Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Fedora Fills Its Role For A Diversity Advisor

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #51
    Originally posted by DIRT View Post

    Troll post. That has been debunked many times.
    Why would you call me a troll?
    The data indicates what I said.
    Even more recently http://www.nytimes.com/2016/03/20/up...rops.html?_r=0

    BTW, I'm not saying anything about the causes, just that it seems like the data makes this pretty clear.
    That said, if you're aware of some other good data sources that tell a different tale, I'd be interested.

    Comment


    • #52
      In universities, three women graduate for every two men. This is not a problem and it seems that more women than men are interested in attending university; however, the problem is that universities measure diversity by department. They realize that not many women graduate or are interested in STEM. The response is to lower entrance requirements and promote special incentives for women. This isn't because women are less capable than men. It reaches a larger population and thus reaches more women.

      On the other hand, even in departments dominated by women, there are no benefits or incentives for men.

      Comment


      • #53
        Originally posted by eggbert View Post
        I would argue there is no issue to solve. If dorky white guys happen to be the majority in software development, then SO WHAT? There are plenty of things that dorky white guys are not good at that other "groups" are. People are different. Deal with it.
        well, the issue is mostly how unwashed white nerds tend to react to non-unwashed non-white non-nerds, especially 'wimmins, but also other more normal white men.

        That is one of the reasons there aren't a lot of 'wimmins or other minorities in that work places, even if they do have the capability to be good or decent programmers. Hell, even

        Also, saying that only dorky white guys can be good software developers is nonsense.

        Welcome everyone, don't be a dick, and knock off the orwellian group think.
        This has to be enforced on all parties, white dorks and whiny victimists.

        Comment


        • #54
          1.april is in one week...

          Comment


          • #55
            Right, let's try to sift through all this hypocrisy shall we?

            First off, on-topic, "diversity promotion".
            I'm interested to see that the person in the new position (didn't actually read the name, just the comments made by the person, ie - their contribution and am thus judging them on that... and the role I suppose) has commented:
            1) An English practice program with volunteers (not a bad thing IMO, and it shows those people willing to go the extra mile).
            2) Meetings for culture enlightenment (utterly pointless.. You're trying to introduce borders or local traditions into the internet here)
            3) Meetings to review CoC/politics based on 'diversity' (DANGER WILL ROBINSON!! I can see the ass-backwards quotas and regressive stack of privilege here)
            4) Talking about their "experiences" (I only panic here because of previous SJW use of this.. This terminology can also mean a way to take complaints about a process and correct it... but should not really need a special "diversity" structure behind it.. I'm sure there is a complaints process already in place?)

            So, now that's over and onto the comments.
            I see people playing the victim card all around.
            Can we all admit that (bad) "discrimination" is actually when one person does an action based on the innate qualities of another individual.. For example an employer picking one candidate over another because of their race, gender, sexual leanings, etc?
            ('Good' discrimination is basically preferring one candidate over the other based on the role and merit.. basically wanting a certain type of person who is good with children to be in social work is much better than getting a person who hates kids in there, etc)

            In that case there is no "reverse discrimination" ... There is simply "discrimination" (same with sexism, racism, etc). *anyone* can be a part of this - although it should be proven before actions are taken (we should all be innocent until guilty after all).

            There was a brief discussion concerning the earnings gap (hahaha, the article says ~20%).
            I'm glad I haven't seen anything saying "wage" gap, as "earnings" is the key word here!
            2 people can be doing totally different hours, but being paid the same wage, and *earn* different amounts - because that's the nature of working more hours.
            The use of medians vs means, the fact that the values never take into account hours worked, bonuses for specific jobs, and the fact that these high percent differences are promoted using overly generic terms (all tech-based managerial roles... ok, so what do you actually mean by that? break it down!) gives unreasonably high numbers.
            This type of discussion is a bit moot in this conversation, but a simple google search for "wage gap myth" gives several sources which actually go more in depth with the numbers and - surprise surprise - reduces the gap significantly..
            Most of the data seems to be American and I know that pay raises are often dependent on the employee chasing the employer, and that has been cited before.
            ANYWAY, don't really want to go there any further as it's not technical and there are laws against it. I would urge anyone who has PROOF of wage discrimination to go to court.
            This has to be enforced on all parties, white dorks and whiny victimists.
            How very authoritarian of you Mr Orwell.
            People need a thicker skin nowadays. Programmers call each other idiots (as do normal people around the world), they tend to defend groups they identify with (be that rightly or wrongly), and some even skew the facts to fit them (or worse, go looking for facts to support their claims, rather than the other way around).

