4 ms·

Since what we're looking for is a peace that eliminates collateral damage, perhaps the best course would be to reassure both sides that they can have security w

Since what we're looking for is a peace that eliminates collateral damage, perhaps the best course would be to reassure both sides that they can have security without having control.

Yizahi 2y ago
In my opinion government focus should be on the education of young people, and not on trying to force and bend adults to behave in the narrow "correct" way. Again, with some exceptions. If we want more female representation in STEM - focus on education. If we want people not to use some slur or derogatory term - teach people in the school. And so on. The problem is that across the world education is a third tier activity for the government and is largely neglected. No big profits there.
- whatshisface 2y ago
  Some people will choose to antagonize men or women even after being made aware of the facts. That's why people who are unwilling to tolerate a low level of bad behavior and the after-the-fact nature of punishment wind up demanding absolute and preemptive control over everybody else.
- wizzwizz4 2y ago
  > If we want more female representation in STEM - focus on education. You also have to introduce rules for hiring – unless you want your interventions to have an 80-year delay on them. (Or we could make unqualified 18-year-olds responsible for hiring decisions, I suppose.) If you're training children up for careers they're going to be kept out of, you're doing everyone a disservice.
  - Yizahi 2y ago
    Removing reasonable discriminating items from hiring is good idea, like mandating no photos for example. But we can't remove all of it and people will still be discriminated, even just by name and surname. Then we decide to force the issue and add diversity quotas, but those are both neither enough nor are truly enforced. Then we start creating DEI departments, thought police and... well. It doesn't work very well. Also in practice these quotas are often put at the lower rank jobs, where there is little discrimination anyway. E.g. IT industry will eat up any good candidate, usually. The problem with quotas is that we can't implement them where they are really needed - in the higher castes of social hierarchy. There are no quotas for CEOs or Senators, or top politicians etc. And really won't be. So considering that, I tend to think that quotas is a losing game, and only education is the solution. And I mean real efforts there, not some token programs for 30 girls per nation or something. And yeah, unfortunately we will need to wait a lot.
    - wizzwizz4 2y ago
      I also think quotas are a poor solution. Pretty much all of the surface-level DEI stuff in the US is – or, I suppose, was – absurd. (Mandatory corporate training where a voice reads out a list of slurs… What problem is that meant to solve?) However, my experience of DEI specialists is overwhelmingly positive, even those in the US. Maybe I've got lucky, and have only interacted with competent ones: who knows? But if they say a system involving quotas is the best solution currently-feasible – which iirc I have been told – then that won't convince me that quotas are good, but it will convince me that the other options are worse. > The problem with quotas is that we can't implement them where they are really needed - in the higher castes of social hierarchy. This isn't a problem with quotas. It being a problem presupposes that quotas work, surely?

Since what we're looking for is a peace that eliminates collateral damage, perhaps the best course would be to reassure both sides that they can have security without having control.

Yizahi 2y ago

In my opinion government focus should be on the education of young people, and not on trying to force and bend adults to behave in the narrow "correct" way. Again, with some exceptions. If we want more female representation in STEM - focus on education. If we want people not to use some slur or derogatory term - teach people in the school. And so on. The problem is that across the world education is a third tier activity for the government and is largely neglected. No big profits there.

whatshisface 2y ago
Some people will choose to antagonize men or women even after being made aware of the facts. That's why people who are unwilling to tolerate a low level of bad behavior and the after-the-fact nature of punishment wind up demanding absolute and preemptive control over everybody else.
wizzwizz4 2y ago
> If we want more female representation in STEM - focus on education. You also have to introduce rules for hiring – unless you want your interventions to have an 80-year delay on them. (Or we could make unqualified 18-year-olds responsible for hiring decisions, I suppose.) If you're training children up for careers they're going to be kept out of, you're doing everyone a disservice.
- Yizahi 2y ago
  Removing reasonable discriminating items from hiring is good idea, like mandating no photos for example. But we can't remove all of it and people will still be discriminated, even just by name and surname. Then we decide to force the issue and add diversity quotas, but those are both neither enough nor are truly enforced. Then we start creating DEI departments, thought police and... well. It doesn't work very well. Also in practice these quotas are often put at the lower rank jobs, where there is little discrimination anyway. E.g. IT industry will eat up any good candidate, usually. The problem with quotas is that we can't implement them where they are really needed - in the higher castes of social hierarchy. There are no quotas for CEOs or Senators, or top politicians etc. And really won't be. So considering that, I tend to think that quotas is a losing game, and only education is the solution. And I mean real efforts there, not some token programs for 30 girls per nation or something. And yeah, unfortunately we will need to wait a lot.
  - wizzwizz4 2y ago
    I also think quotas are a poor solution. Pretty much all of the surface-level DEI stuff in the US is – or, I suppose, was – absurd. (Mandatory corporate training where a voice reads out a list of slurs… What problem is that meant to solve?) However, my experience of DEI specialists is overwhelmingly positive, even those in the US. Maybe I've got lucky, and have only interacted with competent ones: who knows? But if they say a system involving quotas is the best solution currently-feasible – which iirc I have been told – then that won't convince me that quotas are good, but it will convince me that the other options are worse. > The problem with quotas is that we can't implement them where they are really needed - in the higher castes of social hierarchy. This isn't a problem with quotas. It being a problem presupposes that quotas work, surely?