Post by de chuckaPost by FranPost by de chuckaPost by de chuckaPost by FranPost by de chuckaPost by de chuckasnip
Post by FranPost by de chuckaPost by FranPost by de chuckaPost by FranPost by de chuckaPost by Lions Growl of Butchers FoulOf course merit applied to them. And good
connections. And seniority.
LOL. In a pig's ear.
Post by Lions Growl of Butchers FoulThe issue is that feminism isn't advocating
merit-based appointments, it is advocating
discrimination based on sex.
Feminists always HAVE advocated merit selection!
Who are the people advocating quotas?
No-one I know of when it comes to merit selection for
gongs or jobs.
There are many calling for quotas, the areas that come to
mind and Company Board appointments and political
preselection
Do learn to read!!!
What? you haven't argued anything
then less smart blokes started squeaking about
>>>>>>>>> merit based
>>>>>>>>> selection. It never had to apply to them for
millenia as they
>>>>>>>>> got every
>>>>>>>>> first pick for every gong or job going
>>>> No-one I know of when it comes to merit selection for
gongs or jobs.
Post by de chuckaThere are groups pushing quotas
For gongs and jobs? Cite?
https://www.sbs.com.au/news/australian-army-shunning-male-recruits-for-women
That is like a petz cite. There is nothing in that cite that
is from the Army about who they are recruiting. I have noticed
how all of the army ads show a lot of women in the its ads so
it's certainly possible that the army does see a need for more
female recruits.
"Staff have been told to recruit only women, including in
frontline combat roles, under threat of being reassigned if they
ignore the directive, News Corp Australia reports.
"Staff have been told"... Which staff? Told by who? And they
supposedly told that the News Corp and SBS is rereporting what
News Corp suppsedly said. That's just Chinese whispers.
Post by de chuckaOf 50 Army jobs posted this week, only 15 are available to men.
So? How is that a quota? How many women are there in the Army?
What percentage of anything is this quota? Has the army
announced any quota?
OK. I've done your homework for you since you don't seem to be
able to manage it.
I call bullshit on your claim that the ADF has quotas. It
certainly has targets but targets are not quotas.
How do you achieve these "targets". I'd describe Targets as
aspirational goals while quotas are mandated one,
Yep. I think that is near enough by way of definition.
however both need to have some form
Post by de chuckaof positive discrimination to be achieved.
Nope. It does for quotas but not for targets. Hence the
advertising I mentioned. Show lots and lots of women in the
military ads is how one works towards targets.
I'd make the environment more inclusive, however it seems a quota
system is operating
There is no quota system in place as they'd have to meet them.
Targets are in place and even they aren't being met.
They'll have to increase the recruitment of females within the
recruitment number
that seems to be what the ADF appears to be doing.
Post by de chuckaPost by FranPost by de chuckaIs this a bad thing? maybe
Post by de chuckanot although it does stick in my craw to say that as I'm such a
strong supporter of best person for the job.
Well that too is a bullshit comment when it comes to ADF recruiting.
There is no qualifications beyond passing the medical at the target
level of entry. And if you read the cites I gave, in terms of where
women are inside the military, there are fuck all women up the
greasy poll so the blokes are still being seleceted over women all
the way up the greasy pole. Your craw needs to rethink it's setting.
No there is positive discrimination in ADF recruitment at the moment
which some believe is needed as only 15%are involved are women
https://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/defence/army-shuns-male-recruits-for-women/news-story/d3ab0118aced4757d3e188759e17fa69
So you want it both ways? Was it positive discrimination when it was
only males who were selected?
Yes >
Post by FranDid you squeak up about that then and did that stick in your craw
then? Of course you had no issue with any of that.
In my day women could not serve actively so it didn't really matter to
me. They could service trucks, drive, feed us, arrest us (not me but
there were female MPs) as well as the blokes. Did I women the barricades
to change the policy? No
Of course you didn't. Now you do. That's hypocritical.
Post by de chuckaPost by FranHow can it be positive discrimination when there are only 15% of women
in the whole of the ADF?
because the discrimination is in the recruitment to get up to the 50/50
level
It's a form of redress. At 15% of the ADF, I don't see it as being
positive discrimination. I see it as a targeted recruitment and even
that is not being met if you read the reports I cited and how they are
trying to get up to nearer 25%.
Post by de chucka If it was 60% women then yep, then you could
Post by Franjustifiably squeak on about positive discrimination.
At the moment, the ADF has decided it wants women recruits so if they
pass the physical, that is who it chooses to take to meet its targets.
If there was no squeaking when it was a massive majority of men who
passed the physical and were selected, then it's not an issue now the
forces have decided to take a majority of women.
So women and men didn't fight for total equality in the armed services?
I remembered when it happened, it should be open to anyone to serve
anywhere was and is my opinion.
Sorry Fran there is currently positive discrimination in recruitment
from the reports, all for the best of reasons but that doesn't mean it
isn't occurring.
OK, have it your way but do recall that it never was a problem for you
till they started choosing women over men. and you wonder why I get on
your case on gender issues when you keep putting your hoof in it.
Post by de chuckaPost by FranPost by de chuckaPost by de chucka Females in the ADF are a whole 15%
Totally irrelevant, the discussion is about whether there are calls
by for quotas in jobs and gongs
It IS relevant!!!! You produced a moronic petz-like cite to support
your assertion about quotas! In short, you posted hysteria and not
facts.
