Institutional racism in the police?

What I take from David's words is that it's REALLY worrying that he is in charge (or plays a role) in recruitment when 1) He has such obvious bias and 2) Diversity of employees is not considered.

70 % of violent crime is carried out be men, 98% of violent sexual assault is committed by men - those stupid women making the wrong choices though.

Chewbacca

^Many women make the wrong life decisions which affect their whole lives and it’s always^ someone else’s fault, that’s not likely to change.

David, that's one of the most crass posts I've ever read. Really, that's a shameful thing to say.

David

Men, on the other hand, always make the right decisions of course.
It's time we females realised that men are infallible. We need to be re-programmed.

I understand that the Stepford Programme is very good.

Many women make the wrong life decisions which affect their whole lives and it’s always someone else’s fault, that’s not likely to change.

David, that's one of the most crass posts I've ever read. Really, that's a shameful thing to say.

Just replace references to women in his posts with the word Jews

Well David there’s only one response to your last post which is ‘I rest my case’. Now I must get back to the kitchen after I’ve ironed Mr SW’s underpants.

No, it's clear you lack the capacity to listen to the voice of those of us who don't have the privilege of being a male white individual. Totally unaware of white male privilege.

Elothan

That sounds exactly like “ Womansplaining to me, women can do and be anything they want it’s their choice and I fully support that. Women have to opportunity to take control of their lives and many do just that, those that don’t blame others for their misfortune.

Many women make the wrong life decisions which affect their whole lives and it’s always someone else’s fault, that’s not likely to change.

That’s the way it is ladies, you are not going to change your opinion and I’m not going to change mine.

‘Mansplaining and Patronising, I’m accused of that frequently, water off a ducks back, pretty standard form from feminists.‘

I can’t begin to imagine why David ?????

Your comment about feminism says all I need to know about the attitude to women demonstrated in your posts to me ( although I’d already guessed)

Sorry trisher, this seems to have wandered a long way from institutional racism. It's covering diversity though.

Davidhs - can I suggest you buy yourself some diversity training so you can drag yourself into the 21st century.

Many gransnet contributors will be familiar with interviewing for members of staff. My training included awareness of diversity and that was almost 20 years ago, its hardly a new concept.

Yes, it was women who worked for votes for women, and for the equalities that eventually came our way. Some men supported the fight, many other dismissed the monstrous regiment and saw us as a threat.

Your dismissal of 'feminists' has been well responded to by Eloethan, so I won't repeat that.

Remind me which century we live in someone please?

davidhs
Because you had either not read or not read properly Susie's post, you then proceeded to explain to everyone that an employer wants to recruit the best person for the job, that qualifications, experience, etc., should not be the only criteria for choosing a particular candidate and that recruiting employees is an expensive and time-consuming business so it is essential to make the right choice.

Your explanation was not relevant to the issue of systemic discrimination in recruitment - and I think the vast majority of Gransnetters fully understand how the interview process works - I expect several of them have had to carry out interviews themselves.

I think perhaps this was why someone used the terms "mansplaining" and "patronising" - which you assigned, in a rather dismissive way, to "feminists".

The word "feminism", according to the dictionary, means:

"The advocacy of women's rights on the ground of the equality of the sexes".

The Law Society website makes this very interesting point that I think should be borne in mind when considering how necessary feminism was, and still is:

"We’re all familiar with the saying ‘men are from Mars and women are from Venus’, less well known is that, not so long ago, women weren’t actually considered people at all!

That’s right, in a ruling which prevented women from qualifying as solicitors, the 1914 Court of Appeal case Bebb v Law Society found that the entire sex of women failed to fall within the definition of ‘persons’.

Feminists don't deserve the sneers and disapproval of those who portray them as some sort of malign force that unnecessarily raises issues of no importance and stirs up trouble. Because of them, women now have the right to:

vote
enter professions such as the law and accounting
practice their profession upon marriage
serve on a jury
act as a magistrate
open a bank account
obtain a mortgage without having to secure a male guarantor
buy a drink in a pub
work on the London Stock Exchange
have access to the birth control pill as an unmarried woman
have equal pay for work of broadly equal skill and value;
continue to have control of their own assets after marriage
divorce an abusive husband

............... and so the list goes on.

No doubt after women won the vote there were many men - and women too - who thought that was the end of the matter. And so it would have been if feminists hadn't campaigned vigorously to achieve all the above rights - which are just basic human rights.

Dear god.

Anniebach

Men also supported those needs

Of course they did. Women can’t do anything by themselves. They need men to help them. ???

Men also supported those needs

I know those awful people who set up domestic violence shelters, campaigned to make rape within marriage illegal, campaigned to stop men putting cameras up women skirts. Those awful feminists.

Susie I apologize I didn’t read your post a page or two back I was assuming that qualifications were the be all and end all, incorrectly.
My reaction was to your post of 21.51 yesterday accusing me of discrimination, all employers take into account all aspects of a candidates CV
Mansplaining and Patronising, I’m accused of that frequently, water off a ducks back, pretty standard form from feminists.

Davidhs

Suzie

Yes I am man and I too have interviewed many job applicants, diversity has never been a criteria in selection, nor has wether a candidate is currently employed. Around 80% successful applicants have been female, most of them stayed for several years some much longer which is fine, changing jobs after 3 months is not good.

The junior level would be just GCSEs, graduates generally had 2/2 Degrees it was the work experience that varied a lot. Some had obviously partied their way through Uni, some had really worked hard.

Can they do the job and are they going to fit in with the rest of the staff is by far the most important thing. I haven't always got it right, there was one graduate that upset everyone, that aside most were happy and stayed several years

That sounds fair enough David

I remember people with a PhD applying for jobs which only required 'A ' levels. One had a level of persistence which was admirable but the reasons for applying were odd.

Well actually, if we're being completely fair and non biased to everyone, irrespective of race or gender, it wasn't really necessary to ask David whether he was a man, was it? His opinions and experiences are as valid, even if you disagree with them, no matter what his gender is, wouldn't you say?

Yes he’s mansplaining because I called him out on his totally false post about me and rather than apologising for that, he launched into a post directed at me with information that Iam fully aware of. It’s mansplaining because not only was he too male to read my posts properly, but he thought I needed the benefit of his male wisdom in the recruitment and appointment process. It’s not about the content of his post but why he thought it necessary to actually post it.

I dont understand what peoples individual experience of recruitment has to do with anything to be honest.

David has it spot on, why is that mansplaining, that’s another daft term. How he put it is how it is in business, it has to be, that is just fact. Why is it if a man says something you don’t agree with make it wrong, it might not be your view on the subject, it’s what’s right not whom.

Suziewoozie, is he really mansplaining ? On this occasion I disagree with you I think he is just recounting his experience

David stop mansplaining.