Well, women are the immediate beneficiaries of some gender quotas, and men are the immediate beneficiaries of others. It depends on the applicant pool.Arkaniack said:Yes women benefit from gender quotas. And company, country, and males that did not get job suffers. Equal rights and opportunities benefits women.Kahunaburger said:A "beneficiary" of something is someone who benefits from something. Calling someone a "beneficiary" of a policy does not imply a value judgment on the policy's benefit (or lack thereof) to society.Arkaniack said:Really? Forcing company to hire women without even looking at their qualifications can be beneficial?(not beneficial to company or even COUNTRY due to company making less profit thus paying less tax) And how is more qualified man that did not got job is "beneficiary of gender quota"?Kahunaburger said:Well, I actually agree with you that quotas are basically a band-aid for a larger structural problem (i.e., the unofficial quotas in management/boardrooms/etc). But pretending that women are the sole beneficiary of gender quotas is an over-simplification, too - the effects of the quota depend on the applicant pool for whatever the quota's for.
or even better - why don't we stop *gasp* lying? Oh wait, that would kill feminism, prevent transvestites from ruining peoples lives (some transvestite kinda screwed someones I know life)Kahunaburger said:I've got a better idea. Why don't we, as a society, stop trying to micromanage the clothing and gender identification of people in our society? You know, treat people like people, even if they *gasp* don't conform to 19th century American/European gender norms?Arkaniack said:I don't "mind" transvestites as long as they don't lie and hunt for mates. If you are transvestite and going to date someone - tell them "what" you are. (and " oh they are born that way" is BS. Really? Man that had wife and children and was cool all around suddenly decides that he is a woman?)
You can think that if you want. It wasn't about you, but w/e. If you want to be offended, you'll find something that offends you.FelixG said:Yet you ignored a polite request to remove my quote from it so there was no miscommunication. So it is obvious you meant it as an insult.Kahunaburger said:Eh... people see what they want to see, and get offended by what they want to get offended by. Not much I can do to change that.Abandon4093 said:It honestly does not come off that way
Gee, I wonder why my line had very little do do with what Felix was saying? Could it be... because it wasn't meant to represent what he was saying? No, that's too obvious.Abandon4093 said:intentionally outrageous strawman position of the other parties stance
" It depends on the applicant pool."Kahunaburger said:Well, women are the immediate beneficiaries of some gender quotas, and men are the immediate beneficiaries of others. It depends on the applicant pool.Arkaniack said:Yes women benefit from gender quotas. And company, country, and males that did not get job suffers. Equal rights and opportunities benefits women.Kahunaburger said:A "beneficiary" of something is someone who benefits from something. Calling someone a "beneficiary" of a policy does not imply a value judgment on the policy's benefit (or lack thereof) to society.Arkaniack said:Really? Forcing company to hire women without even looking at their qualifications can be beneficial?(not beneficial to company or even COUNTRY due to company making less profit thus paying less tax) And how is more qualified man that did not got job is "beneficiary of gender quota"?Kahunaburger said:Well, I actually agree with you that quotas are basically a band-aid for a larger structural problem (i.e., the unofficial quotas in management/boardrooms/etc). But pretending that women are the sole beneficiary of gender quotas is an over-simplification, too - the effects of the quota depend on the applicant pool for whatever the quota's for.
Absolutely the way I feel. I've heard feminists complain about how society separates boys and girls from birth by the color pink vs. blue, and write essays (in my literary theory class) about how girls are not allowed to like certain cartoons because it's a "boy's show." Such incredibly trivial and selfish that it reminds me about that Resident Evil 5 racist malarkey.ward0630 said:Feminism is a very good idea in theory, but in practice it sometimes leads to pure stupidity.
See also: three pages back. [http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20111646-503544.html] The female applicant pool is larger than the male applicant pool for college admissions in the states. So for the colleges that have gender quotas, males are generally the primary beneficiary of these quotas. Incidentally, this is why I don't like the quota system: the effects are pretty random, and it doesn't do much about the underlying causes of inequality.Arkaniack said:" It depends on the applicant pool."Kahunaburger said:Well, women are the immediate beneficiaries of some gender quotas, and men are the immediate beneficiaries of others. It depends on the applicant pool.Arkaniack said:Yes women benefit from gender quotas. And company, country, and males that did not get job suffers. Equal rights and opportunities benefits women.Kahunaburger said:A "beneficiary" of something is someone who benefits from something. Calling someone a "beneficiary" of a policy does not imply a value judgment on the policy's benefit (or lack thereof) to society.Arkaniack said:Really? Forcing company to hire women without even looking at their qualifications can be beneficial?(not beneficial to company or even COUNTRY due to company making less profit thus paying less tax) And how is more qualified man that did not got job is "beneficiary of gender quota"?Kahunaburger said:Well, I actually agree with you that quotas are basically a band-aid for a larger structural problem (i.e., the unofficial quotas in management/boardrooms/etc). But pretending that women are the sole beneficiary of gender quotas is an over-simplification, too - the effects of the quota depend on the applicant pool for whatever the quota's for.
ugh... explain. Give example or something. I am afraid you don't get what I am speaking about.
Wait... what? You're gonna need to elaborate on this one a bit.Arkaniack said:or even better - why don't we stop *gasp* lying? Oh wait, that would kill feminism, prevent transvestites from ruining peoples lives (some transvestite kinda screwed someones I know life)Kahunaburger said:I've got a better idea. Why don't we, as a society, stop trying to micromanage the clothing and gender identification of people in our society? You know, treat people like people, even if they *gasp* don't conform to 19th century American/European gender norms?Arkaniack said:I don't "mind" transvestites as long as they don't lie and hunt for mates. If you are transvestite and going to date someone - tell them "what" you are. (and " oh they are born that way" is BS. Really? Man that had wife and children and was cool all around suddenly decides that he is a woman?)
When I tell you I'm a woman (I'm a transgender woman), I'm not "lying", I'm telling you the truth. Why shouldn't it be your responsibility to tell all your partners that you don't like transgender people?Arkaniack said:or even better - why don't we stop *gasp* lying? Oh wait, that would kill feminism, prevent transvestites from ruining peoples lives (some transvestite kinda screwed someones I know life)Kahunaburger said:I've got a better idea. Why don't we, as a society, stop trying to micromanage the clothing and gender identification of people in our society? You know, treat people like people, even if they *gasp* don't conform to 19th century American/European gender norms?Arkaniack said:I don't "mind" transvestites as long as they don't lie and hunt for mates. If you are transvestite and going to date someone - tell them "what" you are. (and " oh they are born that way" is BS. Really? Man that had wife and children and was cool all around suddenly decides that he is a woman?)
No. That's being an egalitarian (equalist for short).Nasrin said:I find those definitions of feminism to be sorely lacking. Feminism is the crazy idea that everybody deserves to be treated like a human being, regardless of things like age, race, gender or sexual orientation.