"I would have gotten the job -- if I were a woman."

[divemistress]

Women divers, women instructors: What do you think of that one?

To me, it screams: You've gotten where you are because of preferential treatment, not ability.

Sexism -- anti-male sexism -- is one of the biggest complaints in PADI instructor circles around Washington, D.C. Supposedly PADI is so desperate for female instructors (why?) that it's heaping opportunities on women, while hemming in the men.How did that guy know he lost a prospective job because of his gender? "They said something about too much testosterone...." he mumbled. Uh huh.

I also hear woman can get away with murder on the PADI IE, make mistakes right and left. But let a guy mess up and he's history. Or so men tell me.

I don't want to start a flame war, but I am curious about other women's reactions.

DM

 

[Kayla]

Personally I think that women have spent a great many years trying to get the respect that we deserve. If men (not all mind you!) think that they are losing jobs to us, then maybe we have done a better job then we thought! On the other hand, its sad that anyone has to feel that they lost a job because they were of the wrong sex..... will it ever end?

 

[ScubaJewel]

This is most likely very true. But I doubt if it has anything to do with us doing a better job.

In all actuality It is most likely driven by the industry attempting to further pursue the female diving market, I beleive that most women would prefer to have a female instructor, Additionally women like to patronize shops that employ female staff. Women will often connect with and trust other women before men...

Think about it in terms of advertising, What is the most predominant sex of people in advertisments in mens magazines? Female...

What is the predominant sex of people in advertisments in womens magazines? Female... Why is that? Because both Males and Females are affected positively by females and less so by Males...

Julie

 

[mempilot]

I don't want a war here, but I'd like to make a comment.

The statement, "I would have gotten the job -- if I were a woman.", transfers to other industries quite visably. As an airline pilot, we see it everyday in hiring. I acknowledge that the industry used to be touted as a boys club(lot's of ex-military), but in the last 10 years there has been a disturbing trend. Airlines have lowered their experience requirements to allow for women to apply that haven't logged the time. The majors have lowered minimum requirements to 1500 hours for everyone, but only minorities and women get hired at that number. For us male caucasians, 5000+ hours are needed to be competitive. There just aren't enough women going through the training to hire a balance from the sexes. Therefore females, if you can walk, talk, and chew gum at the same time, you can get hired at a major airline with 1500 hours and your husband/boyfriend with 10+ years of experience will get passed over. One, and only one, major airline pays the fines every year because they hire based on experience only and not on some quota.

I almost didn't post this, because I know I'll get hate mail. But, unfortuneatly, that statement rings true in a lot of cases. It does all the women out there who truely have the ability an injustice. But, it also opens the door to women and minorities that don't stack up in the experience needed column.

I think the family structure of the 40's, 50's, 60's, and 70's put women behind in a lot of career tracks. Catching up is hard to do, but it is fortuneatly happening, all be it slow. Quotas aren't the answer though, only training, experience, and ability should be judged on a resume. Maybe we should remove the check box marked sex from applications and see how it all pans out.

My two cents, but if you beat me up too hard on this - I'll ask for change.

 

[Kayla]

mempilot-

I agree with you. People should not be hired because of their sex, but because they have the experience to do the job, equal standards. Any other way, IMHO, just seems foolish!

 

[divemistress]

I don't want a war here, but I'd like to make a comment.
The statement, "I would have gotten the job -- if I were a woman.", transfers to other industries quite visably....."
My two cents, but if you beat me up too hard on this - I'll ask for change.

as you point out, plenty of industries -- and companies -- are trying to boost female/minority hiring by lessening standards. BUT THEY DON'T NEED TO. as a journalist at one of the largest newspapers in the country, i saw editors hire minority applicants without caring whom they hired, just to boost their numbers. that newspaper could have attracted the most talented graduates of the best j-schools in the country. but editors didn't care about hiring minorities. so these young kids received little training, unlike their heavily mentored white peers.

the problem went up the ladder. certain top editing jobs were held for women. these jobs HELD NO POWER. men could say there were two top female editors, but they had nothing to do with the content of the newspaper. the good jobs were held universally by white men.

i'm probably going to get skewered for those statements. but if a company/industry wants to change its demographics, it can do it properly, with time and training, i believe.

