#What Are Examples Of Gender Discrimination In The Workplace

[sentrient]

What Are Examples Of Gender Discrimination In The Workplace?

Gender discrimination in the workplace refers to any action or behaviour that treats an individual differently based on their gender. This type of discrimination can take many forms and can occur at all levels of an organisation. Some examples of gender discrimination in the workplace include: 

Hiring discrimination: This occurs when an individual is not hired for a job or promotion because of their gender. This could happen when an employer prefers to hire someone of a certain gender over another or when an employer’s selection process is designed to exclude certain genders. 

Pay discrimination: This occurs when an individual is paid less than their colleagues because of their gender. This can happen even when the individual has the same qualifications and experience as their colleagues. 

Sexual harassment: This occurs when an individual is subjected to unwanted sexual advances or behaviour in the workplace. This can include verbal or physical harassment, such as unwanted touching or comments. 

Pregnancy discrimination: This occurs when an individual is treated differently because they are pregnant. This can include not being hired or promoted or being demoted or fired because of their pregnancy. 

Bias in performance evaluations: This occurs when an individual is evaluated differently because of their gender. This can include being held to higher standards, being given lower ratings, or having fewer opportunities for advancement. 

Stereotyping: This occurs when an individual is judged or treated differently because of societal stereotypes about their gender. This can include being assumed to be less capable or less committed to their work because of their gender. 

It is important to note that discrimination can happen to both men and women and can happen to people of all gender identities. Additionally, gender discrimination can occur even if the person committing the discrimination is of the same gender as the individual being discriminated against. 

This blog post was originally published here.

[doberbutts]

I also think that when I see people demanding a *unique* oppression, that they are asking for something impossible and also are very much misunderstanding intersectionality in the first place.

I don't believe any oppression is truly unique. I do think there are faces of oppression that change with the demographic, but more likely than not you as Oppressed Group X have way more in common with Oppressed Group Y than you might think.

But also, Crenshaw's original paper on intersectionality discussed a specific context: black women being skipped over for hire where black men and white women were both getting hired, making that specific context unique to the intersection of black womanhood.

People get skipped over for jobs they are more than qualified for all the time. Even within the paper itself, there is discussion about this happening to black men and white women at other companies, just that this specific company was excluding specifically black women from its pool of candidates due to their specific bias against black women.

Experiencing workplace discrimination and hiring discrimination is not at all unique to black women. The *context* was. It was not "just racism" because black men were being hired, and it was not "just misogyny" because white women were getting hired. It was the intersection of both that resulted in black women being excluded.

When a trans man states that he is being removed from, say, a reproductive rights conversation and it's happening specifically because he is a trans man, what's meant shouldn't be that no one else struggles with reproductive rights. It means that it's not happening to the cis women who are actively leading the conversation, nor is it happening to the cis men who are pitching in. It is, however, happening to anyone with a uterus who is deemed as too "gender devient" to count: trans men, trans women, intersex people, and nonbinary people. Albeit, for different reasons, and the face of which changes depending on the demographic of the person receiving it.

But the conversation around reproductive rights is also one that must include disability, must include race, must include sexuality, must include class, must include age, because these things also have a direct effect on discrimination within the medical field and whether someone truly has access to the autonomy needed to make reproductive choices of their own without others choosing for them.

Similar to how we can understand the context provided in Crenshaw's coining of intersectionality to examine how black women specifically were experiencing something that neither black men nor white women were victim to within that specific example, so too must we understand that these are contextual and circumstantial conversations that will not always be truly unique.

After all, black men and white women do both get rejected for jobs on account of race and gender. Cis women and other marginalized genders frequently must battle for their right to make their own reproductive choices.

But when someone says "this happened to me due to the combination of my race and my gender", we must understand that likely the combination, the intersection, created a unique scenario that cannot be understood by only examining a single piece of that person's identity. So, too, must we understand the same when someone says "this happened due to the combination of my transness and my gender".

So when I see a challenge to name something unique from someone also flinging around the "learn intersectionality" phrase at those who are trying to describe the things that happened to them that hurt them, all I can think is that clearly that person does not understand interaectionality. Nor have they ever actually read the words of the woman who coined it. She's still alive. Her TED talks are on YouTube. Many of her essays are online for free.

Finally, I must remind these people that Crenshaw is not the woman who coined misogynoir, and while both Crenshaw's and Bailey's theories do work in conversation with each other, being discussed by different people does mean there is not a 1-to-1 basis to compare them to. There will be disagreements and inconsistencies between the two because they are two different people.

[ghelgheli]

Well in that case we can also argue that ''trans woman" fonctions as an umbrella gender characterized by a particular adversarial and oppositional relationship to patriarchy: transmisogyny produces trans womanhood, and afab trans women are certainly this.

''Trans woman'' is also an essentialist archetype that some trans women fail to met (e.g those born with a vulva, those who can bear children).

The social reality of the afab transfem can be similar to the one of (conventional) transfemininity if the afab person is perceived (and thus treated) as a transfem..so what about those people ? Aren't they functionally transfem ? Their lived material experience isn't transfem? However similarity can also arises from interesections between racialization, misogyny, or lesbianism, intersexuality, detransition etc, creating experiences that are functionally like or adjacent to trans womanhood. Some afabs can also be ''women by dint of being less than women'' and thus are transfems, this is not exclusive to amab transfems.

the crux of your problem is this sentence: "the social reality of the afab transfem can be similar to the one of (conventional) transfemininity if the afab person is perceived (and thus treated) as a trans fem"

this is the main justification I see being used for claims of transfemininity/trans womanhood/being tma by people who were cafab: people keep mistaking me for a tranny, and that makes me a tranny! this rests on a complete misunderstanding of the systemic nature of transmisogyny. being mistaken for a trans woman, even on the regular, does not put someone in the same totalizing relationship to hegemonic gender, for the simple reason that (as I have now said multiple times) the logic of transmisogyny operates thru birth assignment. the corrective violence of transmisogyny is applied specifically because betraying coercive assignment as male puts a person in a unique degenerate position as far as cisheteropatriarchy is concerned. someone who was cafab will always have their birth assignment as a shield against this, even if there are instances of mistaken identity where it cannot be used in time.

you may retort that sometimes the violence against someone who was cafab proceeds apace despite disclosure of this assignment—perhaps in the case of the cafab butch lesbian facing street violence (thinking of nearby versions of hannah gadsby's story in nannette), or the working class transmasc on T running up against discrimination at the workplace, or, famously, the case of woman athletes, generally Black and sometimes intersex as in the case of Caster Semenya, being banned from sports competitions (I imagine this is one of the examples you're alluding to when you mention intersections). but to equivocate this to transfemininity is itself violent erasure. you would be neglecting that in every case there is a difference between the person under discussion and someone against whom transmisogyny has set its whole machinery.

there are tma masc lesbians, there are working class transfems on T, there are Black trans women for whom participation in sport is yet more complicated. the realities of navigating the legal-medical-social apparatus of gender is multiplied in impossibility for all of them, because birth assignment is the charge laid by transmisogyny to condemn the trans woman. whatever intersection your "afab transfem" sits at, there will always be this difference between them and transfemininity. this is a difference that will be leveraged against the latter, not the former.

