#MeToo

[liisgo]

http://nationalpost.com/opinion/andrew-coyne-trudeau-cabinet-should-be-built-on-merit-not-gender

I just got a chance to read this article.
Very well written and definitely defines the numbers game, obvious gender picking that was played by JT and the picking of our Canadian cabinet.
good post.

[Silverstarqueen]

From the article above:
" Where a thing is truly important to us — like the national hockey team, or to a lesser extent the Supreme Court — we tend to place relatively greater emphasis on merit."

Odd that they have chosen the example of a hockey team.
Is the women's hockey team based on merit?
Are women olympic swimmers, runners, skiers chosen based on merit?

So now we have here some women politicians chosen. No one has yet pointed out which ones were not qualified for the job. All are highly educated, elected by their constituents to represent their ridings. But somehow because they are female, can't possibly measure up to a male.
Nice circular logic. Women haven't been chosen for many years, because supposedly they just didn't seem to want to participate in politics. Now they are ready and able to participate, but we should not choose them because, we have not had a habit of choosing them in the past.
When more men than women were elected or chosen, no one asked why they their being chosen was not based on merit, it was just assumed they must be competent because they were elected,... and then chosen for some position.

[liisgo]

From the article above:
" Where a thing is truly important to us — like the national hockey team, or to a lesser extent the Supreme Court — we tend to place relatively greater emphasis on merit."

Odd that they have chosen the example of a hockey team.
Is the women's hockey team based on merit? Yes, its based on merit, the best players only, thats how you make the team.
Are women olympic swimmers, runners, skiers chosen based on merit? Off course they are, you have to win with the best times and wins to make those teams. Why even make this a statement?

So now we have here some women politicians chosen. No one has yet pointed out which ones were not qualified for the job. Like many jobs, there is a min. qualification acceptable to apply. Not merit at that point.
All are highly educated, elected by their constituents to represent their ridings. And they should be, but also the best and most qualified.
But somehow because they are female, can't possibly measure up to a male. No, wrong, what has been easily pointed out is that of the numbers not equaling the members chosen. Nothing to do with gender and its only because of the fact that it was numbers showing an advantage for the women. The numbers dont add up, that simple. Not another, "the world is out to make life unfair for women" thing.>
Nice circular logic. Women haven't been chosen for many years, because supposedly they just didn't seem to want to participate in politics. Yes correct, didnt seem to want to participate. Now they are ready and able to participate, but we should not choose them because, we have not had a habit of choosing them in the past. In the past, women did not try for these positions, and if some great, hard working ones did, and the best qualified, they would have got the job.
When more men than women were elected or chosen, no one asked why they their being chosen was not based on merit, it was just assumed they must be competent because they were elected,... and then chosen for some position.

. Really missing the logistics and statistical part of this. Fairness, equality, best for the job, should only be based on merit, not quota's, accommodate, and numbers that are so blatantly to have shown favoritism.

[Silverstarqueen]

Catherine Mckenna is our environment minister and doesn't know the difference between a puffin and penguin. Just watch some videos of her talking, she clearly has very little idea what she is talking about. So no, I don't think they were chosen for merit.

Please explain to me what qualified Peter Kent as a minister of the environment(he was a journalist and news anchorman)?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Kent

[MAPearce]

Answering a question with a question is relevant.

No ... In this case , I think it's baiting .

I wouldn't go near that with your phalu................

Never mind .

[Silverstarqueen]

Really missing the logistics and statistical part of this. Fairness, equality, best for the job, should only be based on merit, not quota's, accommodate, and numbers that are so blatantly to have shown favoritism.

You say merit, then you talk "numbers" and "statistics". So why base the choices on numbers? That's not merit based. These men (I noticed you don't seem to be contesting the male choices) AND women were chosen for a reason, by their constituents, and by the highest ranking elected rep, the PM, on the advice I'm sure of his aides as well. This is the system our country endorses. No where does it say each choice has to be the best in your opinion, or my opinion. If you want different choices, vote someone else in, vote a different PM in, run for Prime Minister and make your own choices, vote for a different system that you like better.

[MAPearce]

You say merit, then you talk "numbers" and "statistics". So why base the choices on numbers? That's not merit based. These men (I noticed you don't seem to be contesting the male choices) AND women were chosen for a reason, by their constituents, and by the highest ranking elected rep, the PM, on the advice I'm sure of his aides as well. This is the system our country endorses. No where does it say each choice has to be the best in your opinion, or my opinion. If you want different choices, vote someone else in, vote a different PM in, run for Prime Minister and make your own choices, vote for a different system that you like better.

You're confused .... It doesn't work that way .

[zoo]

You say merit, then you talk "numbers" and "statistics". So why base the choices on numbers? That's not merit based. These men (I noticed you don't seem to be contesting the male choices) AND women were chosen for a reason, by their constituents, and by the highest ranking elected rep, the PM, on the advice I'm sure of his aides as well. This is the system our country endorses. No where does it say each choice has to be the best in your opinion, or my opinion. If you want different choices, vote someone else in, vote a different PM in, run for Prime Minister and make your own choices, vote for a different system that you like better.

