4 ms·

Here in Belgium, quotas were introduced in politics in eighties IIRC. According to prominent women at the time and now, that was the reason we are closer to par

by etripe 5y ago

Here in Belgium, quotas were introduced in politics in eighties IIRC. According to prominent women at the time and now, that was the reason we are closer to parity in politics nowadays. Their line of reasoning, obviously from a feminist perspective, is that the quotas ensured that not all women could be excluded and enough of them made it through to positions that mattered in a sexist apparatus. Survivor's bias will of course confirm that this is the reason they made it. After the fact, up and coming women could see examples/representation in the women that made it in, which I do believe helps. I have lived and worked in a foreign country. When I got my first job there, my new boss joked I'd gotten the job because of diversity quotas. I was horrified at the idea that my skills wouldn't matter but only my status of a being an non-native. So I can see where you're coming from with the "quota-thing". I am sceptical, like you. Quotas are inherently discriminatory, but I am open to the idea that if the entrenched elite is bigoted or biased too it might be the only way to break things open.

avereveard 5y ago
Well academy awards always had a female quota, and since inception not one female won overall best actor. Italy has had "Quote Rosa" since I can remember, and not one female prime minister. Conversely neither Tatcher nor Merkel were products of diversity quota.
- nix23 5y ago
  >Tatcher nor Merkel were products of diversity quota. More like the product of massive competency in their field and absolutely no one can say otherwise (i am not talking if one likes them as politicians...that's something else) >> neither [...] were products Yes because of competency and not a quota, what's not to understand here?
  - avereveard 5y ago
    > neither [...] were products
SiempreViernes 5y ago
Any selection rule (save random sampling) is inherently discriminatory in some way, and that is indeed the point of it. It is only in that trivial sense that the general statement "Quotas are inherently discriminatory" is true, if you want to go beyond statements like "sorting by price is discriminatory against expensive usb-cables", you have to be more specific with what precise context you are talking about.
- etripe 5y ago
  I would have thought it obvious that sex quota are inherently sexist. Benignly sexist perhaps, but sexist nonetheless. Apparently not?
  - SiempreViernes 5y ago
    That's conflating actions with motivations, and sexism is a set of discriminatory beliefs and not simply any action that separates based on sex. It is for example not sexism to say "only women get tax-free tampons" because that (could be) a rule based on concrete difference in irreducible need. The reason action get called "sexist" is a combination of carelessness in terminology when being upset about suffering things like sexual assault, and the fact that actions are the only availble proxies we have for the private beliefs of people. (As defined by their genitalia)
drumhead 5y ago
Have these sex bases quotas led to better, worse or no change in the quality of government? Has having more women in charge led to better economic growth, lower crime, better educational results, or they worse or no real change. Has you country changed for the better?
- secondcoming 5y ago
  Hard to tell when there is no government some of the time: https://www.france24.com/en/20191210-no-government-no-problem-say-belgians https://www.france24.com/en/20191210-no-government-no-proble...
- etripe 5y ago
  My most charitable read is that women's issues have gotten more attention and the quality is otherwise the same. A less charitable read is that the number of female political fall guys has increased, although that could just be a case of women having the same "defect rate" as men. Despite regularly following the news, I couldn't tell you whether (on average) female characteristics have made a difference.
sytelus 5y ago
Quotas in politics is a great idea and important. Politics is all about representation and without quotas population is not represented properly in law making chambers. As it is, binary democratic systems means majority can out-vote minority at everything and impose laws that only benefits majority and severely penalizes minority. With quotas, at least there is representation.

by etripe 5y ago

avereveard 5y ago

Well academy awards always had a female quota, and since inception not one female won overall best actor. Italy has had "Quote Rosa" since I can remember, and not one female prime minister. Conversely neither Tatcher nor Merkel were products of diversity quota.

nix23 5y ago
>Tatcher nor Merkel were products of diversity quota. More like the product of massive competency in their field and absolutely no one can say otherwise (i am not talking if one likes them as politicians...that's something else) >> neither [...] were products Yes because of competency and not a quota, what's not to understand here?
- avereveard 5y ago
  > neither [...] were products

SiempreViernes 5y ago

Any selection rule (save random sampling) is inherently discriminatory in some way, and that is indeed the point of it. It is only in that trivial sense that the general statement "Quotas are inherently discriminatory" is true, if you want to go beyond statements like "sorting by price is discriminatory against expensive usb-cables", you have to be more specific with what precise context you are talking about.

etripe 5y ago
I would have thought it obvious that sex quota are inherently sexist. Benignly sexist perhaps, but sexist nonetheless. Apparently not?
- SiempreViernes 5y ago
  That's conflating actions with motivations, and sexism is a set of discriminatory beliefs and not simply any action that separates based on sex. It is for example not sexism to say "only women get tax-free tampons" because that (could be) a rule based on concrete difference in irreducible need. The reason action get called "sexist" is a combination of carelessness in terminology when being upset about suffering things like sexual assault, and the fact that actions are the only availble proxies we have for the private beliefs of people. (As defined by their genitalia)

drumhead 5y ago

Have these sex bases quotas led to better, worse or no change in the quality of government? Has having more women in charge led to better economic growth, lower crime, better educational results, or they worse or no real change. Has you country changed for the better?

secondcoming 5y ago
Hard to tell when there is no government some of the time: https://www.france24.com/en/20191210-no-government-no-problem-say-belgians https://www.france24.com/en/20191210-no-government-no-proble...
etripe 5y ago
My most charitable read is that women's issues have gotten more attention and the quality is otherwise the same. A less charitable read is that the number of female political fall guys has increased, although that could just be a case of women having the same "defect rate" as men. Despite regularly following the news, I couldn't tell you whether (on average) female characteristics have made a difference.

sytelus 5y ago

Quotas in politics is a great idea and important. Politics is all about representation and without quotas population is not represented properly in law making chambers. As it is, binary democratic systems means majority can out-vote minority at everything and impose laws that only benefits majority and severely penalizes minority. With quotas, at least there is representation.