SuzukiSavage.com - Print Page

SuzukiSavage.com
/cgi-bin/YaBB.pl
General Category >> Politics, Religion (Tall Table) >> Anyone care to Explain how Exactly
/cgi-bin/YaBB.pl?num=1678796567

Message started by justin_o_guy2 on 03/14/23 at 05:22:46

Title: Anyone care to Explain how Exactly
Post by justin_o_guy2 on 03/14/23 at 05:22:46

Diversity somehow contributes to things being better?
Wal-Mart is closing up stores and leaving a major city. Why? The Governor is a lesbian!
Why are things not better?
Show me where diversity increases performance.

I've worked plenty of jobs and not one time have I ever turned to a co-worker and told him
YaKnow, this would be easier if one of was queer. We could get more done if one of us was a woman.
I don't believe the claim of
Diversity is strength
Is supportable.
Buut, maybe I would understand if my bucket list included
Cut mah Dikkoff..

Title: Re: Anyone care to Explain how Exactly
Post by Eegore on 03/14/23 at 06:08:42

I think it has more to do with what job/task you are referring to, and also how race/gender exclusions in certain jobs impact an economy.

I'd explain to you how having a diverse workgroup positively impacts a handful of multi-billion dollar profitable businesses, but first we need to establish what You think "increases performance" means.

I know with my business if I had all middle-aged white males working for me I would be bankrupt. They simply aren't integrated enough in the environments I work in to provide the cultural information needed to get the job done efficiently. Another example is the medical center, it is beneficial to have both male and female staff, simply put females can do some jobs more efficiently than males, for instance conducting rape-kits, talking to children, survivors of abuse, MVA victims etc. Queer staff have higher return treatments from queer patients across the board.

Hispanic female staff are typically more productive in physical therapy with Hispanic female patients. There is a ton of cultural components and psychology there, so it is beneficial to have a diverse staff in those environments.

That doesn't mean White, straight, males, or Black, straight, males can't do the job, it just means that patients respond to them less efficiently from a healthcare results perspective.

Title: Re: Anyone care to Explain how Exactly
Post by justin_o_guy2 on 03/14/23 at 06:56:15

I can see how it Could be beneficial if the object is to understand, predict, and adjust the direction of a company.
In a team, like NBA, I'm going with No. It's oversold. It's also important to define it.

Hiring someone BECAUSE of their their Identity instead of their abilities is stupid.
But it's Celebrated. A company is supposed to have certain people, or the lefties will try to cancel them. Nothing about being queer makes someone valuable. If they are valuable, then you hire them. The problem is
Diversity Itself became a goal. Instead of hiring someone who just happened to be Not the Historically Average Person who had the job and the personnel naturally became more diverse, hiring to create diversity became the approach.
Or are we supposed to believe Pete Buttplug was actually the best person for the job aaand just happened to be a practicing pervert?
How about Little old Luggage Thief dog fukker Sam?
You know about security clearance rules..
How did he ever get a security clearance? Because he wasn't blackmailable? Because everything that he should have been ashamed of was common knowledge and celebrated by our perverted government?

Title: Re: Anyone care to Explain how Exactly
Post by Eegore on 03/14/23 at 08:08:02

"Hiring someone BECAUSE of their their Identity instead of their abilities is stupid."

I agree here. In the physical therapy example it wouldn't make sense to hire a Hispanic female based off that alone instead of a more qualified physical therapist.

Eventually though I think there is a line, if out of 10 staff 9 are Asian males, it might be a good idea to hire one female, even if another Asian male is a qualified candidate. But to hire a female, or a queer Asian male just because they "diversify" the group, that doesn't make sense.

Title: Re: Anyone care to Explain how Exactly
Post by MnSpring on 03/14/23 at 08:28:24

Totally agree with JOG.
One hires the ‘BEST’ person for the job.

“… how race/gender exclusions in certain jobs impact an economy …”

It can, and it should be, ‘the best person for the job’
That and that alone, effects a economy.

“… if I had all middle-aged white males working for me I would be bankrupt…”

Maybe, Maybe not ! If ‘middle-aged white males’ are the BEST people for the job, that is who you hire !

“…They simply aren't integrated enough in the environments I work in …”

Wow, that sounds a LOT like;
‘They simply aren't integrated enough in the environments I work in because of the color of their skin, sexual preference, heritage, etc. etc. etc.’

“… females can do some jobs more efficiently than males, for instance conducting rape-kits, talking to children, survivors of abuse …”

Absolutely. Problem is when a female is hired for that job, and has NO SKILL, yet a male WITH SKILL, is NOT hired.
(Which NOW happens frequently)

“… doesn't mean White, straight, males, or Black, straight, males can't do the job, it just means that patients respond to them less efficiently from a healthcare results perspective …”

That is wrong
If they are SKILLED, in doing that job, they will be just as efficient.
Regardless of, the color of their skin, sexual preference, heritage, etc. etc. etc.’

