Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

Twitter beats its 2016 diversity goals but its workforce is still predominantly white Watch

    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Chief Wiggum)
    But it's the companies who are "taking action". Twitter is actively trying to recruit more minorities and women. What do you mean by "men aren't taking action but women are". What action are women taking? It's the companies taking the "action", not the women who are applying.

    Using your logic, the NHS should "hire for diversity", and specifically hire more male nurses. Would I support that? No, it is sexist.

    And why should I care about "diversity"? As long as the best applicants are getting hired, that's all that matters.
    Maybe they are trying to overcome cognitive biases that assume whites and men are the better candidates?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Let me just fire all these nice people, who earned their jobs, through education and hardship, (well most of them anyways) and when they claim unfair dismissal, I'll just claim they they were white and therefore entitled. Sounds stupid, doesn't it. Threads like this, where people complain about something without reading into it, all because they have a vendetta towards white, Caucasian males. I'm not saying that this thread is like that, but some are. Crying "OH NO there are more white people than any other race, in a company that was founded in a predominantly white country." They've met their diversity goals, you should be happy.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by yudothis)
    Might have been better.

    Might have ended up worse, too.
    May very well have done BUT your approach was based on an absolute definitive strategy to recruit more women simply because they were women.

    My point highlights the potential flaw in your approach because you would not necessarily have ended up with the best employees.

    Another company might which you and your narrow-minded blinkered cohorts seem to overlook, or worse, choose to deliberately ignore.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by yudothis)
    Maybe they are trying to overcome cognitive biases that assume whites and men are the better candidates?
    So maybe hospitals should do the same to overcome cognitive biases that assume women are better nurses?
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    20
    (Original post by Chief Wiggum)
    So maybe hospitals should do the same to overcome cognitive biases that assume women are better nurses?
    Women are generally better nurses, because there is a biological difference between men and women. E.g. women are more empathetie, and care more about children and the vulnerable.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Mathemagicien)
    Women are generally better nurses, because there is a biological difference between men and women. E.g. women are more empathetie, and care more about children and the vulnerable.

    Mmmmm.

    So, men make better firemen,soldiers, policemen etc. because they're stronger and less emotional than women?
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Mathemagicien)
    Women are generally better nurses, because there is a biological difference between men and women. E.g. women are more empathetie, and care more about children and the vulnerable.
    Making a similar statement about men and technology careers would be viewed as sexist.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by viffer)
    May very well have done BUT your approach was based on an absolute definitive strategy to recruit more women simply because they were women.

    My point highlights the potential flaw in your approach because you would not necessarily have ended up with the best employees.

    Another company might which you and your narrow-minded blinkered cohorts seem to overlook, or worse, choose to deliberately ignore.
    You are assuming men are better than women.

    Also, you have no clue how recruiting works, do you?
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Chief Wiggum)
    So maybe hospitals should do the same to overcome cognitive biases that assume women are better nurses?
    Why are you incapable of viewing a women's issue without bringing up a man's issue?

    Should all women's issues be ignored, because there are also men's issues?

    This is you: "We should not help group x, until someone helps group y".

    It's pathetic.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Chief Wiggum)
    Making a similar statement about men and technology careers would be viewed as sexist.
    Because there is evidence to support that men are innately better at tech than women?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by yudothis)
    You are assuming men are better than women.

    Also, you have no clue how recruiting works, do you?
    Am I? Don't I?

    While not really surprised having read your naive comments I don't know how you could reach either conclusion from anything I have said.

    FWIW, I have been directly and indirectly involved in the recruitment of 100s of people. ie employed them myself or brokered for others. Never have I thought it necessary or appropriate to employ or recommend less able/competent candidates because of their X/Y chromosome mix.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by yudothis)
    Why are you incapable of viewing a women's issue without bringing up a man's issue?

    Should all women's issues be ignored, because there are also men's issues?

    This is you: "We should not help group x, until someone helps group y".

    It's pathetic.
    I'm pointing out a double standard, held by hypocrites. I couldn't care less about men in nursing. I'm not trying to help men or women.

    What evidence is there that women make better nurses?
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    20
    (Original post by yudothis)
    Because there is evidence to support that men are innately better at tech than women?
    lol go on then, what is this evidence?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Mathemagicien)
    lol go on then, what is this evidence?
    You know how you added a ? at the end. So did they.

    Like most of your posts, you really need to take a step back and reflect before firing off a "Now hang on a cotton pickin' minute......" missive. You will save yourself from looking a bit of an eejit
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Mathemagicien)
    lol go on then, what is this evidence?
    He meant there is no such evidence.

    You've said women are better nurses though. Where's your evidence for that?
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    20
    (Original post by Chief Wiggum)
    He meant there is no such evidence.

    You've said women are better nurses though. Where's your evidence for that?
    Well, I don't have evidence as such, but women are more empathetic etc. than men, on average, right?
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by viffer)
    Am I? Don't I?

    While not really surprised having read your naive comments I don't know how you could reach either conclusion from anything I have said.

    FWIW, I have been directly and indirectly involved in the recruitment of 100s of people. ie employed them myself or brokered for others. Never have I thought it necessary or appropriate to employ or recommend less able/competent candidates because of their X/Y chromosome mix.
    Implicitly. And hiding it behind "meritocracy must rule supreme".
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Mathemagicien)
    lol go on then, what is this evidence?
    That's my point, is there any such evidence?
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Chief Wiggum)
    I'm pointing out a double standard, held by hypocrites. I couldn't care less about men in nursing. I'm not trying to help men or women.

    What evidence is there that women make better nurses?
    How is it a double standard?

    I couldn't care, I have seen some very good male nurses.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by yudothis)
    Implicitly. And hiding it behind "meritocracy must rule supreme".
    You are bonkers
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Will you be richer or poorer than your parents?
    Useful resources
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.