your “lived experience” is to mine, since I don’t know you. But I don’t think there’s any reason to believe I would have less in common with your experience than with another woman’s experience purely by dint of a pair of chromosomes. I imagine that if you grew up poor and rural, for example, and so did I, then we’d have more in common than either of us would have in common with a multi-million euro heiress. Does that make sense (even if you disagree)?

I don’t think we do a good job of offering equal opportunity, fwiw, but I don’t think positive discrimination initiatives are the best way to improve that.

Girly Gal

listermint wrote: »

No a poster already stated that the feared their son might get discriminated against for jobs . So the visceral reactions to attempts to encourage differing voices in the workplace seems to get people very animated and afraid of any change.

Maybe you need some actual perspective?

Maybe you need to reply to that poster and not making general claims against anyone that doesn't agree with you

listermint

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Why would my problem solving and or crises handling be different to yours?

Do all women have this same mode of problem solving while men have a different one?

I have no idea how similar or different your “lived experience” is to mine, since I don’t know you. But I don’t think there’s any reason to believe I would have less in common with your experience than with another woman’s experience purely by dint of a pair of chromosomes. I imagine that if you grew up poor and rural, for example, and so did I, then we’d have more in common than either of us would have in common with a multi-million euro heiress. Does that make sense (even if you disagree)?

I don’t think we do a good job of offering equal opportunity, fwiw, but I don’t think positive discrimination initiatives are the best way to improve that.

Well i Do,

Isn't it great that we have... Different perspectives on things !

Girly Gal

Deleted User wrote: »

Why would my problem solving and or crises handling be different to yours?

Do all women have this same mode of problem solving while men have a different one?

I have no idea how similar or different your “lived experience” is to mine, since I don’t know you. But I don’t think there’s any reason to believe I would have less in common with your experience than with another woman’s experience purely by dint of a pair of chromosomes. I imagine that if you grew up poor and rural, for example, and so did I, then we’d have more in common than either of us would have in common with a multi-million euro heiress. Does that make sense (even if you disagree)?

I don’t think we do a good job of offering equal opportunity, fwiw, but I don’t think positive discrimination initiatives are the best way to improve that.

Well put, it constantly amazes me how people who claim to be open minded tend to stereotype

listermint

Girly Gal wrote: »

Maybe you need to reply to that poster and not making general claims against anyone that doesn't agree with you

It's an open forum sorry if you take things so personal if we disagree on a subject. You really shouldn't it's not a good thing to hang on to .

listermint

Girly Gal wrote: »

Well put, it constantly amazes me how people who claim to be open minded tend to stereotype

Yes, you've demonstrated complete open mindedness so far.

Trophy winning.

Girly Gal

listermint wrote: »

Yes, you've demonstrated complete open mindedness so far.

Trophy winning.

As have you!

listermint

listermint wrote: »

Well i Do,

Isn't it great that we have... Different perspectives on things !

Well, yes, but I asked the questions I did because I’m interested in your replies to them. So if you fancy answering that’d be cool.

listermint

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Well, yes, but I asked the questions I did because I’m interested in your replies to them. So if you fancy answering that’d be cool.

So it seems you agree that perspectives are a good thing and that gender perspective difference is a reality?

Right ?

Bobblehats

Springwatch?!

For a programme that’s about protecting endangered species, within their natural habitat this is very irrational act.

AndrewJRenko

Bobblehats wrote: »

Springwatch?!

For a programme that’s about protecting endangered species, within their natural habitat this is very irrational act.

Are you seriously suggesting that the white male is an 'endangered species' at the Beeb?

Bobblehats

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Are you seriously suggesting that the white male is an 'endangered species' at the Beeb?

Sorry, I’m colourblind. Are they indigenous?

AndrewJRenko

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Are you fine with positive discrimination like Microsoft's autism hiring programme?

Are you fine with positive discrimination for female roles through political gender quotas?

No

AndrewJRenko

Bobblehats wrote: »

Sorry, I’m colourblind. Are they indigenous?

Is a tendency to evade questions one of the symptoms of your colour blindness?

Bobblehats

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Is a tendency to evade questions one of the symptoms of your colour blindness?

You can usually tell by their features. Although some of thee lesser spotted have distinctive traits on their coat

AndrewJRenko

Deleted User wrote: »

No

And your problem with Microsoft' autism hiring process that has allowed them to find considerable tech talent that would never have gotten through a standard hiring process is?

suicide_circus

suicide_circus wrote: »

∞

Hmmm...

I don't see how anyone who believes in an infinite amount of genders could seriously be arguing in favour of gender quotas. It would be illogical and absurd.

I'm sure listermint doesn't believe that.

AndrewJRenko

Bobblehats wrote: »

You can usually tell by their features. Although some of thee lesser spotted have distinctive traits on their coat

Extreme level evasion there. REally puts your silly claim about endangered species in context.

AndrewJRenko

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

And your problem with Microsoft' autism hiring process that has allowed them to find considerable tech talent that would never have gotten through a standard hiring process is?

I don't believe in diversity quotas Andrew. That's my problem.

