+ Reply to Thread
Page 745 of 893 FirstFirst ... 245 645 695 735 743 744 745 746 747 755 795 845 ... LastLast
Results 14,881 to 14,900 of 17846

Thread: Random News Article Discussion II

  1. #14881

    Default Re: Random News Article Discussion II

    What could the EU actually do to prevent a civil war? If the King has made his decision and is unwilling to question it, I'd think they would be forced to stay out of the conflict.

  2. #14882

    Default Re: Random News Article Discussion II

    I find the argument of "we can't give them More autonomy, because they already have too much" garbage.

    While the Catalan government don't have the votes to actually declare independence (and with less than 45% of the population voting in an election where not voting and voting no were very close in meaning), you can bet that the extended autonomy would be a slam dunk.

    Madrid just isn't in tune with the needs of each region, while Barcelona's issue start from the taxes, some of the southern regions suffer from complete lack of attention, and have too high rates of unemployment.

    I did wonder why they didn't push for a federal state or something just short of independence, but that was kind of the deal around 10 years ago, and was unceremoniously gutted just before it almost passed. I guess some other historical reason is what prevents building up an alliance with the other regions to grant all interested parties more freedom.
    3DS FC: 0516-7666-3837
    SW-4128-8032-0729

  3. #14883

    Default Re: Random News Article Discussion II

    Quote Originally Posted by maxterdexter View Post
    I find the argument of "we can't give them More autonomy, because they already have too much" garbage.

    While the Catalan government don't have the votes to actually declare independence (and with less than 45% of the population voting in an election where not voting and voting no were very close in meaning), you can bet that the extended autonomy would be a slam dunk.

    Madrid just isn't in tune with the needs of each region, while Barcelona's issue start from the taxes, some of the southern regions suffer from complete lack of attention, and have too high rates of unemployment.

    I did wonder why they didn't push for a federal state or something just short of independence, but that was kind of the deal around 10 years ago, and was unceremoniously gutted just before it almost passed. I guess some other historical reason is what prevents building up an alliance with the other regions to grant all interested parties more freedom.
    What do you think is the worst case scenario that can come from this?

  4. #14884

    Default Re: Random News Article Discussion II

    ETA 2.0., colapae of the Spanish kingdom followed by the collapse of the EU, Puttin grabbing territories because the weakening of NATO, trump playing politics and dragging us to wwIII.

    There are a lot of shitty pieces in the board.

    --- Update From New Post Merge ---

    When China is the one who has to be the fucking adult in the room, I wonder if I should have chosen Canada, Australia, Chile or Uruguay.
    3DS FC: 0516-7666-3837
    SW-4128-8032-0729

  5. #14885

    Default Re: Random News Article Discussion II

    Quote Originally Posted by Femme View Post
    The Charleston shooting wasn't called terrorism.
    It was, but not universally.

    Quote Originally Posted by Femme View Post
    The Planned Parenthood shooting wasn't called terrorism.
    Same deal with that one.

  6. #14886

    Default Re: Random News Article Discussion II


  7. #14887

    Default Re: Random News Article Discussion II

    Why is this a thing in Australia?

    I'm genuinely asking, because something like that would never fly here for obvious reasons.

  8. #14888
    Kick-Ass Finalis desa's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Somewhere

    Default Re: Random News Article Discussion II

    Quote Originally Posted by RoboBlue View Post
    To boost the number if women in their police quickly and close the gap in numbers as soon as possible.



  9. #14889
    Karaage-san, Aishiteru! AfroSamurai's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Italy

    Default Re: Random News Article Discussion II

    Utter disaster, this speech. She had a cough and couldn't talk, she got pranked halfway through, and the bloody billboard wouldn't stay together. Disastrous.

    --- Update From New Post Merge ---

    Quote Originally Posted by RoboBlue View Post
    Why is this a thing in Australia?

    I'm genuinely asking, because something like that would never fly here for obvious reasons.
    Because screw meritocracy all that matters is getting that 50/50 number to make the government happy

    Quote Originally Posted by desa View Post
    To boost the number if women in their police quickly and close the gap in numbers as soon as possible.
    And why is this a good thing? No seriously, why do we *need* 50% of police officers to be women. What benefit does it offer to society, other than propping up some fake idea that men and women are equally likely to want to become police officers?

