Not easy to control when somebody (you and christopher126) concoct some outrageous, male hating nonsense to explain things. There are plenty of companies and countries headed by females that are in trouble. Argentina and Yahoo come to mind right off the bat. Are you two really that delusional to think males running things always makes for trouble?
Got be careful citing examples like that. You are in danger of walking into the 'Exception that proves the rule' trap there. IMHO gender makes absolutely no difference all things being equal, sadly they rarely are Any deviance from that is almost certainly due to a societal history of preferential treatment of males.
I am with the above. Call me naive, but I feel that all this focus on diversity does more good than good. It is a "feel good" move to specifically hire someone based on color/gender.
By your comment, I am guessing you think specifically hiring based on color/gender is a good thing? May I ask why? I honestly don't know why anyone would think this way, but am open to learning/understanding why.
Disclaimer: I am a white, English speaking, college educated, male. So I know I have no first-hand experience. However, if I was ever offered a job to fill some checklist? I would take offense.
To me, it is those that claim to want equality that keep these issues going, all the while not looking for equality at all, but looking for special treatment. If we truly want to get beyond these issues, we will look beyond uncontrollable factors such as color/gender/sexual orientation. These things do not define a person. Their character and qualifications should be what does.
I'm not for the quotas, and I don't think it's a solution. What I like here is the acknowledgement of a problem. I don't think it would be realistic (or even useful) to have a perfect representation of gender/color etc... However without going this far I don't think it would be a problem for a company like Apple to find excellent alternatives for one or two members of their board.
Well, when a group of people who have historically been discriminated against uses legal means to attempt to acquire equal power, I say good luck. That is why we (the USA) came to be, after all, for those who have forgotten their history.
And it is worth considering that the large majority of Apple's customers (at least in the US) are women. Got a problem with that?
Well, when a group of people who have historically been discriminated against uses legal means to attempt to acquire equal power, I say good luck. That is why we (the USA) came to be, after all, for those who have forgotten their history.
And it is worth considering that the large majority of Apple's customers (at least in the US) are women. Got a problem with that?
Good points. My only concern is the US still has such a long way to go to level the playing field and for example, introducing quotas for corporate board members, would come a long way behind equal opportunities in education and equal pay (to name just two examples) IMHO.
Not easy to control when somebody (you and christopher126) concoct some outrageous, male hating nonsense to explain things. There are plenty of companies and countries headed by females that are in trouble. Argentina and Yahoo come to mind right off the bat. Are you two really that delusional to think males running things always makes for trouble?
Time for your meds! You're soon going to feel better.
Well, when a group of people who have historically been discriminated against uses legal means to attempt to acquire equal power, I say good luck. That is why we (the USA) came to be, after all, for those who have forgotten their history.
Not to put too fine a point on it...The Puritans came to this country not for "religious freedom." They came to this country because they wanted everyone to be "Puritans!" Rather like most religions.
I agree with your premise though, and thanks to the forward thinking founding fathers you're correct.
America is the best country in the world. After Thailand, that is. (It's a great country, even the men look like chicks!)
Good points. My only concern is the US still has such a long way to go to level the playing field and for example, introducing quotas for corporate board members, would come a long way behind equal opportunities in education and equal pay (to name just two examples) IMHO.
Anyone with half a brain knows Apple is neither sexist nor racist.
Proof of that? This half a brain needs a bit more than unsubstantiated opinion.
The board and exec team are almost exclusively white men. Does that tally with what you'd expect based on the diversity of the engineering staff, the retail staff, or generally of CompSci grads?
Even if it does, is Apple presenting itself as an attractive place to work for minorities thereby encouraging that career choice?
If Apple is evidently non-sexist and non-racist then they will have policies in place to address diversity. A lack of policy indicates a passive attitude, which is conducive to a closed-off workplace, and systemic racism/sexism.
I can rephrase if you want : "I wish I were like you, able to tell right from wrong without any doubt".
Wish you were, too. You’d be able to avoid moronic beliefs like the one you hold here.
