July 1, 2017
One of the most difficult things about being a liberal academic is that reality constantly disproves your every assertion.
You might sincerely believe that White privilege is real, that women are as innovative as men or that Blacks are human. But every time you leave the house, every time you view the world through your eyes rather than through a screen, the opposite is shown to be true.
So, what do you do?
You double-down on the delusion, of course, by authoring studies that “prove” your beliefs are correct. And those studies will work in your favor, since you tailored them to show the desired outcome.
But what happens when your studies produce the results that you weren’t expecting?
An initiative by the leaders of Australian Public Service to promote gender equality through blind recruitment efforts has failed, according to reports.
The trial, which was an effort to push more women in senior position jobs, revealed that removing the gender from a candidate’s application does not help boost gender equality in hiring. The trial also revealed that adding a male name to a candidate’s application made them 3.2 percent less likely to get the job while adding a female name made it 2.9 percent more likely that the candidate would be hired.
“We anticipated this would have a positive impact on diversity — making it more likely that female candidates and those from ethnic minorities are selected for the shortlist,” said Professor Michael Hiscox, a Harvard academic. “We found the opposite, that de-identifying candidates reduced the likelihood of women being selected for the shortlist.”
You almost have to feel sorry for Michael Hiscox.
He really believes that women have equal or greater chances of obtaining high-ranking job positions if the only source of their power in the workplace – affirmative action – is stripped from them.
Instead, his own study proved the opposite: when women are forced to compete with men on equal footing, the muscular arm of reality slaps them, chokes them and tosses them back into the kitchen where they belong.
Did Hiscox learn his lesson? Of course not.
Hiscox warned governments and companies to consider the real possibility that gender-blind hiring processes may actually lessen equality in the workplace. “We should hit pause and be very cautious about introducing this as a way of improving diversity, as it can have the opposite effect,” Professor Hiscox claimed.
So… men are better employees than women, therefore companies should keep affirmative action to ensure that inferior employees retain preferential treatment over superior ones.
I know that this mentality has been rife for decades, but this is the first time I’ve heard it being pushed when a related study literally proves that it’s a bad idea.
The simple fact is that women don’t belong in the workplace, period. If you’ve worked in an office filled with them, you will agree. They gossip and bitch about co-workers behind their backs, distract male workers, get pregnant and earn free money (aka “maternity leave”) for it, and generally transform the workplace into high school.
If your new workplace looks like this, quit. You’ll be happier unemployed.
Men evolved to do meaningful work with other men and women evolved to remain home with their children. Only someone as overeducated as Professor Hiscox could find this concept difficult to understand.
Personally, I look forward to the day when a shitlord tech company announces a WHITE MEN ONLY hiring policy. Within a single year, that company – being free from the street-shitters and women that staff its competitors – will rise to the top of its field with meteoric speed.
It will be very, very funny.