if you think you can reskin my argument as you have in this ask and maintain its fit to reality, then you understand neither misogyny nor transmisogyny. transmisogyny against the "afab transfem" is a mistake by the lights of hegemonic gender itself, to be amended (not necessarily into something harmless, but certainly into something different) upon the revelation of birth assignment. meanwhile the misogyny experienced by trans women (including closeted trans women, including the trans girl who does not even know why she is being treated thus!) does not happen by accident, but as part of the logic of (trans)misogyny itself, because trans women fail to be men despite their birth assignment and this demands punishment. there is not an escape-by-disclosure here. in other words, misogyny deliberately makes trans women women! there is no defense the trans woman can mount on the basis of birth assignment, because that is the very event against which her existence is measured.

this is not true of your imagined afab transfem, nor is any further punishment systemically levelled against the "afab transfem" because of their failing to meet the "essentialist archetype" of trans womanhood. on the contrary, the "afab transfem" remains asymmetrically empowered to use transmisogyny against the transfeminine. yes, cafab ppl are not exempt from violent transphobia, but this is not a violence predicated on the same gender-betrayal the transfeminine person embodies. the political distinction between these experiences remains.

a final point: you are correct that some cafabs can be "woman by dint of being less than woman" but I never claimed that this was a unique trait of transfemininity! in fact I made it clear that this is a common condition for many women (ableism, fatphobia, classism, etc. can all degender a woman). what is unique is the role the logic of transmisogyny plays in defining transfemininity, and the specific manner in which it underclasses the transfeminine subject—makes her the kind of person for whom only a certain, highly peripheralized form of existence is permissible.

if you are interested in describing the way the world is (hopefully with intent to change it) then this is not the way to go about that. any careful analysis of the power relations that cisheteropatriarchy uses to facilitate gender-classing in service of the division of labour will make this clear. you can argue whatever you want! you can also be wrong.

[religion-is-a-mental-illness]

By: Emily Yoffe

Published: Jan 20, 2025

Toward the end of the 2024 presidential campaign, Donald Trump’s campaign released an unexpected ad, and one that was extremely politically effective. The tagline—“Kamala is for they/them. President Trump is for you.”—could go down in history as one of the most effective campaign slogans ever devised.

The ad reinforced a promise Trump repeated at rally after rally as he toured the swing states: If returned to office, he would immediately take on the gender ideology the Biden administration had embraced. Namely, he would end policies such as allowing males on women’s sports teams and in women’s locker rooms, and the housing of male prisoners who identify as transwomen in federal prisons for female offenders.

President Trump has addressed all this and more in an expansive executive order he will sign tomorrow afternoon called “Defending Women from Gender Ideology Extremism and Restoring Biological Truth to the Federal Government.”

Here is what the order sets out:

The Executive Order establishes Government-wide the biological reality of two sexes and clearly defines male and female.

All radical gender ideology guidance, communication, policies, and forms are removed.

Agencies will cease pretending that men can be women and women can be men when enforcing laws that protect against sex discrimination.

“Woman” means an “adult human female.”

The Executive Order directs that Government identification like passports and personnel records will reflect biological reality and not self-assessed gender identity.

The Executive Order ends the practice of housing men in women’s prisons and taxpayer funded “transition” for male prisoners.

The Executive Order ends the forced recitation of “preferred pronouns” and protects Americans’ First Amendment and statutory rights to recognize the biological and binary nature of sex.

This includes protection in the workplace and in federal funded entities like schools.

Asked why Trump is making sex-based policy a day one priority of his administration, an incoming senior administration official said, “This really was a defining issue of the campaign. The president is going to be fulfilling the promises he made on the trail.” The executive order puts it more bluntly: “Radical gender ideology has devastated biological truth and women’s safety and opportunity.”

It is becoming something of a presidential tradition to begin a term with sweeping directives regarding “gender identity.” President Biden, on his first day in office, demanded the federal government “review all existing orders, regulations, guidance documents, policies, programs, or other agency actions” that could impinge on transgender rights. Language and rules about transgender identities became embedded in the vast federal bureaucracy.

Now, Trump has ordered a reversal of all this. In an exclusive briefing with The Free Press, two senior officials provided a summary of the executive order. “Women deserve protections, they deserve dignity, they deserve fairness, they deserve safety,” said a senior policy adviser explaining why the order explicitly embraces the necessity of special treatment for women. “And so this is going to help establish that in federal policy and in federal laws.”

In reading the order, it’s clear that lawsuits challenging the new directives will start stacking up quickly. The order, for example, asserts that “All radical gender ideology guidance, communication, policies, and forms are removed.” This is far from mere symbolism. United States passports—which since 2022 have allowed citizens to choose “X” as their gender—will revert to offering exclusively male and female options, with the proviso that what people select must “reflect biological reality and not self-assessed gender identity.”

The executive order also “ends the forced recitation of ‘preferred pronouns’ and protects Americans’ First Amendment and statutory rights to recognize the biological and binary nature of sex.” When asked about how this would affect public universities, which are bound by the First Amendment’s free speech protections, the senior policy adviser said the U.S. attorney general will enforce these rights. The adviser cited a 2022 federal court ruling to the effect that a Shawnee State University philosophy professor was deprived of his First Amendment rights by being forced to address a transgender student using that student’s chosen pronouns.

The task of the Trump administration now will be to promulgate rules implementing the order, which will affect people’s daily lives. It is inevitable that activist organizations will take these matters to court. The policy adviser said the administration is ready for litigation, predicting Trump will be “100 percent successful.”

It’s a fight the new administration seems to relish. Both officials said the executive order has the potential to broaden the president’s support. “Just take a look at the polling,” the senior official said. “The public is broadly in favor of the president’s and of the Republican Party’s stance on gender. That there are two biological sexes is something that the public is supportive of.”

The executive order does not address one of the most contentious areas of transgender activism: “gender-affirming care” for minors, meaning putting gender-distressed young people on a swift course to transition and lifetime medication. The Biden administration ardently supported such treatments, even as other Western nations began to restrict them, and dozens of U.S. states began to ban them.

The Biden administration sued Tennessee over its ban. That case resulted in a contentious oral argument at the Supreme Court in December, after which most observers felt the court would probably uphold Tennessee’s law.

Asked about why the new executive order does not deal with this, the senior official said, “This executive order is the first of many. I would expect that anything the president said he would do on the trail regarding these issues, he’s going to be fulfilling those promises.”

The order ends with a sweeping statement about the fundamental issue the White House believes is at stake in this order: ”Men and women are equal but have obvious sexual differences,” it reads. “If federal policies promote such an obvious falsehood that men can become women, the government will forfeit all credibility. The government must maintain a commitment to recognizing biological reality to maintain the trust of the American people.”

This order is one of nearly 200 executive actions the White House is rolling out today. Among them: orders to declare a national emergency at the border; end all DEI programs across the federal government; withdrawal from the Paris climate accord; and a return-to-office directive for federal workers.

==

Go ahead and try to explain how this is unreasonable.

