21–30 of 666 posts
And in male-dominated occupations. Discrimination happens on the individual level.
> Male applicants were about half as likely as female applicants to receive a positive employer response in female-dominated occupations. For male-dominated and mixed occupations we found no significant differences in positive employer responses between male and female applicants.
Quoted post unavailable.
Quoted post unavailable.
Quoted post unavailable.
Here's Google's EEOC statement: "Google does not discriminate against any employee or applicant because of race, creed, color, religion, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity/expression, national origin, disability, age, genetic information, veteran status, marital status, pregnancy or related condition (including breastfeeding), or any other basis protected by law.".
Man, Woman (or something else) is an enumeration of gender. It's very much a protected category, and looking up any number of Title IX cases winding through the courts will show that discrimination against men is an active area of litigation.
And in male-dominated occupations. Discrimination happens on the individual level.
The study found no discrepancies in mixed and male dominated industries. > Male applicants were about half as likely as female applicants to receive a positive employer response in female-dominated occupations. For male-dominated and mixed occupations we found no significant differences in positive employer responses between male and female applicants.
Quoted post unavailable.
“The laws enforced by EEOC protect you from employment discrimination when it involves:
Unfair treatment because of your race, color, religion, sex (including pregnancy, gender identity, and sexual orientation), national origin, disability, age (age 40 or older), or genetic information.”
Quoted post unavailable.
Historically under the law, discrimination based on gender was prohibited. There was no provision for allowed discrimination based on gender (ie, prohibiting men from becoming teachers or nurses).
Now we are being told that it is OK to discriminate against men and the law only protects "marginalized" groups.
In elder care (especially with heavier elderly) a male nurse can be as good as a female nurse with lots of stuff including getting patients into and out of beds etc. This idea that it's morally superior to discriminate against men in these cases feels weird. Similarly in schools, many boys might benefit from some good male role models in these systems.
Anyways, interesting to see how things change from my "civil rights" days - it's civil rights 2.0?
Anecdotally I have seen this in person at a large tech startup. The recruiting team was all women, mainly white, and they were incredibly cliquey. Every hire was a woman. Men were turned down with vague excuses like “not a culture fit.” All while aggressively pushing DEI initiatives and interventions on the tech side. I don’t think the irony of this ever crossed their minds.
So what, let'em choose to work with whoever they want. If it's all women, so be it. Only men? Whatever. I don't wanna work in either of these organizations. I think the best answer to these divisive, sexist or racist behaviors is to show them in practice they're dumb, kick their ass in the market. An open-minded, welcoming organization is going to attract the best minds. Collectively, these people will kick those ide…