• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

For Business Owners, Managers or Human Resource Administrators

Men or Women? What is the appropriate male/female ratio in the workplace?

  • Men 100/0

    Votes: 1 14.3%
  • Men 75/25

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Men 50/50

    Votes: 3 42.9%
  • Women 50/50

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Women 25/75

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Women 0/100

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Men. The mix doesn't matter. I hire the best candidates.

    Votes: 3 42.9%
  • Women. The mix doesn't matter. I hire the best candidates.

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Men. There is an appropriate mix but it should never be discussed.

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Women. There is an appropriate mix but it should never be discussed.

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    7
  • Poll closed .

vasuderatorrent

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 12, 2013
Messages
6,112
Reaction score
987
Location
(none)
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Communist
Once upon a time I asked someone if they had ever hired a man. This was my exact wording:

You might have already answered the question. It might have gotten missed. Have you ever hired a man in your current supervisory role? If so, what is the mix? 10% men/90% women? 50% men/50% women? 75% men/25% women? or no preference/doesn't weigh into the decision at all? Some people might be curious about the situation.

I was accused of being unrealistic and delusional. If that's the case I suppose I am not the only person with the same delusion. Read this post.

The result has been that men are increasingly dropping out of society. They don't marry, they don't go to college because they see no reason to break their humps to get ready to provide for a family -- they aren't going to be having a family.

Lots has been written about this phenomena, most of it in the strain of "why is it that men are so childish now." But men are not dropping out because of arrested development. They are acting rationally in response to myriad laws, attitudes and hostility against them for the crime of happening to be male in the twenty-first century.

My question is two fold and is directed at people responsible for hiring. However you are free to participate in this poll as if you were the person responsible for hiring.

The first question: Do you prefer to hire men or women?
The second question: What is the appropriate mix of male/female ratio?

This poll is anonymous for the protection of your career and/or the protection of your company from lawsuits. Please utilize this anonymity to answer honestly.
 
I see no rational basis why the “mix” of men and women should be a consideration at all. For any given position, it only makes sense to hire the candidate who is best qualified for that position.
 
I see no rational basis why the “mix” of men and women should be a consideration at all. For any given position, it only makes sense to hire the candidate who is best qualified for that position.

It would be nice if everyone had a flying pony who lays golden eggs. The reality is that ponies don't fly, they don't lay golden eggs and owning a pony isn't practical for most people. Women used to be discriminated against. It was so bad that the government had to force people to hire women. Now companies have found out how much better women are then men. Now the discrimination is reversed. I don't know why people become so defensive and disingenuous on this topic. This poll is anonymous. Discrimination happens hundreds of times a day.

Old vs Young
Black vs White
Local vs non local
Christian vs Muslim
Qualified and expensive vs unqualified and cheap

Male vs female is no exception. There is a preference that exists. If the Human Resource Department is cautious they will always lean to the side of the female even if they do prefer to hire males.
 
Once upon a time I asked someone if they had ever hired a man. This was my exact wording:



I was accused of being unrealistic and delusional. If that's the case I suppose I am not the only person with the same delusion. Read this post.



My question is two fold and is directed at people responsible for hiring. However you are free to participate in this poll as if you were the person responsible for hiring.

The first question: Do you prefer to hire men or women?
The second question: What is the appropriate mix of male/female ratio?

This poll is anonymous for the protection of your career and/or the protection of your company from lawsuits. Please utilize this anonymity to answer honestly.
All the people I've hired have been men but HR has yet to send me a female candidate at all
 
My workplace is one man to about 20 women. I'm a minority, kinda like the token black guy.
 
I don't know what wa-wa peddles are. I was fired for misconduct.



I do understand what Bow-chicka-bow-bow means. I was fired for misconduct but it wasn't sexual misconduct.
We all know that spud and stud rhyme
 
Are these sexual innuendos that I don't know or are you saying something ridiculous and pretending that it is a sexual innuendo?

I'm having a hard time understanding your posts in this thread.
Stud works with a lot of women, I was trying to make a joke that didn't seem to work
 
I was in the military for 20 years but I often had to hire civilians. I probably hired a few more women than men but statistically I suppose that was to be expected since we had more female applicants. I don't think there is any magic ratio and I never had a preference. I would list the candidates in order of preference based on their resumes and then it would be up to them in the interview to change my mind. The only time gender ever entered my mind was when I was hiring in Muslim countries and was concerned the host country officers would be less likely to work with the women. But I still hired women there when the women were the strongest candidates.
 
Stud works with a lot of women, I was trying to make a joke that didn't seem to work

I understand now. I still don't understand the wa-wa peddles. Are wa-wa peddles musical devices used to make porn music?
 
There is no correct mix of males and females. That's way too broad. It all depends on the job.

I have far more men working for me than women. I prefer the company of men, always did. I work for a man and prefer him to any previous female bosses I have.
 
I have hired hundreds of people over the years

Is there a correct ratio of men/women to hire? no

Is there a correct ration to have employed at any given time? no

I prefer women to men in my admin departments.....but i have both working here

My managers are almost a wash.......8 men to 6 women

In reality, all i care about is production......they all have their responsibilities

As long as they fulfill them, it doesnt matter to me what sex they are, or color they are
 
I hire the most qualified candidates, gender, race or sexual orientation doesn't even enter into it.
 
Trying to artificially engineer an equal gender mix in the workplace will not solve employment inequality. All it will do is add yet more inequality, but against men.

The only thing paying attention to a given gender mix is good for is taking it as one piece of many which we can then use to evaluate the state of social equality. With all those pieces accounted for, you can then assess whether there are any social factors reducing women's participation in a field they might otherwise show more interest in. And from there, you can start with the message we send to young girls, and continue with the message we sent to college-aged young women, and focus on them pursuing their interests and rejecting messages that say women are incapable.

When all that is done, you may or may not wind up with an equal gender distribution, for all kinds of reasons. If you don't, reassess. If there doesn't seem to be any obstacles, then simply continue supporting women and girls' success, and call it a day. It might simply be that there is objectively more interest from one sex than the other. Possibly still for social reasons, but not necessarily reasons having to do with sexism.

At no point does artificially rigging the employment game help with a potential social inequality issue.
 
I hire the most qualified candidates, gender, race or sexual orientation doesn't even enter into it.

This isn't the court of law. You are not in trouble.
 
This isn't the court of law. You are not in trouble.

Whoever said I was? I find it absurd that so many people even consider race, gender or orientation at all in their hiring decisions. Those people have serious personal problems.
 
Back
Top Bottom