Seem like this entire post is a defense for hiring someone for a job, just because of , ‘ the color of their skin, sexual preference, heritage, etc. etc. etc.’,
Instead of hiring the best, most qualified person for the job,
DESPITE, ‘ the color of their skin, sexual preference, heritage, etc. etc. etc.’.

“… I'd explain to you how …”
You have done that numerous times, don’t need more.

Title: Re: Anyone care to Explain how Exactly
Post by Eegore on 03/14/23 at 08:36:45

That is wrong
If they are SKILLED, in doing that job, they will be just as efficient.
Regardless of, the color of their skin, sexual preference, heritage, etc. etc. etc.’

Incorrect. The person's SKILL often times has little to do with how another human will initially perceive them. For instance most young females that are raped or systematically abused sexually are victims of males.

No male, no matter how SKILLED at inserting collection swabs into a vag!na and anus can convince a 13 year old sexual assault victim to comply as well as a female can. The psychological component of sexual assault and abuse is not something the average male nurse can overcome in the very short time they have to collect evidence. Maybe a male psychologist, over time, can change this, but time is not an option in this case.

The SKILL is the same among the workers, but the customer so to speak is not. So having a female on staff in an ER is probably a good idea.

I agree that the SKILL level may be better from an experienced male, and if that is the exclusive evaluation then the male is the better choice.

But if the evaluation is getting the rape-kit samples in the first place, the male may not be able to get them at all since the assault victim may not consent having another male inserting object into her, so in that case the male would not be the better choice.

Title: Re: Anyone care to Explain how Exactly
Post by MnSpring on 03/14/23 at 08:52:52

6C4C4E465B4C290 wrote:

"... The person's SKILL often times has little to do with how another human will initially perceive them. ..."

So, in the case of rape of a female.

A Male, who knows how to interact, knows the job, what to do, how to do it.
is not good.
But a female, who does not know the job, how to it,
is better ?

So, "...how another human will initially perceive them..." is better.
Even when in court, the defense says, xxx was not collected because xxx, and the rapist is let go.

OK got it.

Title: Re: Anyone care to Explain how Exactly
Post by justin_o_guy2 on 03/14/23 at 10:38:59

What is your point, E?
If a guy wants to DO rape kits,something is WRONG.
Who would ever suggest a rape victim be handled by a man? If that is Done, I'm floored.
If she says it's cool, okay, but why would any man ever want to work on a rape victim in a way that makes her vulnerable? Because he CARES so much?. Are you in Deep Dive mode, in search of The Rare Event that makes Hiring someone who has no skill reasonable or what?

Title: Re: Anyone care to Explain how Exactly
Post by Eegore on 03/14/23 at 10:53:55

"A Male, who knows how to interact, knows the job, what to do, how to do it.
is not good.
But a female, who does not know the job, how to it,
is better ?"

No, you changed it to alter context.

You changed it to "does not know the job". So if we go with your Different scenario which is not what I indicated then no the female that does not know how to conduct a rape-kit should not be selected.

See how that works? If you make up a different scenario, you get a different answer.

If the outcome is no evidence, or some evidence, then some evidence is better.

Title: Re: Anyone care to Explain how Exactly
Post by Eegore on 03/14/23 at 11:02:29

What is your point, E?
If a guy wants to DO rape kits,something is WRONG.

Not necessarily. If that is the only way to collect evidence, then it may be appropriate.

"Who would ever suggest a rape victim be handled by a man? If that is Done, I'm floored."

If only males are selected for employment then the suggestion would be due to the desire for gathering evidence. In this case, I would think you might hear something along the lines of, "I bet we could get this done if a woman were here".

Again, the diversity impact is for a different kind of evaluation. Not just "can this person do this job" but also, "should we have females working in the ER?" I'd say yes, but I would not want to alter any qualification standards to get there.

SKILL alone should not be the deciding factor in every scenario. If two humans have the same SKILL, and no females are currently employed at a location where it is beneficial to hire females, then I would say it is ok to diversify the employee pool and hire the female.

Not a less SKILLED female, not a one that "does not know how to do the job".

Title: Re: Anyone care to Explain how Exactly
Post by justin_o_guy2 on 03/14/23 at 12:41:24

Ooookay, yeah..

Title: Re: Anyone care to Explain how Exactly
Post by Eegore on 03/14/23 at 12:59:51

Yeah totally not beneficial to have females working in a hospital of the same skill levels as men. What was I thinking.

I can see how it Could be beneficial if the object is to understand, predict, and adjust the direction of a company.

But not an ED?