    EDIT: Don't get me wrong, if you have evidence of systemic discrimination at hiring against women, and that women are equally likely to apply for the job as men, then I'm all for balancing out the system. Remove gender and names from application sheets. Do all you can to make it as fair as possible. But if application rates among women are lower than among men, why the need to balance it out?

    Why aren't we having months where schools only hire male elementary school teachers to get the ratio 50/50? Why not with nurses? Biologists?

    I hate quotas. Hate them. Anti-meritocratic b*llshit
    Last edited by AfroSamurai; October 4th, 2017 at 10:53 AM.

  10. #14890

    Default Re: Random News Article Discussion II

    yeah cuz i'm sure that ol' joe brownlyncher got into the police force on his own merits

    Set Art by Daily Rowlet

  11. #14891

    Default Re: Random News Article Discussion II

    Oh boy it's that time of the week again where RoboBlue reminds us that the truest form of discrimination is that against men.

  12. #14892

    Default Re: Random News Article Discussion II

    Quote Originally Posted by desa View Post
    To boost the number if women in their police quickly and close the gap in numbers as soon as possible.
    Yes, but why are they in such a rush that they decided to ban all male applicants rather than review and tweak their recruitment program?
    American colleges have quotas too, but they'd never decide to only accept applicants from one race or gender, let alone officially announce that decision.

  13. #14893
    Karaage-san, Aishiteru! AfroSamurai's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Italy

    Default Re: Random News Article Discussion II

    Quote Originally Posted by Cyan D. Funk View Post
    Oh boy it's that time of the week again where RoboBlue reminds us that the truest form of discrimination is that against men.
    Well no, this is obviously untrue, discrimination against women and minorities way overshadows it. It's not even a real issue 99% of the time, it only becomes one when quotas and similar measures are thrown into the mix. The problem here is that they're overcompensating, and doing exactly the same thing in the other direction. It might not be a big deal on a macro scale, but the individual decision in this case is grossly misguided, and completely fails to solve any underlying problem of discrimination that might exist in the system.

    Discrimination cannot legitimately be used to solve discrimination. Two wrongs don't make a right. Discrimination is solved by eliminating the discrimination. And sometimes, the result might not be 50/50! Especially in a profession that appeals to more men that women. Artificially bringing it to 50/50 is simply not the correct way to approach the problem.

  14. #14894
    Discovered Stowaway Sparsebeard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Québec, Québec

    Default Re: Random News Article Discussion II

    Quote Originally Posted by AfroSamurai View Post
    Well no, this is obviously untrue, discrimination against women and minorities way overshadows it. It's not even a real issue 99% of the time, it only becomes one when quotas and similar measures are thrown into the mix. The problem here is that they're overcompensating, and doing exactly the same thing in the other direction. It might not be a big deal on a macro scale, but the individual decision in this case is grossly misguided, and completely fails to solve any underlying problem of discrimination that might exist in the system.

    Discrimination cannot legitimately be used to solve discrimination. Two wrongs don't make a right. Discrimination is solved by eliminating the discrimination. And sometimes, the result might not be 50/50! Especially in a profession that appeals to more men that women. Artificially bringing it to 50/50 is simply not the correct way to approach the problem.
    I don't know why the decision was taken but...

    There are plenty of situations where having female police officers makes more sense, i.e. when the victims are female for exemple conjugal abuse, rape, etc.

    And for the record, perhaps it would even be useful to do the reverse in some female dominated professions like nurses, teachers, etc. It would be about the needs of the population first.

    Also, to me, you look like a poor little misoginistic [redacted] when you complain about this.

