Quote:
Originally Posted by djforsberg
The problem is, you can’t solve equity issues with quotas. You have to tackle the root causes, make effective social investments, particularly in education, and remove economic barriers, and the Liberals don’t seem to want to go that route. It’s like thinking making cabinet 50% women all of sudden makes a government “feminist” when it is still very difficult for women, especially those who came from poverty, to even get close to positions of power. It really comes down to class politics, and liberal politicians, just like conservative politicians, don’t want to actually address that and will do whatever it takes to maintain the pro-free market, neoliberal status quo.
|
In a perfect world everyone would be treated equally, come from the same socioeconomic status, have no obstacles, etc. But in reality, quotas and equity are generally good things.
The usual complaints against it are things like "if you eliminate XXX (usually white men) from consideration then you are potentially not looking at the best candidate." While the entire premise of that statement is rooted in systemic privilege, even taking it at face value it breaks down as ridiculous to assume that the "best' (which is arbitrary, and typically decided by those who already come from the power group) is even required.
A good example would be something like:
A company made up of 12 men wants to hire a new designer, and 10 people interview. Of the 10, 8 are more than qualified for the job, but the top 4 are men, and the bottom 4, women.
If you go by the "best," (again, which is usually arbitrary based on how someone interviews, gut feelings, etc) then a man is hired, even if all 8 would have been a good fit. So even if that company states that they wanted to hire a woman, they can claim they were forced to hire a man since the women weren't the top picks. But in the end...the women would have been more than qualified for the job, and by not hiring them it perpetuates the power differential between the genders.
Because the power groups in our society are typically there for multiple reasons (historical inertia, networking, the in-group subconsciously maintaining its membership, lack of money and education for non-power groups, etc), simply saying that we need to provide more "opportunities" for non-power groups doesn't really change anything. In some cases, "forced" equity is one of the few ways to actually make a difference. Then, over time, having those non-traditional power groups in places of power changes how funding is allocated, which role models are praised, the culture of an organization, etc. It's why having a focus on DEI (Diversity, Equity, Inclusion) in the hiring process of any organization is essential.
Yes, tackle the roots of this inequality, but also take what immediate action is available.
Prev
Linear Mode
