4 ms·

By 2026, companies will need to have 40% of the underrepresented sex among non-executive directors or 33% among all directors. Identity quotas do little but fo

by causi 4y ago

By 2026, companies will need to have 40% of the underrepresented sex among non-executive directors or 33% among all directors. Identity quotas do little but foster distrust of the members of the assisted category. How does this even work as more and more peoples' gender identities deviate from the classical male and female? Does a non-binary person count toward the quota? Do they count only if they were assigned female at birth? Can executives change their legal gender to manipulate their stats? Are companies similarly required to have at least 33% males on their boards? How does telling a company who they must hire, as opposed to who they're not allowed to discriminate against, not violate the right of freedom of association? This is a whole damn mess.

ClassyJacket 4y ago
Sex is not assigned at birth, it's observed.
- medstrom 4y ago
  You must know this claim of yours can trigger a huge discussion. If you want to discuss it in good faith, you must write more, not toss in a one-sentence slogan like a grenade and hope it gets people to spend a ton of effort in response. And I'd advise replying to a post more directly related to the point.
- causi 4y ago
  Dumb or not, assigned female at birth and assigned male at birth, AFAB and AMAB, are the contemporary terminology.
  - Veen 4y ago
    It's the terminology preferred by people with particular ideological commitments. Those who disagree have no obligation to conform to those preferences or permit others to choose the words they are allowed to use.
    - causi 4y ago
      Agreed.
- hereme888 4y ago
  That's unscientific, against medicine. If you see a penis and a pair of testicles, but for some reason the parents are ultra-liberals who wonder if it's still a girl, just test to see if there's a Y chromosome.
josteink 4y ago
> This is a whole damn mess. Agreed. > How does this even work as more and more peoples' gender identities deviate from the classical male and female? Well. Colour me plain, but I don’t think allowing people to select a gender disparate from their biology is useful, nor is going to help in this regard. Kids these are getting more confused than ever before, because we as adults are afraid to draw clear lines and put up simple, reliable structures they can relate to. Being handwavey about something as fundamental as gender is doing our kids a gross disservice.
FranzFerdiNaN 4y ago
> Identity quotas do little but foster distrust of the members of the assisted category. Only for a while. After a while it will become normal and the distrust will fall away. And what else do you propose? Because we've tried doing nothing for decades and the results aren't great.
- troad 4y ago
  > Only for a while. After a while it will become normal and the distrust will fall away. Really? What do you base this on? From my understanding of race-based affirmative action in the United States, that distrust hasn't gone away after many, many decades. I've heard African-Americans complain it's more difficult to be taken seriously when quotas are in place, but it's hard to say how common that experience is.
- AdrianB1 4y ago
  My company started this policy internally for more than 10 years. What is the situation 10 years later: - the last 4 senior directors of my department were all females, the last 2 were fired for incompetence, the previous 2 moved out with different golden parachutes (one in an extended maternity leave of several years, one in retirement) - we are no longer allowed to do technical interviews in IT with very few exceptions for key positions. The reason: the ratio of people passing tech interviews were ~ 10:1 male to female, not enough to hire 60% women (that was the quota for new hires) - we are losing Application Managers at rapid fire. They either leave the company, get fired or move to other functions (HR, sales). They are all females, only a few developers are males. - the last 2 cafeteria managers were promoted to IT directors (Facility Management is technically part of IT function for some historical reason). Both females.
- causi 4y ago
  Because we've tried doing nothing for decades and the results aren't great. Why do you say that? The proportion of female executives is increasing at a phenomenal rate. Look at, for instance, the number of female CEOs in the Fortune 500. In 1998 it was one. In 2008 it was twelve. In 2019 it was thirty-three.
varispeed 4y ago
In my country, we have a concept of "employee for tax purposes", where someone is not an employee, but pays employer and employee taxes on their invoices. I can imagine we could arrive at "gender for quota purposes", where someone may declare themselves as female, but for quota purpose they'll still be regarded as male.

by causi 4y ago

ClassyJacket 4y ago

Sex is not assigned at birth, it's observed.

medstrom 4y ago
You must know this claim of yours can trigger a huge discussion. If you want to discuss it in good faith, you must write more, not toss in a one-sentence slogan like a grenade and hope it gets people to spend a ton of effort in response. And I'd advise replying to a post more directly related to the point.
causi 4y ago
Dumb or not, assigned female at birth and assigned male at birth, AFAB and AMAB, are the contemporary terminology.
- Veen 4y ago
  It's the terminology preferred by people with particular ideological commitments. Those who disagree have no obligation to conform to those preferences or permit others to choose the words they are allowed to use.
  - causi 4y ago
    Agreed.
hereme888 4y ago
That's unscientific, against medicine. If you see a penis and a pair of testicles, but for some reason the parents are ultra-liberals who wonder if it's still a girl, just test to see if there's a Y chromosome.

josteink 4y ago

> This is a whole damn mess. Agreed. > How does this even work as more and more peoples' gender identities deviate from the classical male and female? Well. Colour me plain, but I don’t think allowing people to select a gender disparate from their biology is useful, nor is going to help in this regard. Kids these are getting more confused than ever before, because we as adults are afraid to draw clear lines and put up simple, reliable structures they can relate to. Being handwavey about something as fundamental as gender is doing our kids a gross disservice.

FranzFerdiNaN 4y ago

> Identity quotas do little but foster distrust of the members of the assisted category. Only for a while. After a while it will become normal and the distrust will fall away. And what else do you propose? Because we've tried doing nothing for decades and the results aren't great.

troad 4y ago
> Only for a while. After a while it will become normal and the distrust will fall away. Really? What do you base this on? From my understanding of race-based affirmative action in the United States, that distrust hasn't gone away after many, many decades. I've heard African-Americans complain it's more difficult to be taken seriously when quotas are in place, but it's hard to say how common that experience is.
AdrianB1 4y ago
My company started this policy internally for more than 10 years. What is the situation 10 years later: - the last 4 senior directors of my department were all females, the last 2 were fired for incompetence, the previous 2 moved out with different golden parachutes (one in an extended maternity leave of several years, one in retirement) - we are no longer allowed to do technical interviews in IT with very few exceptions for key positions. The reason: the ratio of people passing tech interviews were ~ 10:1 male to female, not enough to hire 60% women (that was the quota for new hires) - we are losing Application Managers at rapid fire. They either leave the company, get fired or move to other functions (HR, sales). They are all females, only a few developers are males. - the last 2 cafeteria managers were promoted to IT directors (Facility Management is technically part of IT function for some historical reason). Both females.
causi 4y ago
Because we've tried doing nothing for decades and the results aren't great. Why do you say that? The proportion of female executives is increasing at a phenomenal rate. Look at, for instance, the number of female CEOs in the Fortune 500. In 1998 it was one. In 2008 it was twelve. In 2019 it was thirty-three.

varispeed 4y ago

In my country, we have a concept of "employee for tax purposes", where someone is not an employee, but pays employer and employee taxes on their invoices. I can imagine we could arrive at "gender for quota purposes", where someone may declare themselves as female, but for quota purpose they'll still be regarded as male.