Ever heard of affirmative action? Sounds wonderful in theory -- in practise tho, there's a reason it's also called 'reverse' or 'positive discrimination'. Leads to quotas being established & filled based more on race/gender/religion rather than on whether the candidates are actually qualified for the job. I have seen this described in my relatives' field (police work) where several ppl were allowed to join the force even tho they were literally barely able to write their own names, much less fill out an entire police report. I've seen it myself in sm of my own vanilla jobs. Personally, I'd be quite uncomfortable being hired where every1 thought/knew I was only hired bc I'm a female, not bc I'm actually qualified for the position.
Sexism is a form of bias, so I think you're splitting hairs w/ the whole 'sexism isn't the same as bias' argument. I agree w/ the 'sexism is sexism is sexism' view, but 'reverse' sexism could absolutely be at play, in the case of a custody decision automatically favouring the mother w/o regard to the father's capability to handle sole-parenting duties. Granted, most of such laws were written in an era when women really needed that extra favour, but given the advancements that women have made in the public domain I think these decisions need to be examined more on a case-by-case basis.




Reply With Quote


Bookmarks