4 ms·

"The Dutch government has said that by next year 30% of executive board positions should be held by women..." I wish one day we can do away with this sort of '

"The Dutch government has said that by next year 30% of executive board positions should be held by women..." I wish one day we can do away with this sort of 'reverse' sexism, and I think that next year 100% of executive board positions should be held by capable people, regardless of their sex.

omginternets 11y ago
>I think that next year 100% of executive board positions should be held by capable people, regardless of their sex So, in theory, 50% of capable people should be women, no? edit: If your point is that we shouldn't be positively discriminating to artificially reach equidistribution of men and women in the workplace, then I agree, but your line of argumentation is often used to imply that women are less competent.
- NietTim 11y ago
  No. Because woman carry kids when they get pregnant and inadvertently will get behind on work experience compared to their male peers when they have to take time off for birth/etc. (Especially in the Netherlands it's common to take a full year off/more)
  - jameshart 11y ago
    So clearly your argument is that the most competent people will all be those who have maximized their amount of time in the workplace. We're looking for 70 year olds who never took a day off sick for all board positions. Surely the worst impact of taking time out to have kids should be a slight delay in the career trajectory of the most talented women, not disqualification from board positions because they've now inevitably and irretrievably fallen behind their male peers.
- mvanvoorden 11y ago
  I don't think so, as more men tend to choose an education that paves an easier path to acquiring a board position. This is not because women are less capable, but because they somehow feel less attracted to this field of work. This of course also has to do with our parents, media and other surroundings teaching us about gender roles and such. It's only since a few years that for example technical studies try to attract more women, as these were before considered 'a man's thing'. It's going to take a few generations for all of this to 'even out' and then we might see 50/50, but it could also result in 70/30 or 30/70, if it turns out that in a gender-neutral unbringing, one gender might be more capable of leadership than another.
  - mc32 11y ago
    To me the answer is not gender neutral upbringing, but rather emphasizing that everyone has the dame potential to achieve and make the tools available to everyone. Let's say instead of gender differences, we had people with different physics handicaps, we wouldn't pretend there aren't handicaps, ache same time we would not steer people but rather provide them all with the same opportunities and not encourage or discourage because of a particular handicap. Let the people, children, figure out what works and doesn't work for them, given their abilities and handicaps. The biggest problem I see is people steering or lowlighting certain paths because of some preconceptions --a deaf person can't sing well, instead let them prove they can't sing, or that they can sing, regardless of hearing.
    - toothbrush 11y ago
      the dame potential That sounds rather sexist lol :p j/k instead of gender differences, we had people with different physics [sic] handicaps That might be considered rather insulting. Having a penis, vagina, or whatever linear combination of the above isn't really comparable to being handicapped.
bnoordhuis 11y ago
I've been going back and forth on this. On the one hand, I feel that positive discrimination is just as bad as the other kind and that its proponents are not thinking things through as clearly as they should. On the other hand, board members are humans too. Given the choice, and whether consciously or unconsciously, they will typically elect people much like themselves, because that's the kind of person they can understand and relate to. It's an understandable human trait but it does perpetuate the status quo. I do wish the focus was less on gender and more on diversity in general. We have sizable ethnic minorities in the Netherlands but they are quite underrepresented in upper management and I'm not sure it can be fully explained by the socioeconomic and education gap.
- techlibertarian 11y ago
  > Given the choice, and whether consciously or unconsciously, they will typically elect people much like themselves, because that's the kind of person they can understand and relate to. The issue is at what point does the need for diversity kick in? If I start a startup right now with a friend, a person who is much like myself, very few people will criticize us for diversity issues at 2 people. But if we continue to hire friends, when does it become a diversity issue that needs addressing?
  - warp 11y ago
    I think a good moment to start thinking about this is when you are legally required to have an Ondernemingsraad [1]. Which is at 50 employees. It's an arbitrary threshold, but seems like a good point in the life of a company where it transitions from a small company to a larger one, where you need to start making various informal policies and company customs and values more formal. [1] http://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ondernemingsraad_%28Nederland%29 http://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ondernemingsraad_%28Nederland%2...
icebraining 11y ago
Positive discrimination - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OhZRDoGZg00 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OhZRDoGZg00
rayiner 11y ago
Why do you assume that if 30% of board positions were held by women, they wouldn't be capable?
- atom-morgan 11y ago
  That was never said or implied.
  - rayiner 11y ago
    Of course it's implied. The comment makes no sense unless you assume that the target of having 30% women is at odds with 100% of the board being competent.
    - avar 11y ago
      It's important to realize that when the government makes these sort of comments their intent is usually to enforce it on a per-company basis. According to Wikipedia the average size of a board is 9.2 members, and as low as 3 members[1]. It's easy to imagine a company where the 3 most competent people all happen to be either male or female. 1. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Board_of_directors#Size http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Board_of_directors#Size
    - atom-morgan 11y ago
      > I think that next year 100% of executive board positions should be held by capable people, regardless of their sex. No, it isn't implied at all. (emphasis mine)
      - rayiner 11y ago
        Here is a hypothetical exchange. Statement: The phone should have a glass back. Response: The phone should be durable. The only reasonable interpretation of the response is that it calls into question the durability of phones with glass backs. Otherwise, it is a non sequitur. Similarly, the only reasonable interpretation of the quoted statement is that it calls into question whether a board composed of 30% women can also be 100% composed of capable people. Otherwise it makes no sense as a response.
jchrisa 11y ago
Maybe it's plain old realpolitik aiming to make the country more successful: http://qz.com/361602/companies-run-by-women-perform-better/ http://qz.com/361602/companies-run-by-women-perform-better/
s73v3r 11y ago
Wouldn't your wish require that most board members be fired, then?

omginternets 11y ago

>I think that next year 100% of executive board positions should be held by capable people, regardless of their sex So, in theory, 50% of capable people should be women, no? edit: If your point is that we shouldn't be positively discriminating to artificially reach equidistribution of men and women in the workplace, then I agree, but your line of argumentation is often used to imply that women are less competent.

