Boy, that's a lot of predators! But there's a vanishingly small number of people whose biases might affect their voting patterns (other thread)?
Makes no sense to me.
USCHO Fan Forum
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
-
The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.
She Who Must Be Obeyed
- Thread starter Kepler
- Start date
Makes no sense to me.
Kepler
Si certus es dubita
Re: She Who Must Be Obeyed
What makes you think a lot of people thrive in business? Seems to me most of us are just wage slaves crushed under the yoke, doing what we can because we must, and waiting for the sweet release of death.
What makes you think a lot of people thrive in business? Seems to me most of us are just wage slaves crushed under the yoke, doing what we can because we must, and waiting for the sweet release of death.
Jimjamesak
Already insane, UAA making it worse
On the flip side, more than few of the women who thrive in those fields can be worse than many of men. See: TV personalities, CEOs, politicians, and athletes.
mookie1995
there's a good buck in that racket.
Re: She Who Must Be Obeyed
But she is not attractive
But she is not attractive
Kepler
Si certus es dubita
Re: She Who Must Be Obeyed
Well, Chinese, so I assume not.
But she is not attractive
Well, Chinese, so I assume not.
mookie1995
there's a good buck in that racket.
Dude!!!!
Kepler
Si certus es dubita
Adam_Krug#1
Member
FadeToBlack&Gold
Microlot Marxist
MinnesotaNorthStar
Minding the gap
Re: She Who Must Be Obeyed
"Brogrammers"....can we add "bro" to the banned words list?
"Brogrammers"....can we add "bro" to the banned words list?
mookie1995
there's a good buck in that racket.
Re: She Who Must Be Obeyed
I suppose I should consider myself lucky not to work with any.
I suppose I should consider myself lucky not to work with any.
FadeToBlack&Gold
Microlot Marxist
mookie1995
there's a good buck in that racket.
dxmnkd316
Lucia Apologist
Re: She Who Must Be Obeyed
Ok I have a complex question
The two women that planned and led this trip were both offended that none of the plants that we visited had any female engineers in the host teams. One said “so much for progressive Europe“. Being a man, I don’t always perceive these things. However, I really felt like each of the plants rolled out there most senior engineers possible. So I feel like it was just the set of circumstances we had.
I did notice that the oldest person who was with us was often addresssed first. He also happened to be a guy. He and I tried to stay at the back of the group so the hosts would address the women leaders first. I felt like this was borderline patronizing. I went with it because I wasn’t about to risk enflaming the situation. Even to the point where I felt my position as the incoming elected leader of the group was compromised. One of the European colleagues said he thought the woman who organized the trip was acting more like the leader.
Yesterday as the night was winding down, one of the women said that she expected better and thought women weren’t treated very well in Europe. She tried to clarify by saying it was just one plant, but she absolutely meant it was Europe in general. I attempted to give her an out but our very progressive Belgian colleagues were deeply offended already. And understandably so. They both said they don’t even see a man or woman when they are hiring. They see candidates and qualifications.
When I was talking the second of the women tonight, she also said she had talked to the other female colleague and that they had both noticed how poorly they were treated and the lack of other women at all of the plants.
She was also very disappointed that she didn’t see any minorities in the plants and that generally she was disappointed that our company didn’t hire more minorities. She told me she’s Hispanic, female, and engineer, and a mother of a special needs child so she feels isolated and it can be lonely at the company. Her exact words were that hiring women was supposed to be a global initiative. So she was disappointed that we only had two other women at this conference.
I tried to explain that we live in Minnesota and the employement base here is 90%+ white. So it makes sense that we have 90% white people in our division. But even that isn’t true. We have many people who identify with various groups. Way more than 10%. She brought up the fact that universities have plenty of diverse people more so even than the local population. “Why can’t we more reflect the university demographics?”
She’s very bright and has a progressive passion. But I’ve also noticed it’s about the issues that impact her. She is very passionate about the company being more accommodating to mothers. Which is fine, but am I wrong in that it is a life choice? She said that she thinks that women who are pregnant should be able to tell the company they don’t want to work in chemical plants. Why should a company bend over backwards for a woman who chooses to become a mother and one who doesn’t? What about men who are trying to become fathers? Chemicals can impact male reproductive systems just the same as a chemical can impact a woman. If a man or woman is attempting to have a child with their partner, I feel like they should be able to request some concessions, but not at the cost of the core function of his or her job.