[applebuttercringe]

Arcane and Class Conflict

So, it has become pretty obvious that Arcane will mostly abandon the class oppression plotline and end Season 2 with Zaun and Piltover teaming up to fight off Noxus. The plot is almost definitely going to gloss over Caitlyns fascist martial law over Zaun, and focus the story on redeeming her personally via her relationship with Vi. As is reasonable, a lot of people are kind of upset with this direction, and in general how Arcane seems to try and portray both sides as equally in the wrong even when the majority of Zauns issues can be directly traced back to mistreatment by the Topsiders.

Lets be honest, this was obvious from the start. Here's why:

Arcane was made by a big budget corporation: Arcane cost $250 Million to make, which is the largest budget for an animated series ever. This money came directly from Riot games. Riot isn't exactly the most enlightened company. Despite their profits and budget increasing year over year (the average income per employee was $600,000) in 2024 they layed off 530 employees with little warning or reason. Then they opened an Arcane themed office with Executive offices. They recently settled a $100 Million dollar Sex discrimination lawsuit for gender discrimination and sexual harassment in the workplace. As talented as the writers, artist, designers, musicians, coders, animators, etc. at Riot are, ultimately the story has to fit into the boxes of what the producers and executives want. Those executives aren't exactly the most class critical.

Arcane is first and foremost an advertisement: Arcane is a prequel for League of Legends, giving more detailed backstories to some of their most popular characters (Jinx, Vi, Caitlyn, Jayce), after Arcane was released the usage rates of these champions increased immensely and with it so did the profits associated with these champions. Interestingly, the amount that these characters popularity increased was mostly in line with how well their character was received in Arcane. For example: despite being practically unrecognizable to his League counterpart in season 1, Viktor experienced one of the greatest increases in usage rates of all champions. This was directly connected to his fan favorite status amongst the Arcane audience. As such, Riot has an investment interest in making the champions as interesting, badass, and likable in Arcane as possible. If Caitlyn was really torn down by the narrative for her turn to fascism they might not sell as many Pool Party Caitlyn cosmetics. In Arcane, the world building regarding extreme poverty and oppression is just a backdrop to give the champions cool backstories. Not to make you think critically about wealth disparities or systematic oppression.

Not to mention, taking any political stance at all would alienate part of the audience. They invested $250 Million dollars in this show, they need/want it to appeal to the greatest audience possible if they are going to make that money back.

Arcane is character focussed, not world focussed: From the beginning Arcane was always focussed on the characters first and foremost. I saw some people upset that Season 2 didn't spend enough time on the world outside the main cast. Like not showing the audience in detail how the power struggle between the chem-barons affects life in the Undercity. But this is just always how Arcane has been. Season 1 never focussed on how the Hexgates revolutionized trade or cross continental relations, only on how it elevated Jayce. The most we saw of the child labor in the mines in season 1 was as a backdrop for a Jayce and Vi fightscene, and then a child is fridged to start an argument between them. In season 2 the only significance the freeing of the child miners is that Isha joins the cast. The world exists to serve the characters, as is only shown in detail in the way it directly affects the characters. It is a cool setting, but ultimately the show will always spend more screentime on the characters emotional lives than the cultural and economic life of Zaun and Piltover as a whole. This isn't necessarily a good or bad thing, it is just a writing choice. This also means that the finale will be far more focussed on the conclusion of these characters emotional arcs than it is in resolving or otherwise finding some conclusion to the civil war plotline.

Of course Arcane isn't a revolutionary story about rising up against oppressors. It is a League of Legends champion advertisement. Subversive political takes don't emerge from big budget blockbusters on Netflix. That isn't necessarily a bad thing, it is just the genre.

Just some thoughts. I've seen some discussion about this and wanted to throw in my two cents on the topic.

[borderlineomniverse]

If You Don't Know About Project 2025, You Need To.

For the uninformed, Project 2025 is a plan drafted by a conservative alt-right think tank that would turn America into an autocratic dystopia in the event that Trump wins the 2024 election. The plan would begin execution IMMEDIATELY upon Trump's innaguration, and includes actions such as the following:

Trump would recieve near-unlimited powers as president and would essentially become a fascist dictator.

Using this power, he would invoke the Insurrection Act of 1807 to mobilize military forces and hunt down anyone he deems to be his enemies (the plan specifically states "deep state politicians", but who he regards as his enemies could expand to generally anyone who opposes him).

Project 2025 pretty much spells the end for LGBTQIA+ rights, with the removal of protections against discrimination and healthcare as the beginning of the plan, but would eventually include the criminalization of anyone who "appears" gender-nonconforming or doesn't fit a heterosexual stereotype. Transgender individuals would be forced to detransition, or at the very least, present themselves as their gender assigned at birth, and any non-heterosexual couples would have their marriages annulled (at the very best), or may even be imprisoned. There's so much more that would occur along the lines of destroying LGBTQIA+ rights, but these are some major points I wanted to highlight.

On the topic of diversity rights, the document has evidence that Trump could begin deporting non-white individuals (mostly Latinx people, but anyone is fair game) and as a whole, rights for any non-white individuals would go by the wayside.

Furthermore, women's rights would also be abolished, with discrimination against women in the workplace returning and reproductive rights being thrown out. Abortion would become criminalized under this new policy, and women would lose automony over their bodies and decisions.

Most of the current administrative branch would be demolished, with current departments like the Department of Education, Department of Justice, and FBI being shut down, and others having their power either significantly limited or replaced with Trump's own conservative infiltrators.

Speaking of which, while this project doesn't technically go into effect until Trump's potential election, the steps are already being made. Alt-right individuals and supporters can sign up on Project 2025's Website to officially join certain jobs and become apart of the project's officially sanctioned militia that could execute Trump's bidding.

If all of this seems very scary, it should be. If Trump gets elected, we would see the end of American democracy and freedom, and the country would transform into a fascist dystopia. If you think this only affects Americans, think again! Other alt-right parties in other countries can and will take example from Trump's power and push for the abolishment of freedom in other countries as well.

So. What can you do?

I hope this doesn't need to be said, but if it does, then VOTE. If you were planning to not vote, then by taking that inaction you are effectively making an action that could spell the destruction of our nation. If you are voting age, you MUST cast your vote against Trump to ensure that Project 2025 will not go into effect.

You can also spread the word to friends, whether that be in person or online. Reblog this post, or make your own posts. Make sure that this information is circulated in your online circles and encourage others to share more information wherever you can. Talk about it on all of your social media profiles and get all of your mutuals talking about it as well. Unfortunately, there's a huge subset of the internet that just isn't aware about Project 2025, but if we get the word out and encourage as many people as we can to take action against this manifesto, then we may be able to save our nation. Again, even if you're not American, this policy could impact you in the future, and you can share information for your own online audience and inform your American followers about the issue. It's very important that we get as many people talking about this as possible.

I hope this post motivates you to take action and begin sharing information about Project 2025, and if you would like more resources I've linked articles and resources for you below.

Analysis from PBS Newshour: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MsoGfOesEEA

For those of you hesitant to vote for Biden: https://www.tiktok.com/t/ZPRwpYeNx/

[transgenderteensurvivalguide]

Pls help this is very urgent, I don't feel comfortable nor feel safe going to either women or men's lockeroom can I like find some way around that like use the nurses bathroom or aomwthing??

