Race and gender equality is a lie

Mods this is not a rant it is a social issue that I have personally observed and would like to start a discussion on.

After a conversation with another active member here on the forums I came to the realization that gender and race equality is being used as a reason to create a social biased and division.

It's very confusing.

Essentially what's happening is rather than focusing on a merit based system of opportunity gender and race is being used to create a social biased against men and white men in particular.

Let me say this thread is not about white racism this is about merit based opportunities. Trust I agree there is bias a lot especially in specific industries but not everything is biased.

However this does not mean we should swing in the opposite direction that won't solve the problem it just creates more social biased but in the opposite direction.

What we need to do is focus on creating merit based opportunities and fostering a culture of accountability in this regard and end the nepotism paradigm that's killing everything in this country.

How do we do this?

What is a merit based opportunity or system and how do we begin definning it?
-P.S.

Forgive me for the thread title but it's probably the only reason your reading this right now.

What would constitute merit?

So many things today are based on diversity "all hail diversity!" That nobody is playing by the same rules anymore.

originally posted by: Bluntone22
What would constitute merit?

So many things today are based on diversity "all hail diversity!" That nobody is playing by the same rules anymore.

Great question I actually just added it into the OP at the bottom.

Defining merit...

Not easy. Let's start with understanding our own biased and self actualization and gaining a neutral perspective.

Then the qualities I see..

Hard work
Accountability
Compassion
Leadership

Feel free to add.

a reply to: onequestion


I don't think you will ever be able to put people into categories. To many variables.
Most of the qualities you listed can only be determined by time and experience. An 18 year old kid has no way of showing what he is capable of achieving. But he can do a lot of damage to his future by that time. Committing crimes and what not

On the other hand your skin color or location of your sex organs should not be taken into consideration either. A black gay Jewish woman should not be the golden child of employment offers just so they can put a few check marks in a few boxes.

It's definitely a conundrum..

a reply to: onequestion


It actually has been 'formalized'. I live in Washington State. My daughter recently worked for a smallish, yet high-end resort-hotel chain in Washington which will go unnamed. It has HR policy that certain ethnicities, gender is included, is given preferred status both in disciplinary actions as well as hiring and promotions. Hispanics, Asians, African-Americans and women are named, specifically.

This is corporate policy. In my opinion, most HR policy is dictated by the legal department. Both from the view of compliance to extant regulations and laws AND to potential/projected future changes in those regulations and laws.

I have seen similar in other Corporations. I would add that by being 'frontrunners', these Corporation buy 'good-will' from those of political agenda, both federally and at the State level.

The resort my daughter- a manager- worked in, held an annual meeting of judges, lawyers. professors....high level people...as to the next level this evolution in correcting society's inequities would go. We were not privy to the meetings.

In summary, this is as much Corporate driven as any other group out there, from what I can see.

a reply to: onequestion

The opportunity to prove your worth only comes with opportunity. The thread you've started this OP based on doesn't seem to think that certain people based on their ethnicity should be given the same opportunity as white men. If you are never given the chance to prove your worth (merit) based on such assumptions then the concept is flawed from the start. If all are given the same opportunities without prejudice then we would have a chance to see a purely merit based system.

ETA the thread in question -

www.abovetopsecret.com...

There is no such thing as equality. NONE. This is not to say that people should be discriminated against intentionally, but it is pure folly to think that everyone is equal and that everyone will have the same opportunities.

There will always be people who have an advantage. The sooner people realize this the quicker they can focus on playing the hand they were dealt the most effective way possible. Waiting on someone to open a door for you just means you will be waiting a long time.

a reply to: Edumakated

That doesn't mean we cant work for a better world.

a reply to: nwtrucker

I totally agree ive also seen it happen

Here you get this job because you such and such.

Imagine what would happen if we chose our president based only on skin color and not on their actions?

originally posted by: onequestion
a reply to: Edumakated

That doesn't mean we cant work for a better world.

I don't disagree. However, part of the problem is that we have progressives using government to force equality down people's throats by creating protected classes. You have government bureaucracies using bunk statistics to support "disparate impact". Government forcing businesses to diversify their work forces under the threat of legal and regulatory punishment if it doesn't mirror some off the wall statistic.

a reply to: onequestion

After a conversation with another active member here on the forums I came to the realization that gender and race equality is being used as a reason to create a social biased and division.

It's very confusing.

Don't be confused, you nailed it. Promoting differences in skin color are false arguments only having the power you give to them. If you don't play along in their racism game it evaporates. If you join in you only make (the division) stronger.

originally posted by: onequestion
a reply to: nwtrucker

I totally agree ive also seen it happen

Here you get this job because you such and such.