I don’t know what to say to her. I think she’s being overly sensitive but at the same time, I know I’m a guy so I don’t perceive everything that a woman might. Especially one who identifies with all of the groups I mentioned above.
Ok, so now my question. How do you respond to this? She’s viewed as a leader in my division so I feel like I have to tiptoe through the tulips with her.
I agree we should have more women in the workforce, but I agree with my Belgian colleagues that we shouldn’t hire women because they’re women. We should hire the best candidates and see beyond gender and other identities as much as possible.
I don’t even see men or women in the workforce anymore. Not in my division. I see colleagues.
Ok I have a complex question
The two women that planned and led this trip were both offended that none of the plants that we visited had any female engineers in the host teams. One said “so much for progressive Europe“. Being a man, I don’t always perceive these things. However, I really felt like each of the plants rolled out there most senior engineers possible. So I feel like it was just the set of circumstances we had.
I did notice that the oldest person who was with us was often addresssed first. He also happened to be a guy. He and I tried to stay at the back of the group so the hosts would address the women leaders first. I felt like this was borderline patronizing. I went with it because I wasn’t about to risk enflaming the situation. Even to the point where I felt my position as the incoming elected leader of the group was compromised. One of the European colleagues said he thought the woman who organized the trip was acting more like the leader.
Yesterday as the night was winding down, one of the women said that she expected better and thought women weren’t treated very well in Europe. She tried to clarify by saying it was just one plant, but she absolutely meant it was Europe in general. I attempted to give her an out but our very progressive Belgian colleagues were deeply offended already. And understandably so. They both said they don’t even see a man or woman when they are hiring. They see candidates and qualifications.
When I was talking the second of the women tonight, she also said she had talked to the other female colleague and that they had both noticed how poorly they were treated and the lack of other women at all of the plants.
She was also very disappointed that she didn’t see any minorities in the plants and that generally she was disappointed that our company didn’t hire more minorities. She told me she’s Hispanic, female, and engineer, and a mother of a special needs child so she feels isolated and it can be lonely at the company. Her exact words were that hiring women was supposed to be a global initiative. So she was disappointed that we only had two other women at this conference.
I tried to explain that we live in Minnesota and the employement base here is 90%+ white. So it makes sense that we have 90% white people in our division. But even that isn’t true. We have many people who identify with various groups. Way more than 10%. She brought up the fact that universities have plenty of diverse people more so even than the local population. “Why can’t we more reflect the university demographics?”
She’s very bright and has a progressive passion. But I’ve also noticed it’s about the issues that impact her. She is very passionate about the company being more accommodating to mothers. Which is fine, but am I wrong in that it is a life choice? She said that she thinks that women who are pregnant should be able to tell the company they don’t want to work in chemical plants. Why should a company bend over backwards for a woman who chooses to become a mother and one who doesn’t? What about men who are trying to become fathers? Chemicals can impact male reproductive systems just the same as a chemical can impact a woman. If a man or woman is attempting to have a child with their partner, I feel like they should be able to request some concessions, but not at the cost of the core function of his or her job.
I don’t know what to say to her. I think she’s being overly sensitive but at the same time, I know I’m a guy so I don’t perceive everything that a woman might. Especially one who identifies with all of the groups I mentioned above.
Ok, so now my question. How do you respond to this? She’s viewed as a leader in my division so I feel like I have to tiptoe through the tulips with her.
I agree we should have more women in the workforce, but I agree with my Belgian colleagues that we shouldn’t hire women because they’re women. We should hire the best candidates and see beyond gender and other identities as much as possible.
I don’t even see men or women in the workforce anymore. Not in my division. I see colleagues.
FlagDUDE08
Banned
Re: She Who Must Be Obeyed
Those two women are sexist, and should be understood as such. Having women in a plant because of their gender is equally as bad as not having women there because of their gender. In addition, you deserve commendation for gender blindness, because THAT is the true message that is sought when it comes to gender equality. Both genders have opportunities regardless of how "the inside parts" are manufactured.
Those two women are sexist, and should be understood as such. Having women in a plant because of their gender is equally as bad as not having women there because of their gender. In addition, you deserve commendation for gender blindness, because THAT is the true message that is sought when it comes to gender equality. Both genders have opportunities regardless of how "the inside parts" are manufactured.