Lee says:

When I was in high school, I brought my clothes with me and changed in the regular bathrooms instead of the open changing area in the gym locker room.

You may have to keep your PE clothing and sneakers in your locker room locker if you don’t have room for them in your normal hallway locker or backpack, which would mean you’d have to enter the locker room, get your items, and then leave.

So if you don’t think it’ll get you in trouble, just get your clothes from wherever they’re stored and then change in the nearest bathroom without even asking the teacher.

If your school has a gender neutral bathroom, you might have better luck changing in there, even if it’s a bit further away than the nearest gendered bathroom is.

But if you’re out as trans, you could explain that you’ll need privacy to your gym teacher, and ask them to be allowed to change elsewhere, like in the nurse’s office bathroom, and that way you can get informal permission to not change in the locker room and won’t be marked as late.

If you don’t want to out yourself, you can tell your teacher that you have anxiety about changing in the gendered locker rooms and not mention the trans thing at all.

If you don’t think your teacher would be open to making informal accommodations for you, or you asked your teacher and they said no, speak to the guidance councilor or whatever school official is in charge of creating formal accommodation plans and see if you’re able to persuade them.

Whether you reach out to a trusted teacher, school counselor, or administrator, explain your concerns about using the gender-specific locker rooms and express your need for a safe alternative. Make sure you explain why you feel unsafe in detail and provide any examples of incidents that would support your concerns. They're more likely to respond if it's presented as a safety issue (and you said it was!) instead of just a personal preference.

If you do go to the top and ask a school official, you an also ask if there are any single-occupancy staff restrooms that you could use. That isn't ideal for you or the school but you can always ask!

Sometimes, having a written request can make the process more formal and may be taken more seriously. It also provides a record of your request, so if you are talking to school officials get everything on paper or in email.

If your parents are supportive, they can back you up and write a note to help excuse you. When you speak with them about this issue, be clear about why the current situation is not working for you and what would make you feel safer because they might not realize how important it is to you.

If even a parent's note doesn't help, familiarize yourself with any non-discrimination policies your school or workplace may have. Many institutions in liberal-leaning have policies in place to accommodate individuals who do not feel comfortable in gender-specific spaces, so you may be able to point at a policy and get backup that way.

And depending on your location, there may be laws that protect your right to safe and comfortable accommodations. Knowing these can help when discussing your needs with officials.

It's also important to know if a law isn't in your favor because then you will have more success just doing it instead of asking because if the school gives you permission they may get in trouble so they might be trying to avoid that. Organizations like the ACLU or local LGBTQ+ advocacy groups can sometimes provide guidance or intervene in situations where individuals are being denied reasonable accommodations, but that can be hard to do if you have unsupportive parents.

Remember, your comfort and safety are paramount, and you have the right to access facilities where you feel secure. Don't hesitate to advocate for yourself, and seek out allies like other trans people at your school or members of the GSA club who can support you through this process. They may have experience with similar situations and can offer advice or advocate on your behalf.

If you have a supportive friend who will stand up for you and come to the bathroom with you or change together with you in the locker room, that can be a great way to plan for your safety until you're able to access alternative facilities. I would honestly consider that to be your first step to help you stay safe while you work everything out.

Finally, it's clear that situations like these can be stressful! Consider speaking with a school counselor (keeping in mind the requirements of mandated reporting) or a therapist for support.

Followers, any tips for anon?

[skeeyee333]

Blog Post due 2/6

How does the internet serve as a tool to interwork global feminism, yet the internet economy reproduces oppressive workplaces for women?

The Internet has made it possible for women of color, especially those from diasporic communities, to interact and organize internationally despite the obstacles. African American women's online political organizing and South Asian internet networks are two examples. Feminist advocacy is made possible by these online platforms, signifying the potential to transcend conventional gender and social constraints. However, throughout the text, it is critiqued that the theoretical future where there is subversive potential for this transcend ignores the actual exploitation that women workers experience, especially in low-skilled tech production jobs. This highlights the limitations of the cyborg theory when it fails to consider the economic reality of Haraway’s theories (Daniels 101-105).

How does the internet resist and reinforce the subverting of traditional power structures and hierarchies?

According to the text, the internet is often where women can form online communities for embodiment. For example, “pro-ana” and transgender communities demonstrate the shaping of self-identity, self-expression, and resistance to traditional societal norms to subvert from those structures (Daniels, 112). However, there are cases where the internet can reproduce white, heterosexual, and masculine cultures that reinforce the supremacy of whites and the hierarchies. It is often an unmarked dominant category in online communities, just like how it is offline in society. For example, in Mary Bryson's study of queer women in online settings, there is a recognition of racial tensions. She notes how the experiences of a woman of color compared to a white woman were much different in terms of treatment by white middle-class men online. Inclusivity was limited by the traditional social power of white men silencing and excluding women of color, dictating who is allowed to belong, essentially requiring marginalized groups to conform to a culture that centers on whiteness. There is no way that the internet can completely resist offline realities (Daniels, 116).

Is Artificial Intelligence Ethical?

Artificial Intelligence has its advantages and drawbacks. But whether or not one outweighs the other is hard to answer. The article "Flawed Facial Recognition Leads to Arrest and Jail for New Jersey Man" by Kashmir Hill cites instances in which a wrongful arrest was caused by facial recognition errors. The article cites false accusations, a violation of civil rights, and the experiences of arrestee Mr. Parks (Hill, 1). These all seem to support the idea that AI is not ethical in ways that it affected someone’s life negatively due to its lack of knowledge. Though I personally enjoy the convenience AI brings, I do not think it should be used for facial recognition purposes to solve criminal cases, as it lacks information and can be inaccurate, potentially leading to unethical practices.

Is replacing human jobs with AI reliable?

The article "Automating Inequality" tells the story of a wife who struggles to get support from their new insurance. The company was unable to assist the narrator because the Al system detected a bogus fraud. Despite her persistent calls, the AI assisting her on the other end of the phone continued referring to what the "system said" instead of verifying her documentation (14-16). The article expresses how it is essentially an automated decision maker that puts social safety at risk, criminalizes the poor, intensifies discrimination, and compromises our deepest national values. All of these, in my opinion, are unethical and demonstrate how AI can be unreliable. I believe more serious jobs like this should not be replaced with AI, especially when it comes to individuals’ health, privacy, and security, like insurance.

[betterbemeta]

A thing that sucks about TERFs consuming all discussions about Second Wave Feminism (1960s - 1990s) is that everything transphobes want to do to trans people represents a walking-back for all gender equality to before that time: the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

(I know that's USA-centric. I live in the USA. Other countries have had their own timeline for civil rights and are better discussed by people who are more familiar. The UK for example partially adopted the UN's ICERD in 1965, but didn't adopt a Sex Discrimination Act until 1975.)

That aside, issues from around that time have direct analogs to trans rights today:

The right to choose your legal name (originally: the right for women to retain their original names in marriage)

Normal life and fashion in one's preferred clothing. (see: modern 'drag bans' or 'dress codes' based on 'biological gender')

women being addressed as they prefer, not based on external assignments or societal roles. (today, it's 'pronouns', yesterday it was 'Ms.' as an alternative to marriage-based titles, or the normalization of women using professional titles like "Dr.")

