The danger of gender inequality

[Ursulachuks]

Two candidates visited my office two days ago to submit their applications for the position of a health assistant. I had the honor of taking part in the interviews with them.After the interview, the candidate did very well, but the CMD chose to hire the male candidate because of his physical strength and height as the best contender for the position.He didn't even give the female applicant a chance to demonstrate her qualifications.What do you think about this?

[1714785691]

1714785691

[BADecker]

I don't think women should even have the vote!

[coolcoinz]

I think that if the job requires strength and a man is best fit for it, the employer should drop all the equality bullshit and simply write that in the offer, but that would get him all the backlash from big and strong women, so maybe a strength test would show the applicants what's what?

I've been there on the other side of the fence. I was unemployed and they were looking for an office assistant, so I applied. When I came to the interview I was the only guy in the room with 3 good looking girls and the employer was a balding guy in his 40s. I knew I had no chance and I wasn't angry because of that, but because they wouldn't simply say they needed a female secretary. They wanted to be polite and that made me waste my time on that whole charade.

[JeromeTash]

We know where all gender equality bullshit comes from, just like we are now struggling with the alphabet gangs and their so-called rights. A man can never be equal to a woman, and each gender has roles that they are best suited for.

We see all the human rights activists and feminists (who, by the way, are there just to make money) bitching about gender inequality in white-collar jobs, but you will never see them advocating for more women to work in Sewers or other blue collar jobs. Why is it so?

[EluguHcman]

Gender inequality is a tolerance system underrating ones ability and capacity to do work and delivering of a given task.
Nowadays what a man can do a woman can do better so the thoughts of genders inequality should be abolished as human qualities depends on individuals and not of the gender differences.

Give it a benefit of doubt before you can conclude because there are women who does some muscular and manpower's job better than some men though majority of men a likely to attain stamina's in a stressful occasion.
This is the same of a mentality that states kitchen works is meant for women and they do it better than men but there are male genders out there who does it better than the women such as the cooking.
Knowledge and skills doesn't only comes from a particular gender.

[blockman]

I don't think there's gender inequality on that. If the person who's assigned to choose the best candidate sees the best in one, then that's the decision that must be done. This is just the tough situation of the hiring, application, and selection process. There's nothing wrong with that if that's the quality that the CMD is looking for in a candidate. Usually in this hiring process, if a company has already found the one that they are looking for, they'll reject and stop wasting time in the selection and also saves time the applicants.

[yhiaali3]

This depends on the quality of work required, sometimes equality is required and sometimes it is not good.
In jobs that require more physical strength and patience, men are preferred and will be chosen. As for cases that require good looks and kindness, such as tourism or secretarial work, women are preferred.

Therefore, we cannot say that equality between men and women is always required.

[Victan22]

    Gender inequality has suddenly become a topic of debate among nations and individuals  every now and then, on the other hand I ask are they really being marginalized?

   Let's not forget in a  hurry the format of home and societal hierarchy as stated by nature  whereby the man  as the head fights(protects), labours and governs the family  while the woman as the helper keeps the home and makes sure of the implementation of the man's directives in his absence. Let's also remember that women came to the realization of what vocational independence is during the world wars when almost all the men were in the battle front then the industries and gov't institutions were short of labour so the women had to be engaged in replacement of that vacuum.

   The men at the war front gave their lives for a better society which is what both genders are benefiting from  today, yes they should be given rights as well but not on an equal scale with a man because  diving into societal welfare I still don't think that women has that fragile heart in certain political decisions.

Finally  Women should be integrated into the system but not as the head so that there can still balance between both genders in the society.

[paxmao]

Two candidates visited my office two days ago to submit their applications for the position of a health assistant. I had the honor of taking part in the interviews with them.After the interview, the candidate did very well, but the CMD chose to hire the male candidate because of his physical strength and height as the best contender for the position.He didn't even give the female applicant a chance to demonstrate her qualifications.What do you think about this?

My view is that while males are in general stronger than female, not all males are necessarily stronger than females so an opportunity to interview and, if strength is required for the role, to test and compare should have been given. I do believe there should be fair processes that guarantee equal opportunity regardless of gender. Just be aware than on certain roles, that equal opportunity means that a stronger candidate may be the chosen one (e.g. if they have to move heavy patients from their beds).

[Doan9269]

Two candidates visited my office two days ago to submit their applications for the position of a health assistant. I had the honor of taking part in the interviews with them.After the interview, the candidate did very well, but the CMD chose to hire the male candidate because of his physical strength and height as the best contender for the position.He didn't even give the female applicant a chance to demonstrate her qualifications.What do you think about this?

There's no gender disparity here since they selected base on what they actually needed, i even thought you would have said that the female was preferred than the male, another context is to decided base on their performance in cases where gender is not a barrier, there are jobs offers you would love to employ females as well than men because that's what you needed, but when there's nothing like gender preference in the job requirements then when the male meet up with the requirements but the role was given to a female is another thing entirely as gender inequalitya and same applies vise versa to both genders.

