Re:Women rise through the ranks of IT more rapidly than men
by bbctol on Tuesday October 11, 2016 @05:02PM
(#12688496)
So you have a problem with saying "we should hire more women," but you don't have a problem with women being given jobs because they are women? I am literally just confused. Do you think women are being given jobs that should have gone to men in a fair world or not?
Re:Women rise through the ranks of IT more rapidly than men
by mhuffman on Tuesday October 11, 2016 @05:46PM
(#12688788)
> I am literally just confused
Yes you are. You have completely confused everything I have written, even though I thought it was in plain English.
> Do you think women are being given jobs that should have gone to men in a fair world or not?
I think people should hire blindly using blind job tests and weighted experience/education. That would get rid of all "-isms".
I imagine that people would still find something to bitch about, though.
I did not.
However, since you bring it up, women statistically can not move up the ranks faster than men, right?
There are about 50/50 men/women in the country. They are the same in every way but genitals.
So about half of those rising through the ranks should be men and about half women. Right?
I mean this is literally the argument that sexism explains our current workforce distribution, so I presume the argument holds the other way around?
I am suggesting that "we should hire more women" is every bit as sexist as "we should hire more men".
If you want to get rid of all -isms, why not do blind hires based on resume/testing (weighted some way)?