First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  Next  Last

Diversity is good

Post Reply
37 cr points
Send Message: GB Post
33 / M
Offline
Posted 9/9/18 , edited 9/12/18

Greylurker wrote:


jn2002dk wrote:


Greylurker wrote:

So you are saying that things like the recent events at Tokyo University where Women's scores in medicine were deliberately lowered, simply because they were women don't happen then?

Like it or not there are biases to be found everywhere, very often at the higher levels of any organization, where the old guard are set in their ways and see the world through an outdated lens.

If efforts are not made to force change, there will not be change

Do you have evidence of your claim that minorities are 'put behind'?

PS Women aren't minorities, just in case you're not aware




what would you consider acceptable evidence then; the government studies do in many nations around the world, the United nation studies. Or is it just the ones from Britbart that support the illusion that whites are the ones under attack that you consider valid?


(Tokyo university is a very recent example of Bias, or again would you like to deny that Bias exists?)


Let's repeat this - women are not a minority. Please read and understand this and stop bringing up a case about women in Tokyo as if it's relevant to diversity hires in europe and USA

With that out of the way, where is your evidence? You keep posting yet you still haven't presented any evidence what so ever to support your claim. Could be it you don't have any?

Link some government studies and we'll see if they are actual scientific studies. As for the UN, i'm sorry but i don't accept anything from an organisation that has China and Saudi Arabia on their human rights council. You'd be hard pressed to find an organisation with less credibility than the UN

At any rate it should be very easy for you to find real scientific peer reviewed studies if this alleged bias is so widespread
15707 cr points
Send Message: GB Post
☆Land of sweets☆
Offline
Posted 9/9/18 , edited 9/9/18


Between 60 and 70 percent of faculties of medicine had higher acceptance rates for male applicants over the past six years, according to a study triggered by an entrance exam rigging scandal at Tokyo Medical University.
...

According to ministry officials, between fiscal 2013 and fiscal 2018, 11.25 percent of all male applicants to faculties of medicine passed while only 9.55 percent of all female applicants were accepted.

In every given year, between 46 and 57 universities had higher pass ratios for male applicants, and the difference in the overall pass ratios was about the same every year.

The ministry did not differentiate between the ordinary entrance exam and acceptance through recommendations.
...
Looking at universities that held entrance exams for all six years, the university that had the highest ratio for male applicants in comparison to female applicants was Juntendo University, where the male pass ratio was 1.67 times higher than that for female applicants.

Other universities with similar trends were Showa University at 1.54 times; Nihon University at 1.49 times; and Kyushu University at 1.43 times.

Meanwhile, at 17 universities, the average pass rate over the six years was higher for female applicants. At Hirosaki University in Aomori Prefecture, the female pass rate was 1.34 times higher than for male applicants.

At Tokyo Medical University, male applicants had a pass rate 1.29 times higher than female applicants.
...
According to the fiscal 2017 study into the ratios of successful entrants to all applicants for all faculties of study, female applicants had a pass ratio of 15.87 percent compared to the 13.15 percent of male applicants.

Even for many science and engineering faculties, the pass ratio for female applicants tended to be higher than for males.

However, singling out faculties of medicine, the pass ratio for male applicants was about 1.11 times higher than for females, a figure similar to that of the latest ministry study.

https://www.msn.com/en-sg/news/msn/male-acceptance-rate-higher-at-more-than-half-of-medical-schools/ar-BBMThRp

in some universities, the pass rate for males was higher while in others, the pass rate for females was higher.
when taking all majors into consideration, females actually had a higher acceptance rate. (simpsons paradox?)
for many science and engineering majors, females had a higher acceptance rate.


1509 cr points
Send Message: GB Post
18 / F / AZ
Offline
Posted 9/9/18 , edited 9/9/18

Ryulightorb wrote:



can you diversify your opinion into the trash




Sure, i'll place it next to you
511 cr points
Send Message: GB Post
Offline
Posted 9/9/18 , edited 9/9/18


As with everything, there is a good side and a bad side, though I will say it is somewhat over-rated.

Sketcy 
912 cr points
Send Message: GB Post
F / Earth
Offline
Posted 9/9/18 , edited 9/12/18

Skimt wrote:


Sketcy wrote:

So, I'm not sure what you mean by "segregation." Please don't add to stereotypes based off what you see on TV...