Full independent participation in public life/right to one's own finances, housing, etc. Overall, being considered legitimate members of society. (in the USA this fight is still ongoing! Phyllis Shafly's grave is of course a gender neutral bathroom.)

Equality in the workplace. I don't have a link for this one besides the Equal Pay Act of 1963 which only covers compensation and doesn't actually regulate corporate structures. But there is a direct lineage of reactionary thought from the rejection of women in labor forces post WWII -> 2nd wave feminism's fight for labor legitimacy (which when White Feminism'd becomes like... Girlboss Politics) -> today where the USA's right wing politics does not want any Human Resources Department to enforce diversity policies despite also making corporate activities almost impossible to directly regulate in my country.

There are definitely more causes that match up. And the victories of these causes have been limited: favoring the most advantaged people in our society over everyone else who needs them. Many of them come packaged with anti-racist civil rights victories; successful feminist actions are also going to be antiracist actions for this reason, and the reactionary right sees the defeat of racial and gender equality as a package deal.

The worst damage that TERFs can do that isn't to any actual people is to history. By obscuring 2nd wave feminist history as a purely 'radfem' history, they erase the direct connection between historical antifeminism and modern transphobia. Hell, historical antifeminism and historical transphobia, considering trans people have been here since the beginning. 'What rights should women have?' cannot exist as a political question without first asking, 'Who is a woman and who decides that?'

[rosiebee-18]

Aggretsuko

With its interesting and sympathetic story, Aggretsuko carefully tackles topics that are relevant to both Japan and the world. The anime draws attention to the widespread issue of workplace stress and overwork in Japan. The "karoshi" phenomenon, in which workers work themselves to death, is reflected in Retsuko's difficult work schedule and her struggles with a demanding supervisor. Her situation shows the need for a better work-life balance because many Japanese professionals face comparable demands.

By exposing Retsuko's experiences with gender discrimination and being devalued in her professional environment, the show also addresses gender roles and workplace inequalities. For example, Ton, her supervisor, frequently minimizes her suggestions and disregards her work, a situation that is representative of the actual difficulties faced by Japanese women. This representation clarifies more general social concerns about workplace gender equality.

Retsuko's battle to balance her demanding career with her personal life is representative of the struggles faced by many people from various cultures who try to strike a balance between their personal and professional goals. The way the show depicts office politics and challenging coworkers has universal resonance because the power struggles and dynamics are typical of many different types of workplaces worldwide. The way in which difficult coworkers, power battles, and hierarchical conflicts are portrayed in the anime is representative of what is encountered in offices across the globe. These elements of the program provide an opportunity to consider the frequently complex dynamics of work settings and how they affect people's happiness and sense of fulfillment in their jobs.

Retsuko's search for personal fulfillment outside of her career reflects a common need for purpose and fulfillment in life. Despite facing obstacles at work, her quest for fulfillment and meaning in life is a reflection of the universal human experience that cuts across cultures. Aggretsuko successfully crosses cultural gaps by providing insights into global challenges as well as Japanese societal difficulties through humor and likable characters.

[lgbt-interactivevisualnovelpeek]

Explanation

[With author's consent]

Hi everyone,

Here I'll post the first part intros or prologues of my friend's interactive visual novel and visual novel, meaning each page will be a preview of a story. You'll be able to find these on Google Play once published, and of course, I'll let you know the moment that happens. The author's Discord is ongoing.

I had to create this page because the app is exactly how I always wanted an interactive visual novel to be:

No tickets to read, no waiting time between chapters other than 5 ADS, so the waiting will be between 25 seconds to 5 minutes (and other waiting times for a new published chapter), no ADS during chapters like in 'Tabou' or 'Decisions: Choose Your Story', and despite having choices that count, there are no premium choices.

The author only writes Bi or Gay stories where the MC is always male, or Straight stories where the MC can be male or female. I'm not going to delve into gender identity; you'll discover that in the story.

Now here's a message the author put on the app:

"The choices count and can have immediate-, short-, medium-, or long-term effects or even future consequences.

If you're only interested in stories where the primary subject is love, you can stop right there, because the stories can go for 20 chapters without any MCxLI interactions, or you can have it in each chapter, depending on the plot.

For example, if the plot is about defeating a supervillain, don't expect a lot of love interaction, but it's not impossible either.

There are no choices during the intro and prologue, and these two are written in novel-like form. The visuals start at Chapter 1.

The list of tags is what you can find in different stories, but not all necessarily apply to the story you're about to read—this avoids spoilers.

TAGS:

Addiction, Age regression, BDSM, Belief, Betrayal, Bodyguard, Bromance, Bully, Business, Celebrities, Cosplay, Criminal, Cross-dressing, Daily life, Dark, DDL, Department of Justice, Development disorder, Digital creator, Disability, Discrimination, Drug, Emotional, Family, Fantasy, Friendship, Funny, FX, Gamer, Geek, Growing, Health condition, Hermaphrodite, History (fake), Hobby, Homophobia, Investigation, Law enforcement, Legend, Little space, LGBT+, Managing (company, people...), Medical (Mental health, Illness...), Multiple POV, Myth, Organized crime (yakuza, mafia, triad...), Otaku, Party, Poly, Pregnancy, Profession, Protection, Quad, Religion, Romance, Royalty, Sad, School, Social science, Serial killer, Sex, Social status, Sport, Supernatural, Traditions, Violence, War, Workplace."

If you find something unclear... I'd like to say leave a comment and I'll answer, but I'm not sure I will, lol. Buuuuut... I'm interested in hearing what users of interactive visual novel apps think about the part where I mention what I like about this app. Do you prefer to stick with your premium choices, tickets, etc.? Yeah, I'm curious, lol.

STAY TUNED TO THE FIRST PREVIEW... please, share with others, thank you.

Click here for a preview of A Symphony Of Growth

[coochiequeens]

Male self-identified ‘women’ ignore the purpose of having a women-only space,” Orita said. “The desire not to have physical men in women-only spaces is not prejudice or a discriminatory attitude, but comes from evidence-based reality.”

Japan’s longest-running rape crisis center has been declared ineligible to receive public funding following statements made by the facility’s director which were deemed by government officials to be discriminatory against males who identify as transgender.

Tokyo’s Rape Crisis Center was founded in 1983 by six women, half of whom were survivors of sexual assault. Michiko Orita, one of the founders, first confirmed the punitive measure during a meeting held last year in Mayorganized by women’s rights campaign group Save Women’s Spaces, which was primarily concerned with the potential ramifications should gender identity policies be adopted in the nation.

“There have been various attacks and obstructions against our association [Tokyo Rape Crisis Center] throughout the last year. In one specific example, the director of the Minato City Center for Gender Equality carried out a speech suppression and power harassment attack against us for more than an hour, based on criticism that not referring to ‘transgender women’ as ‘women’ is detrimental to the promotion of gender equality and diversity in the Minato Ward,” Orita said during her 2022 presentation.

Under Japanese law, “power harassment” is considered a serious charge. The legal code was updated in 2019 to address “remarks and behavior of people taking advantage of their superior positions in the workplace that exceed what is necessary and appropriate for the conduct of business, thereby harming the working environment of employees.” 