Imagine what would happen if we chose our president based only on skin color and not on their actions?

We already have.....

originally posted by: nwtrucker

originally posted by: onequestion
a reply to: nwtrucker

I totally agree ive also seen it happen

Here you get this job because you such and such.

Imagine what would happen if we chose our president based only on skin color and not on their actions?

We already have…..

More like they offered it to us. The first time thing. Next it will be a woman 'offering'.

a reply to: Edumakated

100% totally agree.

Amazing people I don't agree with often are coming to a consensus here.

originally posted by: intrptr

originally posted by: nwtrucker

originally posted by: onequestion
a reply to: nwtrucker

I totally agree ive also seen it happen

Here you get this job because you such and such.

Imagine what would happen if we chose our president based only on skin color and not on their actions?

We already have…..

More like they offered it to us. The first time thing. Next it will be a woman 'offering'.

Now it's crazy to think of it like that.

Further solidfies my stance right now.

originally posted by: onequestion
a reply to: Edumakated

100% totally agree.

Amazing people I don't agree with often are coming to a consensus here.

I understand. Its okay to agree with me as long as you enter the disclaimer.

a reply to: nwtrucker

That's just.........amazing.

Tells me the message is, "young, white US Americans, seek your educations and your jobs outside the US, you're not wanted here".

Guess that's why more people are looking at Canada. Why stick around this place for the abuse, the low pay and the constant threat of violence?

a reply to: onequestion

Mods this is not a rant it is a social issue that I have personally observed and would like to start a discussion on.

It doesn't cease to be a rant because you say, "this is not a rant." Your topic is, "Race and gender equality is a lie" which is a pretty rant-y statement of opinion using unqualified terms which make the whole thing rather nebulous.

What you're ranting about is not "equality" at all but rather positive discrimination. In the US, this is typically referred to as Affirmative Action. That term comes from an EO issued by JFK in the early 60's which required government contractors to diversify their employees. These positive discrimination efforts became a thing during the Civil Rights Era as a solution to a very real issue — namely, that in 1959, the average employed black male made about 57% of what the average employed white male made and the median income for the average non-white family was 52% of that of the average white family. This is essentially where things had stalled since WWII (after modest gains over nearly a hundred years since emancipation with a temporary downturn during the Great Depression).

Do you believe that in 1959, the reason that black men only made 57% of what white men made is because white men some how deserved to make nearly double what the average black man made?

I sincerely hope that you do not. It's therefore safe to say that merit has never had much to do with employment opportunity, particularly in terms of white males vs everyone else. So then you have to ask yourself why this situation existed and put yourself in the place of a man like JFK and ask yourself, "how the hell do we get to equal opportunity when part of the population has been deliberately less than equal for centuries?"

At any rate, positive discrimination efforts were intended to be (relatively) short term efforts to catch up non-whites and females to the white male. So I think that you completely misunderstand what you're talking about because of your temporally narrow view of the subject — that is, you're neither taking into account the actual state of things when these efforts were begun nor are you considering that they were never/are never intended to last indefinitely. In a "perfect world," there would be no such thing as "positive discrimination" but in a perfect world, there wouldn't have been discrimination to counteract in the first place. Part of the problem in my opinion, is that the bottom fell out of blue collar employment in manufacturing less than a decade and a half later.

But hey, you've got it all figured out — at least enough that you re comfortable making strong statements about what is and what isn't "a lie" — so maybe instead of simply offering a poorly thought out critique of solutions that have been attempted, you could offer up something better?

Looking at the history of employment in the US, it's apparent that whenever employment has taken a downturn, it disproportionately affects non-whites and females in general. I can post all the relevant statistics if you require.

In my opinion, the only way to ever fix this ongoing issue (and make no mistake, it is ongoing) will be to change the employment paradigm to account for deindustrialization. In other words, we need more employment opportunity for everyone.

a reply to: nwtrucker

If this is true then the company would be breaking the law. Did your daughter report them?

a reply to: theantediluvian

It's clearly not a rant and I hate to admit this but if you don't make a divisive thread title on ATS no one will read it.

The market determines the product labeling not the other way around.

After everything you've said it doesn't change the fact that gender and race aren't the real problem the real problem is a system of merit based opportunities.

Nothing changes.

The only difference is the perceived cause of which I agreen in some companies there may be bias but that's besides the point.

If we move closer to a merit based paradigm all issues will be solved.