You're confused .... It doesn't work that way .

Yes very confused.

Not about gender, its about the numbers, the very well acknowledged drive to have certain representations met and an obvious outcome of that. Men, women, race, what ever, when the numbers show that it was deliberately done to meet that representation then its very apparent that it was not 100% based on the best for the jobs.
They wanted a 50/50 gender role in that cabinet. If only only man OR women was applying they would have got a position.
Just that simple.
Denial is very strong for some.

[dirtybiker]

You're confused .... It doesn't work that way .

You catch on quick !

[Leifer]

Funny story (well maybe not so funny) on how I think men are reacting to this "MeToo" movement.

I am in the market for a new vehicle at the moment.
Stopped into a local dealership and was "assigned" a younger female sales associate.
No big deal right?
She did a good enough job explaining the different vehicle options and we eventually took a vehicle out for a test drive.

One of my colleagues was out and about and noticed me in a different vehicle with some women (other than my wife). I received some ribbing the next day and somewhat of a wake up call. He mentioned that one wrong word from this young women and I could be in the news being "drawn and quartered" on social media.

It never occurred to me that something like that could happen....but he did have a point.
Next time I will request a male sales associate I guess....

[Silverstarqueen]

You say merit, then you talk "numbers" and "statistics". So why base the choices on numbers? That's not merit based. These men (I noticed you don't seem to be contesting the male choices) AND women were chosen for a reason, by their constituents, and by the highest ranking elected rep, the PM, on the advice I'm sure of his aides as well. This is the system our country endorses. No where does it say each choice has to be the best in your opinion, or my opinion. If you want different choices, vote someone else in, vote a different PM in, run for Prime Minister and make your own choices, vote for a different system that you like better.

You're confused .... It doesn't work that way .

Yes very confused.

Not about gender, its about the numbers, the very well acknowledged drive to have certain representations met and an obvious outcome of that. Men, women, race, what ever, when the numbers show that it was deliberately done to meet that representation then its very apparent that it was not 100% based on the best for the jobs.
They wanted a 50/50 gender role in that cabinet. If only only man OR women was applying they would have got a position.
Just that simple.
Denial is very strong for some.

You don't agree with the method of choosing. You weren't elected to choose. The PM was elected to choose his cabinet, from elected members of parliament. This is the democratic process. Some people would like electoral reform, there is certainly a place for that. This is the system we have now, it seems to be working just fine according to many Canadians. Anyone doesn't like it gets to vote again in a couple of years.

[Gilchy]

Funny story (well maybe not so funny) on how I think men are reacting to this "MeToo" movement.

I am in the market for a new vehicle at the moment.
Stopped into a local dealership and was "assigned" a younger female sales associate.
No big deal right?
She did a good enough job explaining the different vehicle options and we eventually took a vehicle out for a test drive.

One of my colleagues was out and about and noticed me in a different vehicle with some women (other than my wife). I received some ribbing the next day and somewhat of a wake up call. He mentioned that one wrong word from this young women and I could be in the news being "drawn and quartered" on social media.

It never occurred to me that something like that could happen....but he did have a point.
Next time I will request a male sales associate I guess....

For all the talk over "false accusations", they are extremely rare. There seems to an attitude out there where "it's better to be safe than sorry", where men are claiming they won't hire/be alone with/use as a car salesperson a woman for fear of being accused wrongly of something. This effectively continues to punish women, eliminating them from contention for a job, or from selling you a car...

To everyone (not just guys): don't be a creep, and you won't have people complaining about your behaviour.

[Silverstarqueen]

Funny story (well maybe not so funny) on how I think men are reacting to this "MeToo" movement.

I am in the market for a new vehicle at the moment.
Stopped into a local dealership and was "assigned" a younger female sales associate.
No big deal right?
She did a good enough job explaining the different vehicle options and we eventually took a vehicle out for a test drive.

One of my colleagues was out and about and noticed me in a different vehicle with some women (other than my wife). I received some ribbing the next day and somewhat of a wake up call. He mentioned that one wrong word from this young women and I could be in the news being "drawn and quartered" on social media.

It never occurred to me that something like that could happen....but he did have a point.
Next time I will request a male sales associate I guess....

Do you think women, your wife, should be concerned about doing a test drive with male car salesmen? Millions of women have somehow bitten the bullet and managed to come out unscathed, most car sellers have been male. But now that there are a few female sales people, the men are going to be extra cautious. Yeah seems like a great idea to some.

[Leifer]

There seems to an attitude out there where "it's better to be safe than sorry",

Absolutely.
I have a career, family, and reputation to consider. It is not fair....but there is simply too much at risk.

I was raised by a real gentleman who espoused treating women with respect and dignity. Open doors, give up your seat, carry the bags, and put them on a pedestal.
Not really very modern....and certainly not treating women as equals.

[Leifer]

Do you think women, your wife, should be concerned about doing a test drive with male car salesmen?

Depends on the car salesmen. She would use her judgment (based on their initial interactions) and decide if she was getting in the car with the fellow.

But now that there are a few female sales people, the men are going to be extra cautious. Yeah seems like a great idea to some.

Agreed.
Better to be safe than sorry.