~ archived since 2018 ~

How infiltrated is feminism inside business environments?

Kuramo

October 24, 2017

7 upvotes

/r/MensRights

/r/MensRights/comments/78g2fr/how_infiltrated_is_feminism_inside_business/

Download the post

Want to save the post for offline use on your device? Choose one of the download options below:

PDF TXT EPUB

Post Information

Title	How infiltrated is feminism inside business environments?
Author	Kuramo
Upvotes	7
Comments	31
Date	October 24, 2017 2:25 PM UTC (8 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/MensRights
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/78g2fr/how_infiltrated_is_feminism_inside_business/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/MensRights/how-infiltrated-is-feminism-inside-business.912453 https://theredarchive.com/post/912453

Comments

[–][deleted] 13 points14 points15 points 8 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]BloodFartTheQueefer 0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]number4ty7 8 points9 points10 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]TFCNU 5 points6 points7 points 8 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]HardLessontoLearn 1 point2 points3 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

This. In addition to worrying about potential harassment claims, many organizations are accountable at the state and federal levels. Any organization doing business with state and federal governments is subject to audits that look at their recruiting and hiring ratios of protected classes, including women. If the ratios are disproportionate to the local community, they'll need to provide evidence as to why that's happening in addition to evidence that they're doing due diligence to recruit and hire those protected classes. A super quick google search provides this example- https://mobile.nytimes.com/2000/02/03/nyregion/despite-recruiting-few-women-do-well-in-firefighter-tests.html. (Likely not the best or most recent, but the quickest and definitely applicable). Many fire entities are going through this kind of scrutiny for both female and minority candidates. They have to prove they seek to recruit these candidates and that their testing of the candidates is accurate. In that article specifically, there's a place where it discusses an old physical exam that was ruled discriminatory and not job-related. Not only do these organizations have to prove that they're recruiting women, and that they're testing women, but they also have to prove that the tests given are not discriminatory and are job-related. This can be harder and costlier than it sounds and some organizations will go with "better safe than pay to defend".

I've used fire as the example because it was the quickest article, but as I said, this same standard applies to ANY organization doing business with state and federal governments. If you provide printing services for a state prison, if you provide food for school lunches, etc., you're accountable for these audits and have to answer questions like these to prove you're not discriminating.

[–]Kuramo[S] 0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]TFCNU 0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (26 children) | Copy Link

[–]HardLessontoLearn 2 points3 points4 points 8 years ago (25 children) | Copy Link

You could be missing great career opportunities as many recruiters are female. Even if you want to work for a man, the recruiter and hiring manager are different people (unless you, yourself are a recruiter).

A recruiter's job is to find the best candidate for the role and they're given a job profile for that role. Female, male, it doesn't matter. They'll gather together candidates and present them to the hiring manager for consideration.

You can choose to progress your career in any way you see fit, including not working for or around women, but to not accept invites from potential recruiters because they're women is, in my opinion, limiting and ignorant.

Even if the contact isn't a recruiter, you're limiting your professional network and connections. The larger your network, the greater your likelihood of having someone in common with a contact you want to make, and the more people you have to go to for advice if needed. You don't have to seek advice, take advice, or rely on a woman to help you reach a newly desired contact if you don't want to, but to not connect with them at all is to limit that opportunity before you even know what it may be.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (24 children) | Copy Link

[–]cld8 2 points3 points4 points 8 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 8 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

[–]HardLessontoLearn 0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 8 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]HardLessontoLearn 0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]cld8 0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 8 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]MRA-automatron-2kb 1 point2 points3 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]genderbent 2 points3 points4 points 8 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 3 points4 points5 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[+]NiceIce1 points 8 years ago [recovered] (8 children) | Copy Link

Whoa, i don't believe that for a second. You are guilty of trying to paint 'misogynist' on men with too wide a brush.

[–]genderbent 0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

[+]NiceIce1 points 8 years ago [recovered] (6 children) | Copy Link

No, I don't. Please understand the definition of misogyny.

Misogyny = Hatred of women. You can believe all women vote democrat and eat chocolate ice cream without hating them.

That being said, I very much DO hate feminists. Keep in mjnd, though:

Not all all women are feminists
Not all feminists are women

[–]genderbent 0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[+]NiceIce1 points 8 years ago [recovered] (4 children) | Copy Link

Did you even read my post?!: I Very specifically said nothing about all women.

[–]genderbent 0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]HardLessontoLearn 2 points3 points4 points 8 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] -1 points0 points1 point 8 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]HardLessontoLearn 1 point2 points3 points 8 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

It's like you're trying to sound smart, but failing to actually articulate anything worthwhile.

If we're playing a game on words, "ignorant" according to Merriam-Webster is to lack knowledge or comprehension. I'm saying you choosing not to accept any connections from women solely on account of their gender is a career move that shows lack of knowledge or comprehension as to the benefit a large, diversified network could provide.

Hell, I know men in careers that women aren't allowed in who have still benefitted from large, diversified networks that include women.

I can't think of a single industry where having a male-only network and LinkedIn profile would be beneficial. That being said, I'm happy to learn something new. If you'd like to discuss your specific situation, you're going to have to provide more detail. Otherwise, your "evidence" is just vague babble that does nothing to further your point. In that case, I'll add that I think you're ignorant (lacking knowledge or comprehension) as to how to form a logical, convincing argument.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link