Gender Equality Debate: Hot Topics at FriendZone
Résumé
The FriendZone | Make Friends ⋅ Fun Chill Active Chat ⋅ VC Social Gaming ⋅ Memes ⋅ Nitro Emojis ⋅ Anime server recently hosted a lively community discussion regarding gender roles, feminism, and social equality. Members engaged in a deep conversation covering topics from historical sacrifices to modern societal challenges. This thread highlights the diverse perspectives within our active community and showcases the engaging, thought-provoking atmosphere that defines our social space.
that's an argument for including different perspectives, not for assuming competence based on gender...a mixed team is beneficial, but hiring decisions should still be based on merit and relevant skills , ngl with diversity considered transparently rather than through hidden preference
😭 in your own conversation u getting out yapped fahh
But on a different scale it is already unfair for women to have to choose companies and professions whixh have mostly men. It decreases basic human comfort and understanding at the workplace
These guys are too good at debating 😕
Kinda
you're wrong one group shouldn't oppress another just because they were oppressed by them in the past that will just create a cycle where whoever is in power keeps oppressing the others they need to find common ground and actually change the system.
by that reasoning, any gender imbalance would justify discriminating against the majority...but equality means people should be judged as individuals, not treated as representatives of their gender
Hiring decisions have to be based onother factors annd not just merit if you want to improve diversity. There is no other option. But I agree that there should be transparency.
I agree to this….
merit should be the top most factor..
But for a system at a large scale, you can’t look at just individuals.
if merit isnt the primary criterion, then it's no longer equal opportunity..its preferential treatment...diversity can be a goal, but it shouldn't come at the cost of selecting the most qualified candidate
else it will just create sense of not getting wht u deserve in ppl
nd they u wont be able to find best talent
Merit is a big factor, and obviously the person getting hired cross all merit standards. But they prefer a woman over a man with the same merit.
one can't permanently stop inequalities we can only minimise it
its also bout company polices..companies are afraid of getting backlash on not selecting minority
nd theu would call it opression
u can call this being WOKE..or whtever
if individual fairness can be ignored for the sake of group outcomes, then the principle could be used to justify discrimination against any group whenever statistics are imbalanced...thts a dangerous standard lady
Well, from a company standpoint, being qualified is not the only thing that matter. Having the highest GPA can still mean not being able to communicate properly. Being a man with the highest grades and skills, still means not having the unique perspective or experience of a woman. Something that the company required right
if a company needs communication, leadership, or a specific technical skill, it should hire for those qualities directly...using gender as a proxy for perspective risks overlooking qualified individuals who have exactly the experience you're looking for is just bs
Good point. But how do you suggest the group outcome be resolved then. I have thought about it for a long time. There is no other way but to do diversity hiring.
comunication is also sort part of merit tho..its not like women are better at communicating than men always
Nah that was an example to prove that one kind of merit is not enough. I agree on ur point.
larko ko baat karne nhi ati
If diversity hiring is the only solution, how do you determine when it's fair to stop huh?????once representation reaches 50%? 60%? If the principle depends on group outcomes rather than equal treatment, what's the limiting principle???
You cant glorify the things in that way
bhai
🥀
Fax
Scarlet you cant argue over it, I am being rational
I have an example. There was a large scale event, a concert of sorts, where all the organisers happened to be men. There was no gender bias, just men were more qualified and majority. In the event they managed everything, but they did not put up proper washrooms near the main area. And that lead to pure chaos. The event was a disaster.
Nah, when representation is 20-30%. Just enough.
I can, I m being rational too. I have literally lived in the system.
and how does diversity make sure that this wont happen if wwomen oir any mirnority was doin it then it would have been solved
Because a woman would know women’s needs.
if one male organizer had suggested adding more women's washrooms, would his idea count less because he's a man??? if not, then the valuable trait isn't gender...its awareness of user's needs
Tf ppl are still here
And you need to have atleast some of the user’s perspectives to organise stuff better.
Thus diversity in orgs.
You cant deny I am rational here
Thats all I am saying.
well
Basss kr meri jaan 😭😭
You are rational, I agree but there are two sides to this coin.
exactly..but when does thois diversification should stop is the real question
exactly if we shift the goal from equal opportunity to forcing equal outcomes we might end up with people not qualified for the job but still getting it and handing out privileges just to balance the representation of a group is not fair tbh
rationality is not picking a side, I'm talking abt the proper things tht can be seen