NietTim 11y ago
No. Because woman carry kids when they get pregnant and inadvertently will get behind on work experience compared to their male peers when they have to take time off for birth/etc. (Especially in the Netherlands it's common to take a full year off/more)
- jameshart 11y ago
  So clearly your argument is that the most competent people will all be those who have maximized their amount of time in the workplace. We're looking for 70 year olds who never took a day off sick for all board positions. Surely the worst impact of taking time out to have kids should be a slight delay in the career trajectory of the most talented women, not disqualification from board positions because they've now inevitably and irretrievably fallen behind their male peers.
mvanvoorden 11y ago
I don't think so, as more men tend to choose an education that paves an easier path to acquiring a board position. This is not because women are less capable, but because they somehow feel less attracted to this field of work. This of course also has to do with our parents, media and other surroundings teaching us about gender roles and such. It's only since a few years that for example technical studies try to attract more women, as these were before considered 'a man's thing'. It's going to take a few generations for all of this to 'even out' and then we might see 50/50, but it could also result in 70/30 or 30/70, if it turns out that in a gender-neutral unbringing, one gender might be more capable of leadership than another.
- mc32 11y ago
  To me the answer is not gender neutral upbringing, but rather emphasizing that everyone has the dame potential to achieve and make the tools available to everyone. Let's say instead of gender differences, we had people with different physics handicaps, we wouldn't pretend there aren't handicaps, ache same time we would not steer people but rather provide them all with the same opportunities and not encourage or discourage because of a particular handicap. Let the people, children, figure out what works and doesn't work for them, given their abilities and handicaps. The biggest problem I see is people steering or lowlighting certain paths because of some preconceptions --a deaf person can't sing well, instead let them prove they can't sing, or that they can sing, regardless of hearing.
  - toothbrush 11y ago
    the dame potential That sounds rather sexist lol :p j/k instead of gender differences, we had people with different physics [sic] handicaps That might be considered rather insulting. Having a penis, vagina, or whatever linear combination of the above isn't really comparable to being handicapped.

bnoordhuis 11y ago

I've been going back and forth on this. On the one hand, I feel that positive discrimination is just as bad as the other kind and that its proponents are not thinking things through as clearly as they should. On the other hand, board members are humans too. Given the choice, and whether consciously or unconsciously, they will typically elect people much like themselves, because that's the kind of person they can understand and relate to. It's an understandable human trait but it does perpetuate the status quo. I do wish the focus was less on gender and more on diversity in general. We have sizable ethnic minorities in the Netherlands but they are quite underrepresented in upper management and I'm not sure it can be fully explained by the socioeconomic and education gap.

techlibertarian 11y ago
> Given the choice, and whether consciously or unconsciously, they will typically elect people much like themselves, because that's the kind of person they can understand and relate to. The issue is at what point does the need for diversity kick in? If I start a startup right now with a friend, a person who is much like myself, very few people will criticize us for diversity issues at 2 people. But if we continue to hire friends, when does it become a diversity issue that needs addressing?
- warp 11y ago
  I think a good moment to start thinking about this is when you are legally required to have an Ondernemingsraad [1]. Which is at 50 employees. It's an arbitrary threshold, but seems like a good point in the life of a company where it transitions from a small company to a larger one, where you need to start making various informal policies and company customs and values more formal. [1] http://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ondernemingsraad_%28Nederland%29 http://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ondernemingsraad_%28Nederland%2...

icebraining 11y ago

Positive discrimination - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OhZRDoGZg00 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OhZRDoGZg00

rayiner 11y ago

Why do you assume that if 30% of board positions were held by women, they wouldn't be capable?

atom-morgan 11y ago
That was never said or implied.
- rayiner 11y ago
  Of course it's implied. The comment makes no sense unless you assume that the target of having 30% women is at odds with 100% of the board being competent.
  - avar 11y ago
    It's important to realize that when the government makes these sort of comments their intent is usually to enforce it on a per-company basis. According to Wikipedia the average size of a board is 9.2 members, and as low as 3 members[1]. It's easy to imagine a company where the 3 most competent people all happen to be either male or female. 1. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Board_of_directors#Size http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Board_of_directors#Size
  - atom-morgan 11y ago
    > I think that next year 100% of executive board positions should be held by capable people, regardless of their sex. No, it isn't implied at all. (emphasis mine)
    - rayiner 11y ago
      Here is a hypothetical exchange. Statement: The phone should have a glass back. Response: The phone should be durable. The only reasonable interpretation of the response is that it calls into question the durability of phones with glass backs. Otherwise, it is a non sequitur. Similarly, the only reasonable interpretation of the quoted statement is that it calls into question whether a board composed of 30% women can also be 100% composed of capable people. Otherwise it makes no sense as a response.

jchrisa 11y ago

Maybe it's plain old realpolitik aiming to make the country more successful: http://qz.com/361602/companies-run-by-women-perform-better/ http://qz.com/361602/companies-run-by-women-perform-better/

s73v3r 11y ago

Wouldn't your wish require that most board members be fired, then?