Originally Posted by Crowley
Proof of that?
Ownership of more than half a brain, I’d guess. Or the ability to read any of the many human languages to see that Apple has no history of this behavior.
The board and exec team are almost exclusively white men.
“, therefore Apple is racist and sexist.” is your position, is it?
Good luck with that.
If Apple is evidently non-sexist and non-racist then they will have policies in place to address diversity. A lack of policy indicates a passive attitude, which is conducive to a closed-off workplace, and systemic racism/sexism.
Yeah, here’s their policy: Do the best work and you get promoted.
If Cook is that concerned about diversity he could always replace Al Gore on the board. What are his qualifications anyway?
Al Gore could very well be a major influence on Apple's environmental policies. Their renewable energy outlays for their data centers are evidence of some heavy commitment in this area. This may be one of his "qualifications" that you're asking for—making carbon reduction a tangible goal.
I'm not for the quotas, and I don't think it's a solution. What I like here is the acknowledgement of a problem. I don't think it would be realistic (or even useful) to have a perfect representation of gender/color etc... However without going this far I don't think it would be a problem for a company like Apple to find excellent alternatives for one or two members of their board.
I agree whole-heartedly that it is a problem. Articles like this, with these 140 character or less statements do nothing but cause problems.
Problem Statement: Many BODs of American Companies are comprised heavily of white men. There are little to no women or people of color.
That is the problem. This calling out a company for not having enough diversity, that is just throwing a bomb and not caring about the outcome.
Caring about the outcome requires doing some work. Asking questions to which we know the answers, but are afraid to address.
Until we are able to have honest conversations about the problems, we will continue to have these issues.
No one with any intelligence whatsoever gives a flying frick. Apple isn’t going to hire “minorities” to fill some magical quota. They’ll hire who can do the job, whoever that may be.
Since when are women a minority?
People tend to hire people who are similar to themselves, rather than the absolutely best person for the job. 'Blind' interview/audition experiments have proven this. Just look at the success of the Rooney Rule in the NFL.
If you're mostly hiring white men, you're probably not hiring the best person for the job.
Comments
Got be careful citing examples like that. You are in danger of walking into the 'Exception that proves the rule' trap there. IMHO gender makes absolutely no difference all things being equal, sadly they rarely are Any deviance from that is almost certainly due to a societal history of preferential treatment of males.
I am with the above. Call me naive, but I feel that all this focus on diversity does more good than good. It is a "feel good" move to specifically hire someone based on color/gender.
By your comment, I am guessing you think specifically hiring based on color/gender is a good thing? May I ask why? I honestly don't know why anyone would think this way, but am open to learning/understanding why.
Disclaimer: I am a white, English speaking, college educated, male. So I know I have no first-hand experience. However, if I was ever offered a job to fill some checklist? I would take offense.
To me, it is those that claim to want equality that keep these issues going, all the while not looking for equality at all, but looking for special treatment. If we truly want to get beyond these issues, we will look beyond uncontrollable factors such as color/gender/sexual orientation. These things do not define a person. Their character and qualifications should be what does.
I'm not for the quotas, and I don't think it's a solution. What I like here is the acknowledgement of a problem. I don't think it would be realistic (or even useful) to have a perfect representation of gender/color etc... However without going this far I don't think it would be a problem for a company like Apple to find excellent alternatives for one or two members of their board.
And it is worth considering that the large majority of Apple's customers (at least in the US) are women. Got a problem with that?
Good points. My only concern is the US still has such a long way to go to level the playing field and for example, introducing quotas for corporate board members, would come a long way behind equal opportunities in education and equal pay (to name just two examples) IMHO.
Not easy to control when somebody (you and christopher126) concoct some outrageous, male hating nonsense to explain things. There are plenty of companies and countries headed by females that are in trouble. Argentina and Yahoo come to mind right off the bat. Are you two really that delusional to think males running things always makes for trouble?
Time for your meds! You're soon going to feel better.
Google's BOD is equally not "diverse" depending on the yardstick. Same goes for Amazon.
