[an error occurred while processing this directive]
The Death of the UK Government's "Women's Unit"
posted by Scott on Friday April 20, @09:22AM
from the news dept.
News Jonathan writes "This is a short article highlighting the fact that for once, the UK Labour Government is removing a useless layer of bureaucracy, the Women's Unit. Unfortunately, despite accepting the fact that it was an embarrassment, derided by both men and women, they are still going to press ahead with positive discrimination for women in Government. This will be achieved by installing far more women ministers in the next Government, irrespective of ability. Click here for the link."

Source: The Daily Telegraph [UK News]

Title: The Women's Unit RIP

Author: Unknown

Date: April 19, 2001

Schuett Leaves The Liberator | Male Suicide in Australia  >

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Note to all (Score:0)
by Anonymous User on Friday April 20, @06:37PM EST (#1)
Try not to use the term "positive/reverse discrimination" as it means that discrimation only happens to ethnic minorites and victim groups, and that the so called "oppressors" are more often than not white hetrosexual men. Also, positive/reverse discrimination says discrimination is good if it goes against men in general and nobody else (where's the logic?) it's quite a contradiction, so try not to use it guys and gals.

Adam H
Re:Note to all (Score:1)
by A.J. on Saturday April 21, @10:44AM EST (#2)
(User #134 Info)

Thanks for challenging the “positive/reverse discrimination” descriptions. I’ve always been repulsed by those terms.

I consider them symbols of the twisted world we live in, allegedly trying to promote equality for all and creating different labels to describe discrimination – with the proper label being assigned based on the who the victim is.

Who thinks this stuff up?

Re:Note to all (Score:0)
by Anonymous User on Saturday April 21, @12:58PM EST (#3)
Much appreciated AJ, I also was supposed to say that “positive/reverse discrimination” implies that white hetrosexual men (and men in general) did discrimate against others and that discriminating against men is acceptable since "they started it" etc a fools fallacy as I call it.Naturally there are other angles to this, I just gave the most obvious one.

Adam H
Re:Note to all (Score:1)
by jonathan on Monday April 23, @09:47AM EST (#4)
(User #92 Info)
Apologies for any upset caused, I was merely paraphrasing from the article and had not put any hidden meaning behind the statement.

Unfortuantely due to the wide variety of upbringings people receive, the accuracy of the written word to convey meaning can be poor at times. To me "positive discrimination" means giving greater consideration to persons that posses a particular feature than those that do not. If I was interviewing for a job vacancy with a particular requirement e.g. C++ programming, then obviously I would give higher priority to those candidates who demonstrated that skill. However, the advent of race politics and subsequently gender politics has unfortunately raised the specter of using discrimination to address a percieved wrongdoing, e.g. not recruiting able candidates on the basis of race or sex.

On a personal note I actually believe that positive discrimination is just as devisive as negative discrimination. People may moan about not getting a job on the basis of merit, depending on their own opinion of their abilities, but they accept it. However, not getting the job on the basis of a criteria which has nothing to do with your ability to perform it will always enrage people. The sooner politicians and legislators realise that positive and negative discrimination are opposite sides of the same coin the better.

Re:Note to all (Score:0)
by Anonymous User on Monday April 23, @01:02PM EST (#5)
It's ok, I just had to point things out.

Adam H
[an error occurred while processing this directive]