[Gozie51]

Two candidates visited my office two days ago to submit their applications for the position of a health assistant.

I hope this is not about racist or any other colouration because health jobs don't really require physical attributes or gender nor sex except their are these specifics for the job otherwise I don't see a reason that the lady should be disqualified for such reasons of physical attributes or because she is a lady. She was not even given a chance of interview. If these were the criterias then the health company seeking to employ those workers should have indicated that in their adverts so that only the male physically endowed will apply.

[Gallar]

Two candidates visited my office two days ago to submit their applications for the position of a health assistant. I had the honor of taking part in the interviews with them.After the interview, the candidate did very well, but the CMD chose to hire the male candidate because of his physical strength and height as the best contender for the position.He didn't even give the female applicant a chance to demonstrate her qualifications.What do you think about this?

All of these things depend on what type of work will be done later. If it was a tough job and really required a lot of energy in the job, men would definitely have the upper hand and would definitely be the ones to be chosen for the job. But if for example the work is not too hard and women are able to do it, I think there is indeed a bit of injustice. Because if the work can indeed be done by women (capable), why are women not given the opportunity to benefit from entering these jobs.

But maybe the decision issued by the employer must have strong reasons, because it only selects men for jobs in the company. Maybe because of the female applicants, none met the company's criteria? Or maybe there is another reason? So in conclusion, maybe if the job can be done by both men and women. You could say it was unfair treatment. But if the company really needs workers, I think that's reasonable.

[Doan9269]

Don't be surprised there are people that still emulate the practice of this gender inequity in the society, some cultures and traditions so make much of this difference more known and widespread across their geographical location all because of customs, there should be equal opportunities for everyone be it male or female, young or old, this will also help a peaceful coexistence between the people living together in the society.

[BADecker]

I don't think women should even have the vote!

Women should get married, stay at home, have babies and raise them. It's the idea that there is gender equality that is wrecking society.

[Iadegbola34]

Skills and experience should be the primary factors in making hiring decisions. It's disheartening when opportunities are denied based on gender or stereotypes. But for the specific reason of "physical strength" your boss is not totally wrong if the job requirements will require to a large extent someone handle stress to a certain level.

[Belarge]

I think the CMD saw the best qualifications and strength in the male job applicants already, and I think it has nothing to do with gender inequality, is not as if the female job applicants was interviewed and did well and yet she was not chosen or given the job.

The CMD was only comfortable with the male applicants and has no need for interview the female applicants when he has already seen the best qualities in the male applicants...

[Die_empty]

Two candidates visited my office two days ago to submit their applications for the position of a health assistant. I had the honor of taking part in the interviews with them.After the interview, the candidate did very well, but the CMD chose to hire the male candidate because of his physical strength and height as the best contender for the position.He didn't even give the female applicant a chance to demonstrate her qualifications.What do you think about this?

The rise of feminist organizations wants to distort the social order. There are jobs that women cannot be effective in. Sometimes these women's rights groups will always showcase a female that is a truck driver, mechanic, or other male-dominated fields just to prove that women are limitless. But they fail to understand that these cases are rare because the buildup of males is not the same with females. These feminists are even causing more harm than good in families because they have influenced the wives to believe that they are equal to their husbands. The high rate of divorce can be traced to disrespect by the wives because of the misconception of the term equality.

Every job has physical, mental, and emotional requirements to perform them effectively. Women a likely to become good teachers and nurses because of their tender, caring and kind nature. Men will always do well in the task that needs physical strength. I will prefer to employ men as ambulance attendants because they have the strength to carry patients on stretchers.

It will be called inequity if both the female and male applicants have the requisite skills but decisions are made based on sex. I know of a firm that has a policy never to employ female staff because of sexual harassment. Some schools will employ only female staff. All these things are based on the company policies and the tasks to be accomplished.

[BADecker]

Do male leaders in business hire more males or females? And the same with the female leaders? Seems to me that both hire more men.

[Gozie51]

The CMD was only comfortable with the male applicants and has no need for interview the female applicants when he has already seen the best qualities in the male applicants...

I think that is not how interview work. The interviewer looks biase in the attitude going by op post. He won't have to look down on the lady with the excuse of having gotten what he wanted from the male counterparts and only person interviewed according to you. I think the lady was not fairly treated, she was embarrassed and insulted in that act by the interviewer.

[Queentoshi]

Two candidates visited my office two days ago to submit their applications for the position of a health assistant. I had the honor of taking part in the interviews with them.After the interview, the candidate did very well, but the CMD chose to hire the male candidate because of his physical strength and height as the best contender for the position.He didn't even give the female applicant a chance to demonstrate her qualifications.What do you think about this?

The job was not for her, that is why she did not get it. The CMD already had a preference in males for the position as some employers do also for some job openings, and on the condition that no males where found qualified for the position, he would have had to hire the lady the lady qualified and not go ahead to employ an unqualified male. If he had employed an unqualified male for the position when there was a qualified female, that would have been where I have an issue. Preference is what got the male the job.