Let's play "Beat the Apple Horse". What will critics criticize Apple for next? Come to think of it, there's not much left, is there?
Well, when a group of people who have historically been discriminated against uses legal means to attempt to acquire equal power, I say good luck. That is why we (the USA) came to be, after all, for those who have forgotten their history.
Not to put too fine a point on it...The Puritans came to this country not for "religious freedom." They came to this country because they wanted everyone to be "Puritans!" Rather like most religions.
I agree with your premise though, and thanks to the forward thinking founding fathers you're correct.
America is the best country in the world. After Thailand, that is. (It's a great country, even the men look like chicks!)
Good points. My only concern is the US still has such a long way to go to level the playing field and for example, introducing quotas for corporate board members, would come a long way behind equal opportunities in education and equal pay (to name just two examples) IMHO.
Agreed! Well said.
The board and exec team are almost exclusively white men. Does that tally with what you'd expect based on the diversity of the engineering staff, the retail staff, or generally of CompSci grads?
Even if it does, is Apple presenting itself as an attractive place to work for minorities thereby encouraging that career choice?
If Apple is evidently non-sexist and non-racist then they will have policies in place to address diversity. A lack of policy indicates a passive attitude, which is conducive to a closed-off workplace, and systemic racism/sexism.
I can rephrase if you want : "I wish I were like you, able to tell right from wrong without any doubt".
Wish you were, too. You’d be able to avoid moronic beliefs like the one you hold here.
Ownership of more than half a brain, I’d guess. Or the ability to read any of the many human languages to see that Apple has no history of this behavior.
“, therefore Apple is racist and sexist.” is your position, is it?
Good luck with that.
Yeah, here’s their policy: Do the best work and you get promoted.
Agreed! Well said.
True in many countries.
Al Gore could very well be a major influence on Apple's environmental policies. Their renewable energy outlays for their data centers are evidence of some heavy commitment in this area. This may be one of his "qualifications" that you're asking for—making carbon reduction a tangible goal.
I'm not for the quotas, and I don't think it's a solution. What I like here is the acknowledgement of a problem. I don't think it would be realistic (or even useful) to have a perfect representation of gender/color etc... However without going this far I don't think it would be a problem for a company like Apple to find excellent alternatives for one or two members of their board.
I agree whole-heartedly that it is a problem. Articles like this, with these 140 character or less statements do nothing but cause problems.
Problem Statement: Many BODs of American Companies are comprised heavily of white men. There are little to no women or people of color.
That is the problem. This calling out a company for not having enough diversity, that is just throwing a bomb and not caring about the outcome.
Caring about the outcome requires doing some work. Asking questions to which we know the answers, but are afraid to address.
Until we are able to have honest conversations about the problems, we will continue to have these issues.
Wish you were, too. You’d be able to avoid moronic beliefs like the one you hold here.
Moronic?
Well, yeah. It’s moronic to demand that any entity be comprised of “diversity” rather than the best people for the job, whoever that may be.
I agree whole-heartedly that it is a problem. Articles like this, with these 140 character or less statements do nothing but cause problems.
Agreed. Perhaps it's the medium, but I'm often disappointed with "News." There is hardly ever an attempt to create a "frame of reference."
I agree with your comments. Very thoughtful.
Best.
Well, yeah. It’s moronic to demand that any entity be comprised of “diversity” rather than the best people for the job, whoever that may be.
No one has suggested this. I think you need to reread the above posts. Especially, reroll, digitalclips, starbird73 and jonorom. Or not.
In future, you may want to count to 10 before hitting the "submit" button.
'Most' countries sad to say.
No one with any intelligence whatsoever gives a flying frick. Apple isn’t going to hire “minorities” to fill some magical quota. They’ll hire who can do the job, whoever that may be.
Since when are women a minority?
People tend to hire people who are similar to themselves, rather than the absolutely best person for the job. 'Blind' interview/audition experiments have proven this. Just look at the success of the Rooney Rule in the NFL.
If you're mostly hiring white men, you're probably not hiring the best person for the job.