28 Jun 2022 4:39 pm
You don't seem to be hearing the most important point I made to you. You are just ignoring it.impartialobserver » 28 Jun 2022, 4:28 pm » wrote: ↑ I am not sure why I think that you are worth my time. However, I digress. You clearly skipped over a certain element in my second post...
"prior to this newest governor"
Yes, the newest governor has definitely went the other way hiring/appointing women. I am referring to times before him... in other words before 2019. Before him, there was an obvious bias towards males. Have the women hired by the newest governor done better? That is a matter of opinion being that one can't really measure their performance like you can with a coach (wins and losses) or CEO (profit or loss). A lot of them were put in no-win situations. State got shut down and afterwards, the demands on their respective depts increased greatly but their budgets/staff shrank.
Hiring too many men is a liability. Maybe you can get sued for sexism. Indeed you might as well try it...you wouldn't have to prove anything.
on the other hand if you explicitly discriminate against men...like say some ceo says I'm not gonna hire men cause I think men are subhuman...you will face absolutely no punishment for that.
in this legal environment you can expect that any male who is hired has talent.
likewise you can expect that the legally protected classes do not.