Now to find women who want their husbands to stay at home looking after the kids while she works, good luck with that. And to be clear unless 50% of the coupled women out there commit to this you wont see any meaningful change in how society perceives stay at home dads, which currently is "lazy"
Because women dont want to marry men who want to be primary stay at home dads, some do, but I have never met a woman who wants that. Most of the women I speak to when asked think its a little bit funny.
Women tend to prefer men that are higher status than themselves. For a working woman (especially one in tech that earns alot) they tend find partners who are also employed.
This makes a dichotomy where if a man makes $100k+ in most places in the US, they can one-income support a family. Where as women tend not to look favorably to men who take time off of to stay at home.
Women's desire for high status men is something that comes to us from being primates. It's at best a mixture of nature and society. Even if we had a radically egalitarian society, there is a part of many couples that would be unsettled by it.
All that said, there is nothing about that should stop women from pursuing careers in tech. Of all work, ours is one that is really friendly to working remotely and with flexible hours.
Modern-day living expenses being what they are, most people nowadays actively seek out partners who work because, unless you're filthy stinking rich, having a dual income is the only way to afford to raise a family and still have a decent lifestyle.
I dont want to live or work in a society where employees at every company reflect the demographics of that society, where everyone gets equal pay, feels less and less like diversity and more and more about conformity. Its the road to socialism, if all of this diversity was valuable the market will reward companies accordingly.
After reading the sources I would say there is evidence that employees in the survey they conducted self reported better financial performance from the following options:
"how would you compare your organization’s performance
over the past two years in terms of
market share? .|.|. Would you say that it was (1)
much worse, (2) somewhat worse, (3) about the
same, (4) somewhat better, or (5) much better?”
You are truly grasping at straws. There are 15 citations there, many of which show direct data of market cap and share price performance for these companies and you hunt down a single survey you have an issue with. Please.
I dont have time to review all 15 citations, it was the first one I picked based on the claim made in your document. It was also the most closely related claim that you linked to the document in question:
>"An investigation of 500 U.S. businesses found that
companies with more race and gender diverse
teams had higher sales revenue, more customers,
greater market share, and greater profits than did
less diverse companies.4"
You are being very uncharitable to suggest I am "grasping at straws" by reviewing the very document you are using as evidence.
Lets review page 3, each paragraph is a claim.
1. executive boards
2. executive boards
3. top management level
4. top management teams
5. greater profit and market share
6. student study make believe
Now you can see why I Chose 5 to investigate as 1-4,6 are pretty much unrelated to what we are talking about which is diversity of the work force, not high level management.
I see people lying all the time in life, about everything, then I read stories like this and they seem cringe and unreal with no reason to believe they are true. But there is this pressure to believe them because its about sexism or racism and we should take this story as true because skepticism is bad, I find it really difficult to resolve these feelings of distrust, human beings are just overall untrust worthy.
Of course you have no reason to believe anyone's story. Don't forget that the same thing was said about police brutality for decades until we started seeing more and more footage as evidence.
It's hard to imagine and even notice the racism and sexism that happens today if you're not on the receiving end of it, no doubt (not to make any guesses about your race or gender, of course).
Perhaps a relateable situation will be the denial and disbelief about CIA and NSA scandals until more information came out. Not saying believe everything you hear, but don't be so eager to dismiss a story merely because you do not see/know/experience what another part does.
Your point is actually one hundred percent valid... I wouldn't be surprised if he was lying... but in this case he really isn't claiming that unusual a situation. Its not like he claimed dude came out in a grand dragon kkk robe and asked him to do a jig while eating watermelon... seems plenty of younger white people especially with all the hip hop radio songs saying it are truly perplexed why they aren't supposed to say terms they hear on the radio 50 times a day... Its only suprising that the interviewer delved into this the first time of meeting in a business setting...
I don't find it hard to believe. In most of the cases where someone said something inappropriate, it was at a mostly young startup that had some success and then hired some older, white, male executives.
At one company, a married black director, my boss, had hired a black woman as an assistant. A newly hired older white executive was asking around if she was hired because she was his side girlfriend.
At another company an executive went to a bar with one of the younger guys, and advised him to always hit on the "ethnic" women.
There's nothing new to what you're saying, plenty of white people in the U.S. south said there was no civil rights problem back in the 1950s and believed it. Most of those people thought some Jewish rabbi from 2000 years ago came back from the dead. People believe what they want to believe.
It is an incredibly important distinction, those found not to be valid are asked to return to their country of origin, how many of the people in these centers have been processed and refuse to leave?
If you google "australia refugee camps" you will find allegations of rape, abuse, substandard living conditions, lack of medical treatment, indefinite detention and more, denounced by the UN who call it illegal, denounced by Amnesty International who have accused the government of violating ratified rights too. Three people have set themselves on fire to kill themselves, that's not a thing that happens where people are treated humanely.
It's also been made illegal to talk about the conditions of the camp if you work with the guests of the internment camps. That shouldn't even be possible, it's just basic oversight 101.
It's a bit sad that's not a human right yet but that document is a work in progress.
Um, "allegations of rape" does nothing to convince Australians that these people should get to be in Australia. This sounds rather like the issue Germany is having.
Citation needed, but I agree all those things are bad and have nothing to do with the concept of offshore processing, I agree that things should be more transparent but I do not think that would work in the favor of those who are detractors of the scheme. It should also be noted that Saudi Arabia is on the council for human rights with the UN, so I wouldn't hold their opinion very high.