  15. #14895

    Default Re: Random News Article Discussion II

    more of the high(low)lights:
    • A comedian manages to gain fully accredited access to the vetted Tory Party conference.
      • Said comedian manages to reach the front of the stage and hand her a P45 right in front of the media cameras. May drops the sheet without reading it (but does crack a joke about it).
      • Said comedian then manages to reach Boris Johnson's side and give him a thumbs up, again right in front of the media cameras, and still during May's speech.
      • Afterwards, the discarded prank P45 is found on the floor where May dropped it, resulting in Robert Peston broadcasting a photograph of the contents to the Internet (see his Twitter feed). Yes, Simon Brodkin did fill in the form.
    • She suffers from a persistent cough right through her speech and almost loses her voice.
    • She has to stop frequently for water, and Hammond hands her a throat lozenge.
    • The room attempts to give her a standing ovation to support her through one coughing fit, but all the media capture is Amber Rudd telling Boris Johnson to stand up with the rest of them.
    • At the climax of her speech, two letters fall off the slogan behind her.
    • Amber Rudd is caught by the media holding her head in her hand as May's speech wraps up.
    • Throughout the speech, May keeps referring to the 'British dream'. The British reaction to this brand new concept probably isn't the one she wanted.
    • During the speech, May is wearing a bracelet containing the work of a Mexican artist — Frida Kahlo, a member of the Mexican Communist Party who successfully petitioned for Leon Trotsky to be given asylum, and with whom she had an affair. The media noticed.
    • And, finally, her speech is under fire as a result of accusations that parts of it have been plagiarised from The West Wing
    A Monty Python sketch truly come to life ಥ_ಥ

  16. #14896

    Default Re: Random News Article Discussion II

    The Untold Story of Kim Jong-nam’s Assassination

    Basically, the two ladies thought they were doing a prank... or did they ???


  17. #14897

    Default Re: Random News Article Discussion II

    Quote Originally Posted by Foolio View Post
    Somehow I don't believe you, or trust your interpretations. I'll buy that early reporting on an incident, before any facts are known, may play into the whole thing of "we don't know who the perpetrator is or whether this was a terrorist act," but that's about it.
    Sorry, I should've responded to this earlier.
    Yes, I was talking about early reporting and not Alex Jones-type behavior.

  18. #14898
    Karaage-san, Aishiteru! AfroSamurai's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Italy

    Default Re: Random News Article Discussion II

    Quote Originally Posted by Sparsebeard View Post
    I don't know why the decision was taken but...

    There are plenty of situations where having female police officers makes more sense, i.e. when the victims are female for exemple conjugal abuse, rape, etc.

    And for the record, perhaps it would even be useful to do the reverse in some female dominated professions like nurses, teachers, etc. It would be about the needs of the population first.

    Also, to me, you look like a poor little misoginistic [redacted] when you complain about this.
    This isn't the reason they're giving. Seems to me it's just about reaching that 50/50 quota. But sure, if that's actually a problem they're having, and that is the reasoning behind it, I can agree to some level of quotas. But 50/50? That's just arbitrary "equality". And okay, sure, you can think I'm a mysoginistic twat for favouring meritocracy. That's really constructive of you, label anyone who disagrees with quota systems a mysoginist.

    Seems to me that job distribution should ideally reflect the ration of male to female people who apply. But sure, lets skew it in favour of one gender or another because 'equality'.

    Just to explain why I think you're so wrong:

    Spoiler:
    By your reasoning, if 130 women and 70 men applied to fill 20 secretary positions, the 'fair' thing to do is give 10 jobs to the men and 10 jobs to the women. This is obviously unfair to the women, because clearly the positions were filled to reach that (mysteriously important) 50/50 requirement.
    By my reasoning, you'd look at each applicant, and give the best 20 the jobs. Statistically speaking, you should find that comes out to 13 women and 7 men. If it comes out to 15 women and 5 men, that's also fine, as long as they were the best for the job.

    If we look at the overall hiring statistics for secretaries, and find that on average, the gender balance does not end up in the ballpark of 13 women for every 7 men hired (assuming 130 women and 70 men is the average ratio for applications), then we can think about correcting the balance to make it more fair. But we have to look at the reasons behind the shift. Does the gender distribution correct itself to 13:7 if we have blind applications (where gender is hidden, but skills are not)? If it doesn't, the problem isn't in the application process, it's in other sociological and possibly biological factors to do with the skillset required to get the job (N/A for secretaries, but if we look at jobs that require certain specified level of strength, this would be a fair reason why women might qualify less despite equal ratio of applications).

    If it does fix itself with blind applications, then there's something inherently discriminatory and flawed in the application process. Perhaps the people (on average, wealthy men) who are looking for secretaries don't want a man, because of sexist outdated attitudes around what a secretary should be. But will quotas fix it? Yes, if they're made to reflect the proportion of people likely to be hired during a blind application. Is there somehow else to naturally eliminate the bias? Perhaps the hiring process can be done by a non-biased outsider, as opposed to the bosses themselves?

