h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

What are we supposed to do on international women's day exactly? We have a bottle of red and some chinese food- is that good enough?

That's discrimination! There should be an international men's day. and a children's day. And a teenager's day.

...and a hermaphradite day.

There is an international children's day.

I think an international women's day might have a very important role to play in that it highlights that inequalities suffered by many women throughout the world simply because of their sex. I'd be all for that.

Can't see any point whatsoever, 'though, in celebrating women simply because they are women. There is nothing innately virtuous about womanhood, manhood or childhood.

"I think an international women's day might have a very important role to play in that it highlights that inequalities suffered by many women throughout the world simply because of their sex. I'd be all for that."

Well yeah but not in this country. There's all that equality and politicacl correctness now. Did you know people are being turned away from jobs for no other reason than that they're white men and the companies are trying to look un-discriminatory by hiring others instead, rather than going on how good the person is for the job? That sort of thing really gets my goat.

At least your goat probably has a job.

No he doesn't, he lost out to a disabled lesbian Llama because he was too normal for the company's government quotas.

And this college kid is trying to find an internship that isn't reserved for a minority. They actually call 'em minority internships, but fail to provide anything for the non-minorities... We shall overcome!

while I do have a lot of sympathy for the discriminated against - even the white male ones - I have to say, that as part of the group who have been discriminaed against since the dawn of time: feels horrible, doesn't it?

anyone?

"Well yeah but not in this country."

Which country would that be, then? In the country in which I regularly interview and recruit people myself, we have 'equal opportunties policies'. In my organisation, we pride ourselves on being able to find and recruit the best people, regardless of sex, sexual orientation, skin colour, religion, race, whatever.

One only has to look at the rows of serried white male faces at Prime Minister's Question Time to realise that the glass ceiling still hasn't been shattered. Bring in an equal-ops policy and it's a given that people who secure jobs for reasons other than talent are going to lose out.

Hey, what about us white females? Not minor enough for minority preference, not major enough to get those white male jobs. We *shall* overcome...

It's frustrating, but hey - those reverse discriminators don't know what they're missing out on.

Monk, it would be nice if the whole world would choose people based on talent and not race, but wouldn't it be easier to reach that point if people didn't make such a kerfluffle about how they hire minorities? Just do it, if the person deserves it, and don't, if they don't, but preferential treatment one way or another isn't exactly what we're aiming for, is it?

My father does occasional work for the passport office, who have an excellent positive discrimination policy. For example, they have a bliund guy working for them and, nobly dettermined not to be put off my his dsiability, they have him checking people's photos. They also, and I swear this is true, have a deaf lady who answers the phone. And probably a load of murderers and stuff as well, but they're under the radar.

Dear Benjaminpmoore,

Well, you have managed to retain a sense of humour in spite of the problems you are experiencing. Well done.

I particularly liked the deaf person who got the job as a telephonist. You could write comedy acts. Hope your nose is feeling better and that you will soon have broadband.

Regards

Also Ran1, Schooloffish>

No, preferential treatment is not what we are aiming for, but as a short-term means of addressing some long-standing wrongs it'll do until we get a more equitable process in place.

Like I said, in my experience an equal-ops policy goes some way to ensure a level playing filed. The rest of the distance has to be made up by making sure it's enforced properly.

I'm curious, you say that the best person gets the job, disregarding sex, race, etc. But: if it's a woman who gets the job, does she get the same amount of money a man would have got?

"I think an international women's day might have a very important role to play in that it highlights that inequalities suffered by many women throughout the world simply because of their sex. I'd be all for that."

"Well yeah but not in this country." (this one's mine)

"Which country would that be, then?"


Even I'm confused by my posting there.

Ok, I think I was saying something about how in this country, at the moment, women aren't as bad off as they once were and now it's the men who are finding it tough to ride the wave of political correctness. But I can see when I put my comment in context that it is very weird and makes little sense, so I'l retract that one. I think it was spur of the moment anyway prompted by some IRL issue that has nothing to do with anything. You know, that old conundrum.

Anyway, on the topic of positive discrimination being a good start, yes it is in the same way political correctness way. It has been argued that PCness has cone too far now, an argument I agree with when I'm shown some of the mind boggling facts. Seriously, they make me think that the country's being run by people living in a box who don't know what a field looks like. One of them was taking 'Saint' out of the name of a school somewhere for fear of offending non-christians despite many complaints coming from christians and the jewish and muslim communities. So if none of them are offended then for who's benefit is this being done? That's what gets me about PCness, I've never met anyone who agrees with how far it's gone now. Initially it was great I'll grant you, but now it's out of hand and people think it's just a stupid bunch of nanny rules.

"In my organisation, we pride ourselves on being able to find and recruit the best people, regardless of sex, sexual orientation, skin colour, religion, race, whatever."

When I applaud your organisation. There are some, I don't know specifics though I heard about them through a talk someone did, that have government quotas saying they have to have a certain proportion from minority groups regardless of how good they are for the job. Surely that's against the point of trying to find someone for the job in the first place isn't it?

And as to the comment about pay differences between men and women, do you think a company these days would dare to pay a woman less that a man? They'd have their pants sued off before they could spell discrimination!

Then. Then I applaud your organisation. Sorry.

but companies do pay women less than men for the same job. (in my case i get paid more than the guy doing a similar job - but i have 20 years experience and he has none -but still it riles his testosterone gland even though we have never actually takled about our pay)

Positive discrimination can go too far - but I think we still need it in some cases (there is a strong case that the houses of parliament and the police should have a make-up that accurately reflects the make-up of the general population)

However, it's not all about equal pay and an equal shot at joining the rat-race. Women are still discriminated against and treated dreadfully all over the and part of women's day shoul be there to remind us of this and to give us an annual kick up the backside to do something about it.

And, of course, Women's Day is there to remind everyone that we are, simply put, fantastic and deserve being showered with gifts and attenion