            The problem with authoritarians is they always look at the outcome for equality - instead of the actual "equality of opportunity".
            Just because a certain type of person doesn't (or can't) do a certain role, doesn't mean we should put things in place to force that role to go to that person.
            Nor should a role go to a person who is less capable simply because of a backwards "quota".

            Comment


            • #56
              Originally posted by killyou View Post
              Isn't an anti-diversity troll like that a good reason for men to welcome a diversity advisor?

              Cheers,
              _

              Comment


              • #57
                Originally posted by Kite View Post
                I can also only attest to my own personal experience, and my experience rather directly contradicts yours.

                I graduated at the top of my class with a bachelor's in mathematics. My graduating class and the class prior (those I know), restricted to math majors, contained slightly more female students than male students. All of these were clamored over by businesses, and not one of them had difficulty finding their way into their choice of job or graduate school. In contrast, I ended up with a minimum wage job as a cashier after struggling for a year to find jobs utilizing my degree, a total of two of which would seriously consider me (excluding "minorities preferred" listings, which I learned quite quickly had no interest in hiring me despite my qualifications), neither of which worked out. Most of the other male graduates struggled to find jobs or first-pick grad schools similarly.

                Worse, it drove a wedge between the female and male sides of our class --- *everyone* recognized the presence of this reverse discrimination, as it was completely obvious given the demographics and opportunities of our class, and it completely colored discussions of post-graduation plans for the worse. Nobody blamed these young female mathematicians for this, but the look of guilt on the faces of these young mathematicians when I had to respond "I've heard nothing yet" was both heartrending and haunting.

                I would condemn no one to continually questioning whether they have truly merited their successes, or whether their success has been nothing more than symbolic political meddling. It is better to be hated and try and fail, than it is to be favored and try and succeed; for a failure can be overcome in spite of adversity, and time can prove the value of once-ignored work, but no amount of effort can take the fruit of your labors from the realm of merely symbolic adoration into the domain of merited recognition.
                I don't honestly know, but it does sound like there is something more going on than you understand. What you described occurred over multiple years and multiple events pervasively. I don't think you can attribute entirely your experiences to discrimination although I do believe it played a role.

                Comment


                • #58
                  "Those whom God wishes to destroy, he first deprives of their senses."
                  Euripides

                  Punishment for spreading malware and mischief: systemD(efeat), Gnome 3, Fedora modularization, etc.

                  Poison
                  Album: Trash
                  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qq4j1LtCdww

                  Comment


                  • #59
                    Originally posted by liam View Post

                    Why would you call me a troll?
                    The data indicates what I said.
                    Even more recently http://www.nytimes.com/2016/03/20/up...rops.html?_r=0

                    BTW, I'm not saying anything about the causes, just that it seems like the data makes this pretty clear.
                    That said, if you're aware of some other good data sources that tell a different tale, I'd be interested.
                    You isolated one post by ny times. Most people can agree that the news is usually not very honest.

                    I'll humor you anyway, I'm bored today. As far as male dominated fields, men are way more competitive than women are and there is a difference in performance. Yeah they can do the job but men usually go above and beyond and push themselves past their limits. Something I don't see a lot of women doing. Also the average man before they get out of highschool, they are about as capable as a well trained female Olympic athlete. My job requires me to be able to climb many hundred feet and be a technician once I get up there. They can't find a women who can do my job. I live in one of the fattest cities in america so that could be why.

                    Mentally we are different. I'm not saying one is smarter than the other, but men and women have different interests and like doing different things. Because of those different interests most women do different jobs better or worse then men do depending on the job.

                    Also women don't like to take the dangerous jobs as often and women don't negotiate raises in pay as aggressively as men.

                    When our dear president said on national TV that women make less, they only took the average earning of women and men and took nothing else into consideration like women getting pregnant and becoming a mother, not wanting to do dangerous jobs, ect.

                    Btw did you know that whites make around $0.80 for ever $1 an asian makes?

                    Comment


                    • #60
                      Wait... am I still on phoronix?

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X