Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site brl-sem.ARPA Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!seismo!brl-tgr!brl-sem!jcp From: jcp@brl-sem.ARPA (Joe Pistritto ) Newsgroups: net.women Subject: Re: Discrimination Message-ID: <338@brl-sem.ARPA> Date: Fri, 31-May-85 15:58:09 EDT Article-I.D.: brl-sem.338 Posted: Fri May 31 15:58:09 1985 Date-Received: Sat, 1-Jun-85 14:20:18 EDT References: <354@iham1.UUCP> <25954@lanl.ARPA> <2896@drutx.UUCP> <715@burl.UUCP> <783@mtgzz.UUCP> Reply-To: jcp@brl-semtritto .ARPA (Joe Pistritto ) Organization: Ballistic Research Lab Lines: 77 In article <783@mtgzz.UUCP> seb@mtgzz.UUCP (s.e.badian) writes: > Given the case where a white male and a woman are equally >qualified for a job, who should get the job? Should we flip a coin? why not? Actually, the method used should be identical to what would happen if the two possibilities were identical sexes, etc. >No, I don't think so. Women and minorities have been passed over in >promotions for years. What's wrong with tipping the scales in their >favor a little? Lots. Remember, to solve the problem in the long term (more than 25 years), you want people to STOP using color/gender/origin distinctions. So eliminate them whereever possible, as quickly as possible, and allow society to 'get comfortable with this'. It might not solve the problem now, but our children will live in a society without racial/gender tensions, and things will even themselves out naturally. > Should women and minorities being promoted over white males >that are more qualified? Ideally, no. But since when do promotions >always go to the most qualified person? Like it or not, there are a >lot of politics involved with promotions. People get promoted be- >cause they kiss up to the boss, or have the same philosophy as the >boss. They may not be qualified for the job, but politically they >are the right person for the job. So now the politics have changed >a little. Wrong! The 'politics' you referred to above were those of the superviser, or occasionally, the company. Now you've imposed something externally. The major effect of this is to cause resentment among everyone along the line. (particularly those discriminated against). AND THIS IS PERFECTLY NATURAL and to be expected. After all, blacks and women resented being discriminated against before, so why SHOULDN'T the 'new victims' resent it. I certainly would if it happened to me. >Life is not ideal. Well said! However, thats not an excuse for screwing them up even more. >If you want to stop promoting incompetent women and minorities, over >white men then you'd better stop promoting incompetent white men, just >to be fair. Suggest that to your managment please. > I think that the argument that incompetent people are being >promoted is tossed about to cover up what really is going on. Men >don't like playing second fiddle to women and minorities. Everyone >wants you to believe that lots of incompetent people are being promoted >because it adds fuel to their argument. >(don't try telling me I'm making this up. I have lots of friends who >tell me all about the incompetent women bosses they have, or how >this black person is incompetent but got in the program because the >person is black). Sure, I'm sure there are people like that. On the other hand, I have personally experienced incompetence that could not be remedied due to the possibility of a discrimination claim. This is absurd. If I were running a company, I want people who can do the job. If there aren't enough women to balance the workforce (or blacks, or whatever) according to some bureaucrats quota target, too bad. My performance is rated according to how well I get the job done. I WILL RESENT (and attempt to undermine), ANY OTHER externally imposed factor. This goes as much for promoting the boss's incompetant son as it does for minority quotas. Further, expecting me to do otherwise is to expect me to sacrifice my own [performance rating, reputation, possibly job] in order to promote an ethereal concept of 'equality', (which doesn't sound like any definition of equality I ever heard in math class...), and I WILL REFUSE TO DO THAT EVERY TIME! If you want to solve problems of inequality, then simply remove consideration of extraneous characteristics from society whenever possible, and society will grow into equality all by itself... (given sufficient time, which I think means at least 50 years). -JCP-