“Affirmative Action (known as employment equity in Canada and elsewhere) refers to policies that take factors including “race, color, religion, sex, or national origin” into consideration in order to benefit an underrepresented group “in areas of employment, education, and business”. The concept of affirmative action was introduced in the early 1960s as a way to combat racial discrimination in the hiring process and, in 1967, the concept was expanded to include sex.
The nature of affirmative action policies varies from region to region. Some countries, such as India, use a quota system, whereby a certain percentage of jobs or school vacancies must be set aside for members of a race, caste or other protected group. In some other regions, specific quotas do not exist; instead, members of minorities are given preference in selection processes.” (Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Affirmative_action)
The article linked below addresses the issue of ‘affirmative action’ in considerable detail, but it’s well worth the effort to get a handle on this important issue:
The author is Louis Pojman, whose background and achievements are discussed at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Louis_Pojman
That form of affirmative action that is most discussed today in the context of gender issues, is the imposition of quotas to ensure that a particular percentage of students/directors/politicians/etc are female.
Not surprisingly there are no feminist demands for quotas to be established in relation to any of the roles listed in the table below: (source)
Queensland police discriminated against 200 potential male recruits in favour of women, report finds | Australian police and policing | The Guardian (12 May 2021)
Australian feminists in the NSW education sphere are unhappy having only 50% of senior staff being women, and want more (1 March 2020)
Feminist Doublethink: Gender Quotas Are Merit; Men Disqualified By Quotas Are Mediocre (20 June 2017) Reddit discussion thread with linked article. Be sure to see readers comments.
What’s next in social engineering? Gender quotas on motherhood? by Miranda Devine (3 May 2017)
Science minister mulls forcing universities to attract more female researchers (27 April 2017)
The Increasing Significance of the Decline of Men, by Thomas B. Edsall (16 March 2017) Related Reddit discussion thread here. In a world where the goal of gender equality was genuine, the labor market for men would be a consideration in the debate about gender quotas. It’s never mentioned.
Creating gender equality means being bold for change (8 March 2017) Australian Telco giant Telstra to impose 50% gender quota
Should there be ‘bloke quotas’ in Australia to get more men into roles like teaching and nursing? (11 December 2016) Facebook discussion thread with linked article. This is the first time I have seen a feminist organisation propose quotas for men. One hopes they have finally recognised the hypocrisy of campaigning for (only) female quotas, though I suspect it’s merely a strategy to reduce resistance to female quotas.
The Deal: Women in favour of board quotas, feel held to higher standards than male peers (17 November 2016) Australia
DNC replaces two Vermont delegates — because they’re men (21 July 2016) USA. More on this issue here (with readers comments)
We need quotas on boards for women (28 March 2015) Australia. See reader’s comments
The spread of gender quotas for company boards (25 March 2014)
A gender agenda: The effectiveness of quota systems in increasing women’s meaningful participation in politics (November 2014) Pro-feminist paper arguing in favour of gender quotas (Australia)
Schumpeter: A Nordic Mystery (14 November 2014)
Campaign for Merit in Business A UK-based web site maintained by Mike Buchanan where you will numerous papers related to the use of gender quotas in business, including:
Feminist mythtique in the boardroom (18 June 2014)
Women, men still unequal in sports despite Title IX attempts (USA) (4 November 2011)
Title IX: How a good law went terribly wrong (24 June 2014)
Female leaders are missing in academia (18 June 2014)
Exploring the use of quotas for women in leadership roles (10 May 2012) See also readers comments
A license to discriminate (31 August 2012) Australia. See also readers comments
Elsewhere in this blog you might be interested in:
Less than 50/50 representation does not automatically imply ‘gender bias’
Companies with women at the helm perform better (so they say)
One thought on “On affirmative action and the imposition of gender quotas”
What is patriarchy but an Affirmative Action program for straight-acting males, publicly seeking to create and encounter the”real thing” but a serious effort (an “act” for sure as in 👉closeted ), will do, little doubt. When too successful at this we can expect to encounter created zombies dangerous to life and limb, and bullies for measure, but for sure dangerous to the safety of ones beliefs. Patriarchy is protective of males, and privileging of, let’s say ‘ self styled real men’ in ways encouraging of self indulgence. It’s realistic to expect monstrosities, the system excretes them with regularity, and I’m personally ok that they exist, and I keep my distance from their “purview,” but when they run for office and win obviously life gets scary. My point being that the only Quality Control are we who note the limitations, or who find ourselves on the receiving end of dubious and sometimes harmful “benefits” therefrom. Fact.