Have u ever searched up how to kill a women
>>84800236yes 163 million times to be exact
>>84800236why the fuck do foids keep talking about "male loneliness"??? there are literal quotas that prevent men from being hired or promoted
>>84800251lmao, based anon
>>84800281the quota is called skill, men are shit and proven inferior workers than women once women got rights to work
>>84800346no the quotas are called quotas where you have to hire a certain number of women anyway. women are mostly assigned to nonpromotable work, so skill doesn't come into it
>>84800346sitting in an air conditioned box in front of a computer monitor does not count as "work" sorry sweetie
62 gorillion in the rape academy? I believe it.
Why would I need to look that up? I can easily kill a woman with my bare hands.
>>84800346"This study assessed whether women and minorities are discriminated against in the early stages of the recruitment process for senior positions in the APS, while also testing the impact of implementing a 'blind' or de-identified approach to reviewing candidates. Over 2,100 public servants from 14 agencies participated in the trial. They completed an exercise in which they shortlisted applicants for a hypothetical senior role in their agency. Participants were randomly assigned to receive application materials for candidates in standard form or in de-identified form (with information about candidate gender, race and ethnicity removed). We found that the public servants engaged in positive (not negative) discrimination towards female and minority candidates:Participants were 2.9% more likely to shortlist female candidates and 3.2% less likely to shortlist male applicants when they were identifiable, compared with when they were de-identified.Minority males were 5.8% more likely to be shortlisted and minority females were 8.6% more likely to be shortlisted when identifiable compared to when applications were de-identified.The positive discrimination was strongest for Indigenous female candidates who were 22.2% more likely to be shortlisted when identifiable compared to when the applications were de-identified.Interestingly, male reviewers displayed markedly more positive discrimination in favour of minority candidates than did female counterparts, and reviewers aged 40+ displayed much stronger affirmative action in favour for both women and minorities than did younger ones. Overall, the results indicate the need for caution when moving towards 'blind' recruitment processes in the Australian Public Service, as de-identification may frustrate efforts aimed at promoting diversity."https://www.emilkirkegaard.com/p/large-scale-sex-race-etc-discrimination-studies-what-do-they-show?utm_source=publication-search