You are proving that the entomology of hysteria is true "via Latin
from Greek husterikos ‘of the womb’, from hustera ‘womb’" :-) OK I
retract it but bugger of with trying to insult me
You're having a fit of the vapours rather than using your brain!
You re thinking with your womb so ner ner.
You can shove your whingeing about cheap insults up your arse when you
produce that as an example of your own cheap insults!
Cheap insults comparing me to
Post by de chuckapez are really beneath you.
But not beneath you. Grow up and stop acting like him! Don't give petz
like cites and get petulant when you're called on the crap quality of
those cites. READ what you are going to cite and don't give cites that
have no meat to them. You'd have to be stupid if you think I'll accept
the line of "our un-named' anonymous source says"!
Post by de chucka Yes, I
Post by Franam insulting you for being a petz like dimwit and posting low grade
hysteria instead of facts! READ your own pathetic cite! That cite WAS
hysteria and the sort of shit Id expect from petz who clearly has
neither an analytical or a functioning brain and who gravitates to the
lowest form of cite. You usually don't but in the instance of that
cite, you got down to his level.
Come on less insults and more addressing the evidence of people calling
for quotas and jobs which you said you couldn't remember seeing
Come on and stop your own insults and READ the cites you give. A
discussion on quotas that does not "call for" quotas in jobs and gongs
is not support for your fantasy that there are quotas for jobs and gongs.
Post by de chuckaPost by FranPost by de chucka The facts about what is really going on in the Army are that the
Army level of female particpation is lower that the 15% of all the
ADF female participation AND there are no quotas anywhere in the ADF
including the Army.
Which is probably why there is discrimination in recruitment at the
moment, need to reach the targets somehow.'
Pull the other one dechucka. You and I both know that you would not
have had any problems or ever have made a single comment or even
thought there was anything discriminatory in the practices of the ADF
when it took in a majority of males.
Ok so past discrimination make present discrimination OK. Come lets have
your position is discrimination acceptable?
I've got no problems with targets set to redress past problems at the
entry level such as the ADF is doing.
Post by de chuckaPost by FranPost by de chuckaTo be fair the original comment was about if people were calling for
quotas on jobs and gong so IF they are being implemented is rather
irreverent
Post by de chuckaPost by Franof the full time force. Woop-de-doo!!!! A whole 15%!!!!!! As
opposed to them being about 50% of the population. How scary that
they've reached a whole 15%!!!!! The ADF should seriously
consider setting quotas if the best they can manage with targets
is only 15%.
Now you are suggesting quotas, I think that shows very important
people are calling for quotas and my point is proven
Do learn to recognise sarcasm when you see it.
I do, were you being sarcastic?
Now who is attempting to be insulting.....
;-)
Post by FranPost by de chuckaYou stuffed up by posting hysteria and making a dodgy statement that
doesn't withstand examination. And, like petz, you got caught out.
Suck it up Sunshine.
Sorry but the facts are that people are demanding quotas for both
jobs (including that important JOB of Company Director) and gongs.
So give a cite to support that for gongs and jobs. Stop being a petz.
OK it
Post by de chuckadoesn't fit your idea of feminism. However your fight should be with
these sisters not me for pointing out the facts
So give a cite to support your claim on gongs and jobs.
With a quick cut and paste from my previous posts
Some more examples of people calling for quotas/targets ( those with
defined time frame)
http://www.broadagenda.com.au/home/quotas-in-australia-what-has-changed-in-13-years/
READ IT!!!!! Even the title shows you it's a report not a call for
quotas!!!!!
"Here, one of our 50/50 Foundation team members, Jane Alver, reflects
on early research she carried out back when all eyes were on Norway."
Post by de chuckahttps://honey.nine.com.au/2017/05/01/06/31/gender-balance-state-government-contractors-forced-to-hire-more-women
READ IT!!!! "sex discrimination commissioner Kate Jenkins said the Daily
Telegraph report did "not accurately reflect" the commission's
position." ..."she did not recommend a mandatory quota or that
organisations should need to meet this gender balance target to secure
Government contracts, she said."
Post by de chuckahttp://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/breakfast/does-australia-need-gender-quotas/9082934
Board Membership! As I've said several times, Boards are neither a job
nor a gong. You say differently.
Post by de chuckaProgress in this area has so far been achieved without legislative
quotas, but the President of CWDI says that's a measure Australia should
seriously consider.
I'm underwhelmed. Your scratching the bottom of the barrel in your
search for ANY mention of quotas let alone ones that could be deemed to
be "calling for" them.
I have told you several times I want cites on jobs and gongs. Not once
have you produced anything of substance. And do cease with the Boards
when they are irrelevant to 99.99% of Australian women (and probably 98%
of Australian men). And did you not stop to wonder who is the President
of CWDI? Or where is the CWDI located? You report card is marked "must
try harder".
Post by de chuckaPost by FranAustralia will not hit 30% women on boards by 2018, time for quotas ...
https://www.smh.com.au › Business › Workplace › Careers
https://www.womenonboards.net/en-AU/Impact-Media/News/Quotas-for-Australian-Honours
In short, you're still not been able to produce any cite of quotas being
'called for' for either jobs or gongs.