Thread:User talk:WaitingforGodot/Thoughts/reply (10)

Okay, fair point actually. I certainly don't doubt that things would improve if we had the right split. And it's needed, especially in a time when we looking at so much of the bigoted shit we've strived hard to get rid of trying to make a come back.

Now, if you move onto a gender equality committee with both women and men, then the men aren't there to represent just men. They should be there to represent everyone. Why ghetto it off like this? Men have a more salient idea of what being kicked in the balls feels like, women have a more salient idea of what childbirth feels like... but it doesn't follow that women can only help with women's problems and that men can only help with men's problems. This is the point; everyone pitches in and realises that what we've been doing, by walling each other off, is actually not helping any more.

But on quotas, do you not think that enforcing a quota would also send the message "women can't make it unless we give them a hand"? Possibly, and it then depends if you view that as patronising (I do, and I find it quite insulting to the people who have done great things). There is obviously not a real barrier, we don't have any law that says "no, women aren't allowed in these positions of power". Individuals exist who are sexist, and might say "I'm not hiring her, a woman? Bah!" but there's nothing we can do about that but ensure that our moral zeitgeist says that it's wrong (which we do) and hope they either A) change their mind or B) die without passing the attitude on too far (all those Republicans you're talking about? They're ageing rapidly. You more liberal pundits (Maddow for instance, or Cenk and Ana from TYT) are all a lot younger.). Unless you want to actually brainwash it out of them or jail them for it, which would work I'm sure but then we'd all be doing the right thing for the wrong reasons all because we did the wrong thing for the right reasons... that makes sense in my head, at least. Many solid and tangible barriers have been knocked down in abundance over the last century - this is the easy part, because it's clear where the problem is and what you can do about it. Women can't vote -> give women vote. Simples. The step after removing these obvious barriers is the more difficult one because it's the psychological barriers that exist. That's where I think we should move to true equality that involves everyone equally; I suppose this might be where we could differ. I think we can't progress further with the same mentality that got us to where we are today, because there's only so much you can legislate before you stop creating opportunities and you start cutting them off, alienating more people than you help.

I would argue it should be enough to open the door, and not have to force people through it. Because it should be about opening up opportunities, not closing them off for people. Hypothetically the Student's Union here could enforce a quota, but realistically that would end up with positions going unfilled because so many go uncontested anyway. I can imagine a situation where returning officers are sat up all night praying to any god that they can find that another girl signs up! It would lead to a situation where you have keen and competent candidates turned away and told to basically stuff themselves because of... well, their gender. And if it's not okay to do that one way then it certainly isn't okay to do it the other way regardless of the current or past situations of inequality. And yes, I think they would be right to as you put it "scream blood murder that they are being discriminated against" because that would be exactly what was going on.

This is a debate that might come up in the local "atheist club" soon; "how do you attract more women to atheism/skepticism". Not preach to, or convert, but you know sign up, become speakers, become leaders, be out and proud, and so on. It's a similar issue to this one here about getting more women going into positions of power, and this discussion is actually helping focus on why it's important. It's a very noble aim, and an essential one to aim for. But, how do you do it without becoming a hypocrite and enforcing positive discrimination? Where does simply opening up the opportunities and removing the barriers and acting encouragingly end, all good things, all fine things, all things I would try my fucking best to do at any and all times, and where does enforcing it with quotas and special treatment begin? I don't know, it's not immediately obvious and I don't think a general case can be made that suits all circumstances. What I do know is that this is the line I don't want to see crossed.