Can you give me your understanding of the process, how it helps people with autism and why the same consideration can't be afforded to people who aren't claiming to be "neurodiverse"?

tjhook

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

I've no difficulty with any evidence-based positive action programme to address historical imbalances in recruitment and competitions.

So two 20-year-olds being interviewed for a job. It's fine to discriminate in favour of one of them on the basis of skin colour, because (s)he shares a skin colour with others who were historically given fewer chances?

But I assume you'd be against discriminating on the basis that one candidate belongs to a grouping that historically committed more/less crime?

What makes one right and the other wrong?

Shield

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

And your problem with Microsoft' autism hiring process that has allowed them to find considerable tech talent that would never have gotten through a standard hiring process is?

Ah now come on. It's not as simple as "oh you have autism? then you're HIRED!"

People applying for tech roles must undergo some form of assessment. If an autistic person happens to score highest in all competencies and is the best person for the job, he/she gets hired.

Now let's pretend that a BAME person scored second highest, but a white autistic person scored highest.

Who gets the job?

dubrov

Deleted User wrote: »

I don't believe in diversity quotas Andrew. That's my problem.

Can you give me your understanding of the process, how it helps people with autism and why the same consideration can't be afforded to people who aren't claiming to be "neurodiverse"?

It mad that someone has to explain the answer to that to you

suicide_circus

Deleted User wrote: »

Hmmm...

I don't see how anyone who believes in an infinite amount of genders could seriously be arguing in favour of gender quotas. It would be illogical and absurd.

I'm sure listermint doesn't believe that.

Dont pull at that thread, dunner! this tapestry is barely holding together as it is

dubrov

dubrov wrote: »

It mad that someone has to explain the answer to that to you

Thanks, but could you try?

AndrewJRenko

Shield wrote: »

Ah now come on. It's not as simple as "oh you have autism? then you're HIRED!"

People applying for tech roles must undergo some form of assessment. If an autistic person happens to score highest in all competencies and is the best person for the job, he/she gets hired.

Now let's pretend that a BAME person scored second highest, but a white autistic person scored highest.

Who gets the job?

Who said it was 'as simple as'? You seem to be arguing against something I never said. Maybe you should do some research about it before you go making assumptions?

Deleted User wrote: »

I don't believe in diversity quotas Andrew. That's my problem.

Can you give me your understanding of the process, how it helps people with autism and why the same consideration can't be afforded to people who aren't claiming to be "neurodiverse"?

There are no diversity quotas involved. Maybe you should have done some basic research on it before jumping to your negative conclusion. I'm not here to do your research for you.

suicide_circus

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Are you fine with positive discrimination like Microsoft's autism hiring programme?

Are we equating not being white with having a neurological disability now?

AndrewJRenko

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Who said it was 'as simple as'? You seem to be arguing against something I never said. Maybe you should do some research about it before you go making assumptions?


There are no diversity quotas involved. Maybe you should have done some basic research on it before jumping to your negative conclusion. I'm not here to do your research for you.

Oh right then. So then am I against a more detailed and inclusive interview process where everyone is afforded the same treatment and assessed fairly, with the job going to the person who performed the best, regardless of disability, race or sex?

No I am not.

I did make an assumption that it was some sort of diversity quotas initiative. Probably because of the context in which you brought it up.

It's completely my fault Andrew. Anything you say should be thoroughly looked into before taking it at face value.

Shield

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Who said it was 'as simple as'?

I'm simplifying for the sake of debating a point. If I was to go to the lengths you seem to require, we'd still end up at this point of debate.

The point in question is, in a situation where a BAME person scored second highest in a recruitment competition for a tech job in Microsoft, but a white autistic person scored highest... who gets the job?

listermint

listermint wrote: »

So it seems you agree that perspectives are a good thing and that gender perspective difference is a reality?

Right ?

"Perspectives are a good thing" is a very broad proposition. I think differing perspectives can be good, but I've no time for a perspective that holds that gay men should be thrown off buildings, for example, or that headscarves should be banned, etc.

To be honest, I'm not sure how much I believe in "gender", exactly. Not in the way it's spoken about in the current zeitgeist at any rate. I think it likely that men and women may respectively group loosely around certain behaviours because of historical evolutionary pressures, biology, culture and what have you, and that those behaviours change as time passes and technologies advance. But I don't think there's a "female" perspective and a "male" perspective, and I think that, insofar as the sex of a person is important to their perspective, it is only one very small tile in the vast mosaic of what makes up a person. Enough so as to be almost irrelevant. Similarly any other immutable characteristic. I think people's wealth, upbringing, experience, education, travel, culture and so on are bigger parts of the puzzle—and the individual puzzle almost always ends up being pretty unique.

So if you'll agree that what I described above is what you're referring to when you say "gender", then yes, I suppose that, in a loose fashion, I would agree that "gender perspectives" exist. I just don't think they're important, since they are only one axis of what makes up a whole person, and there are almost always much more interesting and relevant things about a person than their sex (or any other immutable characteristic).

AndrewJRenko

suicide_circus wrote: »

Are we equating not being white with having a neurological disability now?

Let me know when you find anyone equating the two.