Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!bloom-beacon!ora!daemon
From: sammy@cbnewsd.ATT.COM (Sammy)
Newsgroups: soc.feminism
Subject: Re: how to bash feminism without really trying
Message-ID: <2642@cbnewsd.ATT.COM>
Date: 28 Oct 89 15:55:11 GMT
References: <2529@cbnewsd.ATT.COM> <10195@encore.Encore.COM>
Sender: ambar@ora.ora.com
Organization: The Comp Center
Lines: 33
Approved: ambar@ora.com

In article <10195@encore.Encore.COM>, @multimax.UUCP@EDDIE.MIT.EDU (jdarcy) writes:
> gazit@cs.duke.EDU (Hillel Gazit):
: When you accept less qualified women via AA,
: does it improve the image of women?
:: 
:: kja@cbnewsd.ATT.COM (krista.j.anderson):
:: Well, thank-you very much for the vote of confidence in my
:: qualifications.
:: [...]
:: But Hillel claims I don't need AA.  In fact, he doesn't
:: even think I should have been hired because,
:: being a woman, I am obviously unqualified for my job.
: 
: Hillel made no claims about any particular individual's qualifications.  What
: he was saying (as I read it) was that *if* a less qualified woman is hired
: to satisfy AA requirements, *then* it does nothing to improve perceptions of
: women in the workplace.
: 

And if a less qualified man is hired, it does nothing to change perceptions
of women in the workplace.  Sorry, but it is my observation that many more
less qualified men are hired and promoted in the workplace than women,
in fact very frequently over more qualified women.  The women I do see
being hired and being promoted are in general much more qualified than
many of the men.  

While Hillel did make no claims about any particular individual's
qualifications, he did imply that because of AA, less qualified women
were being hired.  It also comes close to sounding as though he meant
that due to AA, women, who are less qualified, are being hired.  I know
that Hillel did not say this.  I don't know that he didn't mean it.  I
do know that this type of remark is not only untrue in most cases, but is
very damaging to women.