    As I'm sure you can see, as much as inequality in hiring is a big issue, there are many factors that might explain a gender ratio that isn't 50:50, which have nothing to do with discrimination. And where there is discrimination, one should be careful to use the least 'discriminatory' way to fix the problem, in order to best reach a meritocratic outcome. Just saying 'we're hiring women only for 2 months'? That's completely uncalled for, explicitly discriminatory, and does nothing to fix the problem of the best people not getting the job due to their gender, aside from hide the real issues by artificially 'fixing' the ratio.
    Last edited by AfroSamurai; October 5th, 2017 at 10:43 AM.

  19. #14899

    Default Re: Random News Article Discussion II

    people who vet meritocracy over everything else really just don't want to admit that they themselves got to where they are due to inherent biases that see their merits as better than the merits of people who are equally qualified but also female and/or brown

    you call it a quota but more balance in a gender ratio means that the merits of female employees become more visible and thus their "merit" becomes more apparent next to Bob McWhiteguy

    Set Art by Daily Rowlet

  20. #14900
    Discovered Stowaway Sparsebeard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Québec, Québec

    Default Re: Random News Article Discussion II

    Quote Originally Posted by AfroSamurai View Post
    This isn't the reason they're giving. Seems to me it's just about reaching that 50/50 quota. But sure, if that's actually a problem they're having, and that is the reasoning behind it, I can agree to some level of quotas. But 50/50? That's just arbitrary "equality". And okay, sure, you can think I'm a mysoginistic twat for favouring meritocracy. That's really constructive of you, label anyone who disagrees with quota systems a mysoginist.

    Seems to me that job distribution should ideally reflect the ration of male to female people who apply. But sure, lets skew it in favour of one gender or another because 'equality'.

    Just to explain why I think you're so wrong:

    Spoiler:
    By your reasoning, if 130 women and 70 men applied to fill 20 secretary positions, the 'fair' thing to do is give 10 jobs to the men and 10 jobs to the women. This is obviously unfair to the women, because clearly the positions were filled to reach that (mysteriously important) 50/50 requirement.
    By my reasoning, you'd look at each applicant, and give the best 20 the jobs. Statistically speaking, you should find that comes out to 13 women and 7 men. If it comes out to 15 women and 5 men, that's also fine, as long as they were the best for the job.

    If we look at the overall hiring statistics for secretaries, and find that on average, the gender balance does not end up in the ballpark of 13 women for every 7 men hired (assuming 130 women and 70 men is the average ratio for applications), then we can think about correcting the balance to make it more fair. But we have to look at the reasons behind the shift. Does the gender distribution correct itself to 13:7 if we have blind applications (where gender is hidden, but skills are not)? If it doesn't, the problem isn't in the application process, it's in other sociological and possibly biological factors to do with the skillset required to get the job (N/A for secretaries, but if we look at jobs that require certain specified level of strength, this would be a fair reason why women might qualify less despite equal ratio of applications).

    If it does fix itself with blind applications, then there's something inherently discriminatory and flawed in the application process. Perhaps the people (on average, wealthy men) who are looking for secretaries don't want a man, because of sexist outdated attitudes around what a secretary should be. But will quotas fix it? Yes, if they're made to reflect the proportion of people likely to be hired during a blind application. Is there somehow else to naturally eliminate the bias? Perhaps the hiring process can be done by a non-biased outsider, as opposed to the bosses themselves?

    As I'm sure you can see, as much as inequality in hiring is a big issue, there are many factors that might explain a gender ratio that isn't 50:50, which have nothing to do with discrimination. And where there is discrimination, one should be careful to use the least 'discriminatory' way to fix the problem, in order to best reach a meritocratic outcome. Just saying 'we're hiring women only for 2 months'? That's completely uncalled for, explicitly discriminatory, and does nothing to fix the problem of the best people not getting the job due to their gender, aside from hide the real issues by artificially 'fixing' the ratio.

    Thing is, even if what you said was right (don't think it is), I do find it telling that of all the injustices in the world and there are so many, you chose to focus on one so minor and insignificant. An injustice that frankly is VERY debatable whether it is truly unjust ad that just happens to fall into a conservative narrative.

    It seems so close to sophistery and rethoric in intent (witn nefarious purposes)...

+ Reply to Thread

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 4 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 4 guests)

     

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts