Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

Mattie725 t1_j6oabtp wrote

From my job: really good that my large, international employer focuses on diversity and everyone feeling like they have no obstacles because of gender, sexuality, colour,... However, targeting 40% women in technical/engineering positions by 2025 when it's currently 30% and only 20% of graduates in engineering are women, is letting your perfectly fine ideas of equality run over the reality of the situation.

Also from my job: I've been denied an internal training because 'we are looking for a more diverse group'. Aka, we already have a few white men so we will now deny 70% of our workforce in light of 'diversity and equality'.

Oh or better! A big city in Belgium has publicly stated that if multiple applicants for a job have the same qualifications, they will chose the one from a minority group. Again, everyone deserves a job, but you can't justify obvious discrimination because it's not against a minority.

−34

icanith t1_j6os7w2 wrote

Wow so you are dragging out the ole anti affirmative action argument. Move along ppl nothing to see here.

17

Mattie725 t1_j6ovm3l wrote

You mean the 'don't fight discrimination with more discrimination but just against other people' argument? I absolutely do.

I'm not denying there was and is discrimination. But that's no reason to openly discriminate against me because I am a white man.

*young man btw. It's not like I've built a career on discriminating others.

−11

ImminentZero t1_j6oz3tl wrote

> A big city in Belgium has publicly stated that if multiple applicants for a job have the same qualifications, they will chose the one from a minority group.

There needs to be some sort of tiebreaker in that case, what would you suggest? What's an equitable solution in that case?

14

Mattie725 t1_j6p2hou wrote

As far as I know, they might spin a wheel. I don't know. But solving said problem by openly discriminating against people who don't happen to be a minority is as bad as the inverse.

−4