3 ms·

You’re confusing equity with equality. You can’t have both because equity is an affront to equality. Fortunately, equality is the law of the land and racist or

You’re confusing equity with equality. You can’t have both because equity is an affront to equality. Fortunately, equality is the law of the land and racist or sexist equity laws are illegal.

kennywinker 4y ago
Explain to me what's unequal about requiring boards to be 50/50 male-female? That’s not even how far the law goes, but let’s take it that far. There’s an equal number of men and women born in america. That gives every child born an equal shot at one of those seats. To allow unequal boards would be to allow people to discriminate based on gender when picking board members. To mandate that is to legally require a level playing field. That’s equality, not the equity you seem to have beef with.
- t0suj4 4y ago
  If you believed that men and women are equal then you wouldn't have to care about any men-to-women ratios at all. If you absolutely need proportionate representation somewhere it suggests that each group is unequal.
  - HelloMcFly 4y ago
    How wonderfully optimistic. Unfortunately, such a belief is built on an assumption divorced from how decisions get made and structural advantages (and disadvantages) not equally shared by groups. I'd argue most believe that men and women are generally equal in terms of skills and potential given similar circumstances, but recognize that society does not afford them equal opportunity regardless of merit. This operates for more than just gender, of course.
    - t0suj4 4y ago
      Giving some group an advantage through a law will worsen its position in other areas of life. Mandating a ratio will deepen the divide not fix it. I think the society is on a good track to fix this divide in time. Any attempts by social engineers may undermine it.
- parkingrift 4y ago
  Equality means everyone is judged on merit instead of this dystopian view that you’re espousing where people should be considered on immutable physical properties above all.

You’re confusing equity with equality. You can’t have both because equity is an affront to equality. Fortunately, equality is the law of the land and racist or sexist equity laws are illegal.

kennywinker 4y ago

Explain to me what's unequal about requiring boards to be 50/50 male-female? That’s not even how far the law goes, but let’s take it that far. There’s an equal number of men and women born in america. That gives every child born an equal shot at one of those seats. To allow unequal boards would be to allow people to discriminate based on gender when picking board members. To mandate that is to legally require a level playing field. That’s equality, not the equity you seem to have beef with.

t0suj4 4y ago
If you believed that men and women are equal then you wouldn't have to care about any men-to-women ratios at all. If you absolutely need proportionate representation somewhere it suggests that each group is unequal.
- HelloMcFly 4y ago
  How wonderfully optimistic. Unfortunately, such a belief is built on an assumption divorced from how decisions get made and structural advantages (and disadvantages) not equally shared by groups. I'd argue most believe that men and women are generally equal in terms of skills and potential given similar circumstances, but recognize that society does not afford them equal opportunity regardless of merit. This operates for more than just gender, of course.
  - t0suj4 4y ago
    Giving some group an advantage through a law will worsen its position in other areas of life. Mandating a ratio will deepen the divide not fix it. I think the society is on a good track to fix this divide in time. Any attempts by social engineers may undermine it.
parkingrift 4y ago
Equality means everyone is judged on merit instead of this dystopian view that you’re espousing where people should be considered on immutable physical properties above all.