It was after this altercation, Orita said, that the Rape Crisis Center (RCC) was removed from a list of projects subsidized by the government. Since that time, the RCC has received threats sent to their email address.

“There is an increase in trans-discriminatory and trans-hate labeling and suppression of speech in a situation where most citizens have no knowledge of gender identity. Currently, victims of sexual violence are the target of criticism as trans-discriminatory, and the harmful effects of this are to silence and attack women victims who are suffering from sexual harm,” Orita said last May.

The issue was again brought to light during an emergency press conference held in Tokyo on May 1 to address concerns about a proposed LGBT bill that would codify “gender identity” into law while banning “unfair discrimination” on that basis, without clearly defining either term.

“Male self-identified ‘women’ ignore the purpose of having a women-only space,” Orita said. “The desire not to have physical men in women-only spaces is not prejudice or a discriminatory attitude, but comes from evidence-based reality.”

Orita revealed that she had heard complaints from survivors of abuse, and explained that men in women’s spaces can be re-traumatizing for victims. “Two years ago, when our organization was selected by the Tokyo Metropolitan government’s Minato Ward to organize a lecture on ‘Considering Equality from the Perspective of Sexual Violence,’ a participant said, ‘A woman I know was victimized by a man dressed as a woman in the women’s bathroom. I don’t want transvestite men and trans women to go into women’s toilets.”

Orita described how the attacks against her, and her establishment more broadly, began in response to views she published in a newsletter put out by the Rape Crisis Center in 2021. In the newsletter, Orita questioned the slander directed at renowned author J.K. Rowling after she publicly threw her support behind Maya Forstater, a woman who had her employment contract terminated for questioning gender identity ideology.

“J. K. Rowling was once a victim of domestic and sexual violence, so she came to believe that people should be distinguished by their biological sex, rather than their gender identity. She said that spaces segregated on the basis of biological sex, such as women-only restrooms, public baths, domestic violence shelters, and sometimes women-only train carriages, are a necessity. It is the right of women, discriminated against from birth on the basis of the physical sex, to have a space free from male violence,” the RCC newsletter read.

Orita said that she was told her newsletter amounted to discrimination because she had referred to trans-identified males as “trans women” instead of women.

“To write ‘trans women’ is apparently ‘discrimination’ and goes to the very heart of the Minato Ward’s selection process for grant aid projects. Since then, we have continued to be excluded from the other women’s projects that have been selected [for funding] all these years.”

Orita continued: “In addition, a seven-page letter was sent by an associate professor at Hiroshima University, and a self-described ‘trans ally’ regarding the article, saying that we should apologize to all transgender people or he would launch a protest action.”

Another topic of concern addressed by the newsletter was a lawsuit being heard in the Supreme Court which has the potential to set a legal precedent allowing sex self-identification. The suit was brought forward by a man who has self-declared his sex as female and is seeking unrestricted access to women’s restrooms.

The man, whose name has not been released to the public, has not undergone any surgery and retains male genitalia. He has been diagnosed with gender identity disorder and has been taking female hormones, and began publicly presenting himself as a woman since 2010. In 2013, he filed a petition with the National Personnel Authority to remove restrictions on his use of women’s restrooms at the Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry’s (METI) office, but it was rejected.

However, in 2015, unnamed fellow employees filed a lawsuit demanding that the decision be overturned. in December 2019, the Tokyo District Court ruled that the response was illegal, citing that “it constitutes a restriction on the important legal interest of leading a social life that conforms to one’s self-identified gender.” The ruling acknowledged responsibility for compensation and ordered the payment of 1.32 million yen ($9,600 USD). The case is ongoing, and a hearing in the Supreme Court is scheduled for June 16.

“Attacks and threats were made because we wrote an article about the trial of trans woman A, who works for the Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry, who wants to use the women’s restroom alongside his colleagues, and we have since been targeted from all sides,” Orita said in her presentation.

In the newsletter, Orita questioned how a man can feel like a woman on the inside, and stated that she objected to reducing women to external appearances, which she emphasized reinforced stereotypes, and challenged the belief that the plaintiff in the suit had a right to women’s spaces.

“The attitude of Mr. A, who concludes that there is no problem because there were complaints, is the same as when, in a male-dominated society where, if the woman does not say ‘no,’ she is thought to accept it. Mr. A does not recognize the anxieties of women, which even men can imagine, and uses the power of the court to pressure women. What does it men to be a ‘woman at heart?'”

A Twitter account belonging to the anonymous man involved in the lawsuit was discovered to have been making sexually suggestive posts. Women who oppose men entering female-only facilities drew attention to several instances where he had joked about his penis in a sexualized context.

Orita more recently discussed the issue of the RCC being denied funding during an emergency press conference held at the beginning of the month. Four organizations gathered to expressed their opposition to a proposed LGBT Discrimination Bill which includes a stipulation designating a self-declared “gender identity” as a protected characteristic. 

Representatives from the Association for Gender Non-Conforming People, a group made up of those who have been diagnosed with gender identity disorder, and the Association to Protect Women’s Spaces, spoke alongside LGB activists to share their concerns about the legislation.

The meeting was assembled in response to mounting pressure from foreign powers to adopt measures enshrining the subjective term “gender identity” into law before the upcoming G-7 Summit, scheduled to begin on May 19. Concerns presented at the press conference included the expanding of women-only spaces to men, which speakers said placed women at risk of assault or harassment, and the treatment of the lesbian community by men who claim to be women.

In recent months, several representatives from both the United States and Australia have met with Japanese officials to discuss the topic of “gender equality,” particularly in how it relates to gender identity under the umbrella of the LGBT movement. The foreign influence in domestic affairs has drawn widespread criticism from Japanese citizens.

Last month, Australia’s Ambassador for Gender Equality, Stephanie Copus Campbell, spoke with members of the national Diet to “discuss how Australia and Japan can work together to promote gender equality.” In February, Copus Campbell announced her appointment to the new role as “Australia’s lead international advocate” for “persons of diverse gender identites” in a video that was met with sharp criticism on social media.

On May 12, the U. S. Ambassador to Japan, Rahm Emanuel, shared a video featuring fifteen foreign representatives pressuring the government of Japan to pass the LGBT bill. “When my closest friends give me the same advice, I pay attention,” he said.

Ambassadors from Argentina, Ireland, Denmark, Sweden, Australia, Finland, Norway, Canada, Germany, the Netherlands, and the United Kingdom, among others, reiterated the message that Japan ought to pass the bill ahead of the G7 summit. The majority of the speakers focused on the same-sex marriage aspect of the bill rather than the more controversial “gender identity” portion.

Japan’s Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) sponsored the LGBT bill and is aiming to pass the legislation before the G-7 Summit in Hiroshima begins on May 19. The term “gender identity” was not included in the LDP’s initial outline of the bill, but was added due to pressure from lobbyists during revision talks in 2021.

Several lawmakers have expressed opposition to the “gender identity” aspect of the bill by pointing out how this infringes on women’s rights and privacy. However, Former Defense Minister Tomomi Inada, who supports the bill, told the press that “the issue of men violating women’s rights by falsely claiming to be women is a problem that has nothing to do with the legislation.”