Title: Re: Anyone care to Explain how Exactly
Post by justin_o_guy2 on 03/14/23 at 13:16:41

Title: Re: Anyone care to Explain how Exactly
Post by MnSpring on 03/14/23 at 13:19:34

0B2B29213C2B4E0 wrote:

"... you changed it ...
... Different scenario ..."

Perhaps you could read it again, instead of spinning.

A person knows the job and is qualified.
A Person who does not know the job and is not qualified.

Who will you choose,
the qualified one,
or the NOT qualified one.

Or will it be on the decisive;
'color of skin, sexual preference, sex, heritage, religion, etc. etc. etc.’

Title: Re: Anyone care to Explain how Exactly
Post by Eegore on 03/14/23 at 14:08:23

You're suggesting my position is not that? You are screwed up,man You Can Not believe I'm saying that. This is fukking laffable. Proven wrong and not able to own it and continue to pretend I'm saying what I'm not. You're a hoot.

So you are saying that if you question one part of a rather large topic and I over-react, acting like you said something you didn't, that's fukking laffable?

Weird. I wonder where I've seen that before.

Bottom line here is there are reasons for diversity. To do it exclusively for diversity while undermining the end-goals of a company or group is not good.

I know in my case if I only hired "the best" I would make less money or fail completely. Sometimes I need the "best" female at a job, not the "best" human. Like a hydrology data analyst for swimwear, I know a male that basically built the software used for this worldwide, but putting him into women's swimming pools and locker rooms would surely lower my data rates, even though he'd be the best at that job.

So the best choice is not the most skilled person, it is the best person with the most skill.

Again it depends on what the evaluation is. Is it SKILL? Or is it end results? I prefer to go with what makes me the most money, and that is results.

Title: Re: Anyone care to Explain how Exactly
Post by Eegore on 03/14/23 at 14:15:21

"Who will you choose,
the qualified one,
or the NOT qualified one."

The qualified one.

The difference is when one is qualified, but would be a better candidate for getting the job done because of their gender or whatever "diverse" standard they have. A power lifter instructor: Probably more money in it if you hire a male. A women's shelter counselor: Probably more positive results if you hire a female. Suicide hotline for gay humans: Probably best to have gay staff.

None of them should get the job if they are completely unqualified.

Title: Re: Anyone care to Explain how Exactly
Post by MnSpring on 03/14/23 at 19:29:25

2707050D1007620 wrote:

"... I know in my case
if I only hired "the best"
I would make less money ..."

Totally disagree.
In fact in my experience,
it has always been,
hiring the most qualified,
makes me the most money.

So,

Please supply the stats,
where ‘X’ employees are hired on qualification,
VS
‘X” hired on skin color, sex, heritage, etc etc.

That way one will know, for sure, what is correct.
Because their are numbers that can qualify a position.

After all, hiring a gay man, because he is a gay man is correct.
It is not correct hiring a gay man, because he is the best/qualified human to do the job.
(Human, as the only Sentient Being on this Spaceship)

Oh Oh Oh, can't say that.
Cause their are some UL, DFI, FDS, Socialists that are convinced plants are also sentient beings !!!!!)

Title: Re: Anyone care to Explain how Exactly
Post by Eegore on 03/14/23 at 20:07:44

"Totally disagree.
In fact in my experience,
it has always been,
hiring the most qualified,
makes me the most money."

Great. This is not the case for me. If I hired a man to go fit swimwear with sensors on women because he was the most qualified sensor technician, I'd have very few women volunteering. So I'd have less data, and thus less money. I'd lose the contract to the first company that used a female to fit clothing on females.

JoG asked if there were scenarios where diversity was beneficial. There is, but the diversity needs to compliment achieving goals.

"Please supply the stats,
where ‘X’ employees are hired on qualification,
VS
‘X” hired on skin color, sex, heritage, etc etc."

No. I already said hiring people based exclusively on color, race, gender etc. is not ideal. You can go find that information to support what we already agree about.

I am saying that the evaluative spectrum will create more variables in who is "qualified". If I am hiring a human to talk to teenage girls about social media safety methods, a young female would be most qualified from a participation perspective. However someone like Zuckerberg would be the most qualified to discuss social media risks. the problem is young females won't listen to Zuckerberg like they would another young female. Ideally I should diversify the group and have both working on that project, instead of hiring another middle aged male that is an expert in online security.

If I was hiring staff to be at an ED, I would want males and females on staff. Not people that can't do the job, but specifically accredited medical providers capable of doing the job. But if I had 20 positions and 15 were females, I would want to hire 5 males to diversify the group so more positive clinical outcomes were possible.

That may mean a nurse with 30 years of experience loses the position to a male with 10. This has more to do with her timing of application to the job than her gender, as I would have hired her if she had applied earlier - she would have been one of the 15 females.