Subculture. Subculture is the result of lumping immigrants together geographically instead of spreading them out. It is the crux of racism, and is an issue that has been combated in European countries by setting quotas of immigrants per sector over time, so long as the location or relocation does not separate families. The integration process also includes education. These are policies that stem from the mistakes made by among other the U.S., South Africa, and Germany (pre-WW1 and pre-WW2), at times when there was little to no former knowledge around the proceedings necessary when taking in waves of immigrants and liberating mass of slaves. Today, not dealing with these policies knowing what we know now, is the same as indirectly segregating people, or more specifically letting the people segregate themselves. Those of dark complexion are largely segregated from those of lighter complexion in America, but not because of some invisible hand. It's because of past ignorance and neglect, and a garbage subculture perpetuated by mainstream media.



We don't lump immigrants or races together geographically. Good grief...
Again, fueling stereotypes...

We don't control who lives where at all (unlike those European quotas you referenced that apparently tell how much % of a person can live someplace based on their race to make it "diversified." That's what I meant before about diversity solely to say you have it). In the United States, if a house is for sale, someone can buy it. Period. Regardless of race or nationality. Now, my friend is Vietnamese-American and talked about the Vietnamese community where many live--but it's out of choice because it's familiar to live around those who speak your own language and who you have in common with. It's why people who move overseas (like Americans who move to overseas) make community with other Americans. It's not because they don't feel welcome or because they're required to live someplace. It's because adapting to a new culture can be tiring. But people aren't forced to live there based on their nationality. It's not like a concentration camp or even Italy's ancient ghettos at all. It's just a neighborhood where people chose to buy houses. In fact, the community my friend was speaking about has been shrinking since most of their kids (like her), have started going off to college and choosing to live other places afterwards.

The neighborhood around our local elementary school is a highly diverse, lower income neighborhood. The neighborhood around the high school and middle school (they're located together), is also a diverse neighborhood with middle to upper end homes that I would never be able to afford. The school itself is highly diversified with everyone of all backgrounds, and some of the classes are about 50% or more legal minorities. We also have programs in the United States in every school called "ELL" which help students who can't speak English not only learn English, but make sure that they are not disadvantaged educationally in the transition. We offer scholarships and grants to people who are disadvantaged to also help them afford college education (first generation college students, low income families, etc). There are also programs that help legal immigrants start their own businesses.

So, what exactly about our subculture is segregated or garbage? Is diversity only measured on things like petty skin color and nationality? Is that really diversity, or just trying to manage the allowable numbers of all the races? X% employed at this company must be X race. X% of the people who live here must be X nationality. X% of the students who learn here must be X minority. There's something weird and wrong with that...

There seems to be some strange confusion lately with politics. Are people wanting others to ignore race and look at the person as an individual based on their qualifications--or rather to judge and give them an assigned place in society based on their race or nationality? Preferring someone because of their race, nationality, or gender is still discrimination. It also devalues the feeling of accomplishment when others assume you only succeeded because of your race, nationality, and gender and not because you really worked as hard for it. Granting jobs, housing, and other things because of someone's race is also a little insulting. On some level, it shows that people don't truly believe certain races (or gender in some cases) are as capable as the others to become educated or get a job. In other words, you're technically looking down on them as though they were special needs children who need protecting and special placement instead of encouraging them to be successful, independent members of a society that works with everyone to build a community together.

When you force diversity, it creates resentment, suspicion, and entitlement. When you just stop looking at race and nationality and take people at face value, for their individual attributes, you create a community.
931 cr points
Send Message: GB Post
32 / M / Scandinavia
Offline
Posted 9/9/18 , edited 9/9/18

Sketcy wrote:


Skimt wrote:


Sketcy wrote:

So, I'm not sure what you mean by "segregation." Please don't add to stereotypes based off what you see on TV...


Subculture. Subculture is the result of lumping immigrants together geographically instead of spreading them out. It is the crux of racism, and is an issue that has been combated in European countries by setting quotas of immigrants per sector over time, so long as the location or relocation does not separate families. The integration process also includes education. These are policies that stem from the mistakes made by among other the U.S., South Africa, and Germany (pre-WW1 and pre-WW2), at times when there was little to no former knowledge around the proceedings necessary when taking in waves of immigrants and liberating mass of slaves. Today, not dealing with these policies knowing what we know now, is the same as indirectly segregating people, or more specifically letting the people segregate themselves. Those of dark complexion are largely segregated from those of lighter complexion in America, but not because of some invisible hand. It's because of past ignorance and neglect, and a garbage subculture perpetuated by mainstream media.



We don't lump immigrants or races together geographically.


Past and present tense was made clear in my post. This conversation is over.
Sketcy 
912 cr points
Send Message: GB Post
F / Earth
Offline
Posted 9/9/18 , edited 9/10/18



Past and present tense was made clear in my post. This conversation is over.



lol, You accuse modern Americans of being racially / culturally segregated, said it was because they currently have a "garbage subculture," then hubrisly say "this conversation is over" when someone doesn't appreciate their nation being stereotyped.

But, if you want to end the conversation here, that's fine, too. We've both made our points.

However, sincerely, next time if you don't know something about a culture, why don't you ask for an open-ended discussion from people who actually live there--how they feel and live their lives? Don't just go on a forum and stereotype or attack an entire people on matters you don't know anything about (like a country's laws and social norms) based on social media and different political parties arguing back and forth.

People need to stop trying to point fingers at everyone and getting into stupid fights. I mean, your argument essentially comes off as "well my culture is more sophisticated and diverse than [insert culture]." In other words, "[insert culture] is inferior to us." (That's no way to inspire people or make multicultural ties... You've just switched which culture you're looking down on for this century).

That's the exact same mentality that CREATES discrimination, division, and segregation. It's not about race, nationality, or gender. It's about ANY group looking down on another and causing resentment. When you speak (or type), you're a representative of the place you are from.
32973 cr points
Send Message: GB Post
22 / M / Bundaberg, Queens...
Offline
Posted 9/9/18 , edited 9/10/18

Yellowkitty96 wrote:


Sure, i'll place it next to you



You are too kind ^^
17581 cr points
Send Message: GB Post
46 / M / Verginia
Offline
Posted 9/9/18 , edited 9/10/18
Yup america is the most racist socioty untill you look at the institunalised racism in the peoples democratic socalist nation of China

https://www.wsj.com/articles/chinas-campaign-against-muslim-minorities-1533855077
runec 
43113 cr points
Send Message: GB Post
Online
Posted 9/9/18 , edited 9/9/18

bernardwheelerjr wrote:
Yup america is the most racist socioty untill you look at the institunalised racism in the peoples democratic socalist nation of China


No one said it was the most racist society. In fact, someone said it was the most diverse.

Just because you found a thing even worse than the bad thing doesn't make the bad thing magically good.

It's the People's Republic of China.


147 cr points
Send Message: GB Post
21 / M / Wales
Offline
Posted 9/10/18 , edited 9/10/18

Greylurker wrote:


One of the myths is that, Diversity targets for positions result in hiring unqualified people just to meet quota. That if you just hire "the most qualified people" that should be enough.

It's a myth that ignores a couple of realities
1) There are plenty of qualified people who can fill those diversity targets, so there "risk of getting an unqualified person to fill the slot" are minimal.
2) There are frequent unconscious bias that put people from visible minorities behind others despite the fact that they are just as qualified. Diversity Targets are simply a way of evening the playing field.



It's not really an argument that there are plenty of qualified people since this isn't a binary. Employers don't simply take everyone who meets the minimum requirements and pull one of their names out of a hat. They will take the best workers made available to them. So even if the diversity hire is still qualified he/she may not have been the most qualified that applied.

There is an easier way to deal with unconscious bias in hiring that doesn't require racial discrimination. Simply make it so application forms don't have names or ethnicity listed on them.
100586 cr points
Send Message: GB Post
45 / M / Canada
Offline
Posted 9/10/18 , edited 9/10/18

eviscery wrote:


Greylurker wrote:


One of the myths is that, Diversity targets for positions result in hiring unqualified people just to meet quota. That if you just hire "the most qualified people" that should be enough.