As previously reported by Reduxx, a Japanese trans-identified male YouTuber prompted backlash last December after boasting of using the women’s sauna at a hotel and describing seeing women naked in highly sexual terms. Nao Wasada, who also uses the name Suzanne Misaki, uploaded a video to his YouTube channelon December 5 titled “What Happened After a Former Man Took Off His Clothes and Entered the Women’s Bath.” He called the experience “paradise,” saying he was in “boob heaven,” and stated that it was not his first time entering a women’s public bath.

International rankings, including those from the World Economic Forum, consistently place Japan as one of the most unequal countries in the developed world in terms of political representation and economic opportunities for women. Sexual harassment involving groping, up-skirting, and the illicit recording of women, known as voyeur pornography, are rampant in the nation. Authorities have designated certain train carriages as women-only and placed public service announcements in response.

Reduxx attempted to contact Orita to provide comment for this article, but did not receive a response prior to publication.

By Genevieve Gluck

Genevieve is the Co-Founder of Reduxx, and the outlet's Chief Investigative Journalist with a focused interest in pornography, sexual predators, and fetish subcultures. She is the creator of the podcast Women's Voices, which features news commentary and interviews regarding women's rights.

If any ladies in Japan have more insight in this please comment.

[hividsmarttv]

Understanding LGBT+ and the Significance of Pride: Breaking Barriers and Fostering Acceptance

We'll be celebrating Pride this June. Curious? Learn more!

The LGBT+ community, encompassing individuals who identify as lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and more, plays a vital role in our diverse society. However, despite significant progress in recent years, discrimination and legal barriers persist, hindering many from leading authentic lives. HiVid supports our diverse customer base and we want to introduce readers to the concept of LGBT+ and Pride. Continue on to learn more.

What is LGBT+?

LGBT+ is an acronym that represents the diverse spectrum of sexual orientations and gender identities. Here's a breakdown of the terms:

Lesbian: A woman who is emotionally, romantically, or sexually attracted to other women.

Gay: A term typically used to describe men who are attracted to other men, though it is also inclusive of women.

Bisexual: Individuals who are attracted to both males and females.

Transgender: People whose gender identity differs from the sex assigned to them at birth.

Plus (+): This symbolizes the inclusion of all other sexual orientations and gender identities that are not specifically represented by the aforementioned terms, such as pansexual, non-binary, and queer.

Others may use different acronyms or apply a different description to these terms. Each person has the right to decide for themselves which labels, if any, apply to them and how they should be used. If you're not sure, ask!

The Significance of Pride

Pride, celebrated globally during the month of June (often referred to as Pride Month), holds immense significance for the LGBT+ community. Here are a few reasons why Pride is important:

Visibility and Acceptance: Pride events provide a platform for LGBT+ individuals to express their identities openly and authentically. It helps promote visibility, fostering a sense of acceptance and understanding within society.

Community and Support: Pride celebrations bring together people from various backgrounds, creating a strong sense of community and solidarity. It allows individuals to connect with others who share similar experiences and challenges, offering much-needed support.

Historical Milestones: Pride commemorates various achievements in the quest for recognition, acceptance, and fair treatment. In the United States, the Stonewall Riots of 1969, a series of protests by LGBT+ individuals against police brutality and oppression, is celebrated during Pride. This event marked a turning point in the fight for LGBT+ rights and serves as a reminder of the progress made and the work that still lies ahead. Other countries may have people, dates, or events highlighted during Pride.

Discrimination and Legal Barriers

Unfortunately, discrimination against LGBT+ individuals continues to persist worldwide. While progress has been made in some regions, many laws and societal attitudes still prevent LGBT+ individuals from living their lives authentically. Some common examples include:

Criminalization: In many countries, consensual same-sex relationships are still criminalized, leading to persecution, imprisonment, or even capital punishment for LGBT+ individuals. Transgender and self-expression may be against the law, particularly in religious districts.

Employment Discrimination: LGBT+ individuals often face discrimination in the workplace, ranging from harassment and unequal treatment to denial of employment opportunities based on their sexual orientation or gender identity.

Lack of Legal Protections: In many places, there is a lack of comprehensive legal protections against discrimination and hate crimes targeting LGBT+ individuals, leaving them vulnerable and marginalized. For instance, some countries won't allow partners to make legal decisions for their loved one or refuse to permit an LGBT+ couple to adopt children. Others are refused cohabitation, marriage licenses, and other freedoms most straight, cisgendered people can take for granted.

Conclusion

Understanding the LGBT+ community and the significance of Pride is crucial for fostering inclusivity and acceptance. Pride celebrations serve as powerful reminders of the progress made in the fight for equality while highlighting the ongoing challenges that the LGBT+ community faces. By recognizing and challenging discrimination and advocating for change, we can strive towards a society that embraces diversity and ensures that everyone, regardless of their sexual orientation or gender identity, can lead authentic and fulfilling lives.

[religion-is-a-mental-illness]

Published: Nov 7, 2022

Over the past several years, companies big and small have been making public their efforts to improve DEI (diversity, equity, and inclusion) initiatives. As detailed by Glassdoor, many companies have made the connection that DEI is not only good for society, but also good for business.

However, in recent months there has been a buzz around what some are terming “reverse discrimination” in hiring, wherein companies are passing over members of racial and gender majorities in service of meeting DEI benchmarks. And with the Supreme Court again hearing arguments against affirmative action, these same issues continue to be debated across multiple realms.

To find out how many believe “reverse discrimination” is really an issue affecting their workplace, in November ResumeBuilder.com surveyed 1,000 hiring managers across the U.S.

Key findings include:

52% believe their company practices “reverse discrimination” in hiring

1 in 6 have been asked to deprioritize hiring white men

48% have been asked to prioritize diversity over qualifications

53% believe their job will be in danger if they don’t hire enough diverse employees

70% believe their company has DEI initiatives for appearances’ sake

52% of Hiring Managers Believe Their Company Practices “Reverse Discrimination” in Hiring

More than half of hiring managers whose companies have DEI initiatives in place ‘somewhat’ (29%) or ‘strongly’ (24%) believe their company practices “reverse discrimination” when it comes to hiring.

Additionally, 48% say they have been told to prioritize diversity over qualifications when considering an applicant.

“In this evolving and competitive workplace, companies are having to respond to the demands of workers, which includes modifying their hiring practices,” commented career expert Stacie Haller.

“With all of the rapid changes organizations need to meet, it’s mostly middle management that implements the policies, and with many organizations, the support and tools provided to them are not there yet, especially when it comes to DEI” she continued.

1 in 6 Have Been Told to Deprioritize Hiring White Men

Sixteen percent of hiring managers surveyed say they have been told to deprioritize white men when evaluating candidates, and 14% have been told to deprioritize hiring white women. This is a consistent finding with past reports of “reverse discrimination”.

For example, according to Bloomberg “A lawsuit claims former Google and YouTube recruiter Arne Wilberg was unlawfully fired because he didn’t reject white and Asian male job candidates, which he said the company pressured him and other recruits to do for diversity purposes.”