(a sincere thank you to you for mentioning that societal structure put women behind, career-wise, during the past few decades. that's something that often gets overlooked. during the past half century, many women who wanted to work outside the home didn't get hired because they weren't men.)

back to my first question -- how does a statement like the one i heard strike you/everyone? the speaker sounds ignorant to me, bitter and a little stupid. i figure his personality lost him the job. because he doesn't even seem open to the possibility that a female competitor might be better qualified. is a person with such a narrow mind the best judge of his abilities?

dm

 

[divemistress]

xxx

 

[Kayla]

the speaker sounds ignorant to me, bitter and a little stupid. i figure his personality lost him the job. because he doesn't even seem open to the possibility that a female competitor might be better qualified. dm

I think that pretty much sums it up.....


Kayla

 

[Kat]

I want the job because I'm the best one for it. Any other reason is just an insult.

An LDS I used to go to, once in a while, was all over me to work for them. And hinted that it was because I am a women.

They knew nothing about me or my training. Yet, felt I would be an asset to them.

Thanks, but no thanks.
(I don't go to that LDS anymore.)

 

[NAM001]

i never thought i would see this discussed here. dont get me wrong, i think its great. discussing this tabo. i have always thought of this topic as a joke. where i work this can not be discussed by men. its called work place violence. as is the case for race issues unless you are non white. nepotism unless you are family. homosexuals unless you are gay. the supression of such discussions are called acceptance . creating the illusion of embracing diversity. in short creating the false sence of acceptance through threats. you want a contract awarded to you you have to meet certain demographic ballances. our production head is a black woman who was pushed up the chain because of her gender and race. any guesses as to the demographics of the management team she positioned is. if you are white male you will not advanced unless it is a critical position. our supervisors kids work there and they are promoted. when they become to top heavy they are xfered to other facilities to make room for others. supervisory training programs did not include white or males untill letters were written to the right people. its unfortunate that in order to run a business today you have to do this, but it is a fact of life. i feel fortunate that i am not in a business that deals with life critical issues. imagine what your local dive shop would be like if the local consumer groups / business were not allowed to do business with you unless you could show you had a ballance in the demography of your employees. lots of doors would close. many business's are held in a womans name so to qualify for government contracts. draw a paycheck and never know where you work. thats ok though your getting your share of the highway money. look at the clinton era where his campaign promised hireing/positioning per afermitive action in lue of qualification. any one remember (safe bullets) and the sergoen general. it amazes me that in atttempting to diversify the working class it can not be done with out having those who control your employment being given race gender age ect. to make those hireing /promotion decisions. it would concern me greatly to find out that 105 lb freshly manacured bambi (the quota hiree) was contemplating working on my regulator as soon as she can find the repair bench. the saddest part of it all is that many of those who get thier positions think they really deserve it and call it a conquest over thier oppressors. those who truley deserve thier position quickly prove thier competance. unfortunately they are stuck carrying the stereotype burdon of the bimbo's that are there for statistics. i recently came back from a dive vacation where the only 2 dive shops in town were owned and operated by women. they were well run shops. it would never cross my mind that they were inferior to a male operated shop. the fact that they are there and have been for years says that they do it right. my other half on the other hand thinks i would dive better if i were color co-ordinated. i would be on my death bed before i would let her do anything with my gear.

i would hope dive mistress doesnt put me in the ignorant bitter or stupid box. reverse discrimination is a fact. standards have dropped thats a fact. selective enforcement of policies and standards are a fact. many who think "they have come a long way baby", havn't and those who have could care less about those who havnt and are in it for the free ride. i still believe that in general the lame free riders stay clear of such sports as diving or anything that require them to leave the security of reliance on others to do something that could get them selves hurt.

as far as her initial post i think i agree with her to a degree. although to every roumer there is a basis of truth. if padi is under the gun by its compeditors for not meeting their demography standards. padi has to stand up and buck the compeditors or give in and play the numbers game. i think the truth is somewhere in the middle and that there is a lot of facts missing. i have experienced many of the comments made by others. i personally have been required to impose double standards to insure a desired outcome in areas of gender race and others. when all is said and done it is fear driven favoritism pure and simple. whether it be schedule assignment, peromotion, or time off. its just a fact of life. if you cant convince the majority of your opinion then you convince the mninority to make it law and use the law to dictate to the majority.

ok im ready to go to my box now.