It's a myth that ignores a couple of realities
1) There are plenty of qualified people who can fill those diversity targets, so there "risk of getting an unqualified person to fill the slot" are minimal.
2) There are frequent unconscious bias that put people from visible minorities behind others despite the fact that they are just as qualified. Diversity Targets are simply a way of evening the playing field.



It's not really an argument that there are plenty of qualified people since this isn't a binary. Employers don't simply take everyone who meets the minimum requirements and pull one of their names out of a hat. They will take the best workers made available to them. So even if the diversity hire is still qualified he/she may not have been the most qualified that applied.

There is an easier way to deal with unconscious bias in hiring that doesn't require racial discrimination. Simply make it so application forms don't have names or ethnicity listed on them.


how would you proposes doing a job interview blinded then?

147 cr points
Send Message: GB Post
21 / M / Wales
Offline
Posted 9/10/18 , edited 9/10/18

Greylurker wrote:


eviscery wrote:


Greylurker wrote:


One of the myths is that, Diversity targets for positions result in hiring unqualified people just to meet quota. That if you just hire "the most qualified people" that should be enough.

It's a myth that ignores a couple of realities
1) There are plenty of qualified people who can fill those diversity targets, so there "risk of getting an unqualified person to fill the slot" are minimal.
2) There are frequent unconscious bias that put people from visible minorities behind others despite the fact that they are just as qualified. Diversity Targets are simply a way of evening the playing field.



It's not really an argument that there are plenty of qualified people since this isn't a binary. Employers don't simply take everyone who meets the minimum requirements and pull one of their names out of a hat. They will take the best workers made available to them. So even if the diversity hire is still qualified he/she may not have been the most qualified that applied.

There is an easier way to deal with unconscious bias in hiring that doesn't require racial discrimination. Simply make it so application forms don't have names or ethnicity listed on them.


how would you proposes doing a job interview blinded then?



If it's a choice between legal racial discrimination and banning employers from interviewing applicants I would choose the former. Although there are somewhat awkward solutions if we really had to keep interviews. An independent interviewing body could score an applicant's social skills and send only the scores to the employer. It could be required that a member of this independent body pass a racial bias test in order to be on the scoring team.
12527 cr points
Send Message: GB Post
M / People's Republic...
Offline
Posted 9/10/18 , edited 9/10/18
When it comes to diversity, the first thing everyone brings up in defense is restaurants, because that's one of the only places diversity actually really works. Once you get outside of that things start falling apart. Believe diversity is inherently good? Cool! Come up with your own rules for the meaning of traffic light colors -- for the sake of diversity and follow them. If you survive the first wreck then come back here and tell us how well it served you.

Variety is the spice of life, but consistency is the meat and potatoes. Generally speaking, diversity divides us. The very word 'diverse' comes from a Latin word 'turned separate ways'. If you disagree with me that diversity divides us, then by disagreeing you actually prove me right. Between you and I there is a diversity of opinions about whether or not diversity divides us. As such, we are divided on this matter. If there were no diversity then we would be united in opinion.

At the end of the day, you can point to any system or example where diversity helped things or improved them, and I can find an order of magnitude more things in that system where diversity could not survive without standing on a framework of unity. After all, diversity without a larger, underlying system of unity is chaos.

Remember folks: Diversity is the spice of life, but unity is the steak and potatoes. The former gives life extra flavor, the latter keeps life going. Diversity divides us. Unity unites us.

2882 cr points
Send Message: GB Post
42 / M
Offline
Posted 9/11/18 , edited 9/11/18

karatecowboy wrote:
The very word 'diverse' comes from a Latin word 'turned separate ways'. If you disagree with me that diversity divides us, then by disagreeing you actually prove me right. Between you and I there is a diversity of opinions about whether or not diversity divides us. As such, we are divided on this matter. If there were no diversity then we would be united in opinion.



Is it any wonder that Progressive global fascists who are trying to divide and undermine nations are telling everyone "diversity is good! it makes us stronger!"

there's more good posts in this thread than I would have put money on




lol right on cue...

https://www.campusreform.org/?ID=11281
Harvard Prof: Merit-based admissions 'reproduce inequality'

and the nutjob prof is actually shocked and disappointed that the students she interviewed are acting out of a sense of self interest and not acting out of a sense of social justice

...and they try to tell us that Universities have not become brainwashing groupthink experiments....
First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.