“Hiring practices regarding diversity are also evolving and workers will notice if companies are treating these practices as simply the means of getting to the desired end,” advised Haller.

53% Believe They Could Be Fired if They Don’t Hire Enough Diverse Employees

More than half of hiring managers ‘somewhat’ (28%) or ‘strongly’ (25%) believe that their job will be in danger if they don’t make enough diverse hires.

Fifty-nine percent say they feel ‘some’ (39%) or ‘a lot’ (20%) of pressure to hire diverse candidates. Forty-seven percent of this group say this pressure comes from company higher-ups and 45% from their boss. Additionally, 35% say they feel pressure from customers and 31% from co-workers.

70% Believe Their Company Has DEI Initiatives in Place for Appearances’ Sake

The good news is that the vast majority of hiring managers ‘somewhat’ (30%) or ‘strongly’ (67%) believe their company has overall good intentions when it comes to DEI initiatives.

The majority also ‘somewhat’ (35%) or ‘strongly’ (60%) believe that their company has been overall improved by having DEI initiatives and 87% say their company has successfully hired more diverse employees due to these programs.

However, nearly one-third (31%) also say their company has not consulted a DEI expert, and 70% ‘somewhat’ (32%) or ‘strongly’ (38%) believe that the company has DEI initiatives in place for appearances’ sake.

While DEI initiatives have been shown to create more positive workplaces and offer great ROI, companies need to make sure they are approaching these initiatives with the right framework in mind and not just hopping on the bandwagon for appearances’ sake.

“While the efforts to overcome inequality in hiring diverse populations continue to evolve, companies need to consider all aspects and the effects of these practices on their entire population and move carefully and thoughtfully,” Haller finished.

Methodology

This survey was commissioned by ResumeBuilder.com and conducted online by the survey platform Pollfish on November 2, 2022. In total, 1,000 participants in the U.S. were surveyed. All participants had to pass through demographic filters to ensure they were age 18 or older, currently employed for wages or self-employed, and manage at least 25% of the hiring at their workplace.

==

There's no such thing as "reverse discrimination" or "reverse racism" or "reverse sexism." Discrimination against men is just sexism. Discrimination against white people is just racism.

Nonsensical academic attempts to redefine words to make this acceptable don't change what's going on. And demonstrate that it is, by definition, systemic. If you have the power to redefine words to make yourself immune to accusations, you're from the ruling class, not an underclass.

[themainspoon]

This is why it’s so important to listen to marginalised voices, even if you already think you know how certain groups or people are oppressed or discriminated against. If you don’t experience it yourself, you will almost always underestimate just how bad/common it actually is. This is something I grapple with a lot, because sometimes I think I do actually get it, and then I read/hear about somebody else’s experiences and remember that no, I actually don’t.

Also, trans experiences should absolutely be listened too when it comes to gender, because the experiences of transitioning, as shown above, reveal a lot about gender relations in a very clear and unambiguous way. Not just inequality in the workplace, but how we are perceived and treated in pretty much every area of our lives, sometimes even revealing differences in treatment that are just completely invisible to lots of cis people who have never even noticed that there IS a difference.

However, having said this it’s important to remember that while the above is true, it should not be the job of trans people to explain gender relations to us. They should just be allowed to live their lives, and we must always remember that they aren’t just sources of information and insight, but are people first and foremost at all times. That may sound obvious, but study and academia (if we are to talk on that level) has it’s own “gaze”, just like people and other institutions. The gaze as it exists in institutional contexts (medicine is a good example of a field with its own infamous gaze) functions to reduces people to subjects of discourse. We must be careful that our gaze does not reduce trans people, their lives, experiences, and perspectives, down to nothing more than subjects within the academic discourse surrounding gender. Gazes, no matter who or what they belong too, work to dehumanise, we must be careful not to let this occur.

The last bit wasn’t really all that relevant to the contents of the posts I’m replying too, but it felt like a good and important reminder while discussing the insights that trans people can provide into gender inequality. It is easier than you may expect to drift into “we must dissect transness, which is a vessel containing information that could teach us about ourselves, for the sake or furthering our understanding” territory.

https://twitter.com/delaneykingrox/status/1090402436995473408

[yetisidelblog]

As Trump and his white supremacist allies escalate their all-out war on diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) programs, some major corporations are shamefully caving to the pressure and abandoning their commitments to building inclusive workplaces. Instead of standing up for equality and fair opportunity, these companies are retreating in fear, prioritizing political convenience over fundamental values.

The conservative backlash has already pushed companies like Boeing, Home Depot, McDonald’s, Harley Davidson, Target, Disney, and Walmart to gut their DEI initiatives such as supplier diversity trainings and diversity goals for senior leadership positions. Lowes ended their sponsorship of LGBTQ+ events and withdrew from the Human Rights Campaign. Meta (which owns Facebook) disbanded its DEI team and canceled all its programs for promoting equity.

While some companies are backing down, others are leading by example: Microsoft, Ben & Jerry’s, Delta, Cisco, e.l.f. Beauty, and Patagonia remain steadfast in their commitment to fostering inclusive workplaces despite relentless attacks from right-wing extremists.

Apple issued a statement that focuses on the value of creating a “culture of belonging.” When Costco shareholders were faced with a proposal to end inclusivity programs, 98% of them voted to uphold the initiatives.

These companies recognize that DEI isn’t just the right thing to do -- it’s also smart business. Studies repeatedly show that diverse workplaces drive innovation, boost employee morale, and improve financial performance.

Now is the time for companies to stand firm. Tell corporations: Do not cave to Trump’s attacks on DEI!

Companies that choose to pull back on diversity are harming their communities, while shooting themselves in the foot.A company’s dedication to diversity, fairness, and equal opportunity should not be dictated by shifting political winds or a change in presidential administration. Equality is not a partisan issue -- it is a fundamental moral and business principle that every corporation must uphold.

And make no mistake: this attack on DEI isn’t just about corporate policies. Trump and his allies are waging a broader war against women, people of color, LGBTQ+ individuals, and other marginalized groups.

Trans people, in particular, are being singled out in some of the most vicious and dehumanizing attacks by the hard right fascist movement. From efforts to ban gender-affirming healthcare to erasing LGBTQ+ identities from workplaces and schools, this agenda is about rolling back civil rights and reinstating systemic discrimination.

When corporations retreat from DEI, they send a dangerous message: that fairness, dignity, and equal opportunity are negotiable. That marginalized communities are disposable. That political convenience matters more than human rights. We cannot allow this to happen.

If Apple and Costco can stand firm in the face of right-wing pressure, every corporation can. No more excuses. No more backtracking.

Add your name to tell corporations to reject Trump’s extremist attacks and reaffirm their commitment to DEI today!

Thank you for demanding accountability. Together, we will continue to build a more just, humane, and affirming world for all.

@upontheshelfreviews

@greenwingspino

@one-time-i-dreamt

@tenaflyviper

@akron-squirrel

@ifihadaworldofmyown

@justice-for-jacob-marley

@voicetalentbrendan

@thebigdeepcheatsy

@what-is-my-aesthetic

@ravenlynclemens

@thegreatallie

@writerofweird

@anon-lephant

@mentally-quiet-spycrab

@therealjacksepticeye