Click-bait title. Here's a few questions for you. Do not look at the next spoiler until you've answered the first one. ~Side note, I was doing an essay while writing these questions. I may improve them later.~ Maximum is always 10. Spoiler There are 10 men and 10 women sitting in a room, waiting to be picked to go to the future. 10 men were chosen. Does this appear discriminatory? Spoiler What if I told you that the 10 men were all historians? Spoiler Now, what if I told you, the 10 women were all historians as well? Spoiler Okay, the point of those was to display how lack of information can cause you to have views which are contrasted to the norm. Are you ready for the next set? Spoiler There are 100 men and 10 women sitting in a room, waiting to be sent to the past. 10 women were chosen to go. Does this seem sexist? Spoiler What if I told you that 10% of the men were historians? Spoiler And what if I told you all of the women were historians? Spoiler Now, what if I told you, that the person who picked them was trying not to look sexist. Do you think they succeeded? If not, why not? Sorry for putting you through all those questions, but I'll be intrigued by your responses... If you give me any (It's research for my novels, btw).
The concept is wonderful, and have many different terms in different subjects, but seeing it in literature would be a first for me.
This is sexist cause they're actually trying not to be. Attempt = result results may or may not be positive that doesn't matter it's the attempt that counts. how do I justify this If I tried to Kill you would it matter? If i succeed i can blame a bear or some shit then get caught after a couple of years If I fail I get a witness live my life on the run and get caught eventually.. see.~ attempt = results or in this case attempt = actually being sexist~ edit: Im sexist and ok with it~
the first one: 10/10 the men were picked because women dont work well together. the second one: 100/10 women not picked for their brains, their smarts were only a bonus
But, why not send some of the men who were confirmed historians? This is stupid. Why would the other 90 men even be there?
hmm? so what is it? good thing they have time travel huh. . . . and so what if the future they are going. . . . doesn't need historians? what if it is apocalyptic type? and why not a mixture o profession and skills? and the last batch are women to ensure thatthe 10 men atleast got some partners incase that the place they have gone do not have people present. . . . well that is if they are sent in the same timeline. . . . and if the butterfly effect is not in action. . .
psychological things are actually a hit or miss...no in between... if you put this concept on your novel then just do your best on your wordings and maybe you'll make a decent one...
my answer was "no" troughout the whole thing just untill the last one i said no because hiring people is decided on competency and there was nothing to suggest that the company wasn't doing so untill we knew that the person evaluating had gender on his mind
Sorry, but you are retarded It is a simple fact that there is inequality, one could say unfairness, between the sexes and there is no reason not to combat it other than males trying to keep that inequality You say lack of information is a problem, true, but do you try to get all the information? And no, I'm not saying there is no difference between the sexes, obviously there is, but said difference is no reason to, for example, pay a female less to do the same! job as a male coworker.
equality doesn't exist......it's a simple truth......if someone is talking about equality, either he is living a fancy life and talk about equality just to look great, either he has extreme bad luck......
Kinda boring. You kinda ruined it by only giving limited info (which you stated). If you're going for something deep then I'd suggest making the questions more varied. What this boiled down to was two questions being "with limited info do you think this is sexist".
ikr when feminists talk about gender equality I always think of a joke from a comedian (think it was George Carlin) which goes "If females want equality they are going to have to start taking their lives in droves"
None of those were really sexist if there is a reason for the choices. Like, I don't know, for the 10 men if they had to do something physical and the 10 women if they had to go in the past as nuns or something.
even if it "appear" to be discriminatory or sexist, it isn't. because the criteria in which the 10 men was chosen was not revealed.
Some people would consider it sexist, but I would question the quality. Were the ones chosen perhaps specialized in different types of history, which could be more useful, or were they in general just... a better historian, having more knowledge?
i don't get it. if they have a working machine to future, they must be have a good judgment. so if they want to send 10 man, 10 woman, half and half, it's completely reasonable to me. if they choose those people with reason of sexism or discrimination, they probably not looking for a good result