Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Tragedy is brought about by action too. But then it can also be brought about by inaction, so eh.

Melissia wrote:Tragedy is brought about by action too. But then it can also be brought about by inaction, so eh.

Tragedy is just a perspective, change happens without regard to opinion.

Change also happens without individual action.

Melissia wrote:Change also happens without individual action.

Individual action is the only kind of action.

A group is nothing more than a collection of individuals who influence each other and ultimately are influenced by their pasts and present situation which in turn is influenced solely by past events.

Call me a loon but I firmly believe there is nothing more than cause and effect.

Okay. But how does this relate to singular cases of workplace discrimination? Given that a single individual in this case actually has very little power to change things, and it the only the courts that can force the change, which then creates the hostile enviroment.

corpsesarefun wrote:

Melissia wrote:Change also happens without individual action.

Individual action is the only kind of action.

A group is nothing more than a collection of individuals who influence each other and ultimately are influenced by their pasts and present situation which in turn is influenced solely by past events.

Call me a loon but I firmly believe there is nothing more than cause and effect.

Bingo.

And what the hell did I say that made me want to seem edgy and cool? I'm being honest here. If someone really wants something, they'll try to attain it. If other stuff gets in the way of them trying to attain it, then the other stuff is more important to them. History is full of people who went against the grain and failed and other people who managed to change the direction of the grain. To say that either one is obligatory is pretty much wrong. Stupid law suits get through sometimes, why shouldn't legit ones too?

Edit: It relates in that an individual can gather other individuals of like mind. It still takes that individual finding other individuals. Or maybe that person making a big display on their own. I don't see why that should be limiting.

corpsesarefun wrote:

Melissia wrote:Change also happens without individual action.

Individual action is the only kind of action.

A group is nothing more than a collection of individuals who influence each other and ultimately are influenced by their pasts and present situation which in turn is influenced solely by past events.

Call me a loon but I firmly believe there is nothing more than cause and effect.

... the problem with that viewpoint is that there are billions of causes and trillions of effects at any given instant. Life has a lot of random chance to it because it is a giant mess of causes and effects, most of them completely and utterly outside of your control.

Also kitty, stop trying to eat my hand.

1) Both employees want to get a promotion/pay raise, but are having more trouble than normal due to their gender. One way of getting it is to continue to work had and prove thier dedication, more than if required of from someone of the opposite gender, and they should eventually get that promotion/pay raise. The alternative is to keep up a fuss. They both want the promotion/raise, it's just the alternative has serious consequences that even if you secure a raise you have wrecked your career outlook.

2) You fail to see that even if the law suit is sucessfull, that pretty much gaurentees that the employee won't be welcome at that workplace, and either fired for the smallest excuse or kept in a mindnumbing area of work regardless of their level of competency or dedication.

Stop repeating the same things. I'm saying, if someone cared more about "justice" or "the cause" or whatever they want to call it, they'd be willing to risk it if it helped to end or at least lessen the impact across the board. Why does someone have to stay in that career path? If we're speaking in terms of fictional characters, why don't they have super powers too? Tell me you at least see what I'm saying? I've made no statements about it being practical or otherwise.

Melissia wrote:

corpsesarefun wrote:

Melissia wrote:Change also happens without individual action.

Individual action is the only kind of action.

A group is nothing more than a collection of individuals who influence each other and ultimately are influenced by their pasts and present situation which in turn is influenced solely by past events.

Call me a loon but I firmly believe there is nothing more than cause and effect.

... the problem with that viewpoint is that there are billions of causes and trillions of effects at any given instant. Life has a lot of random chance to it because it is a giant mess of causes and effects, most of them completely and utterly outside of your control.

Also kitty, stop trying to eat my hand.

My kitten minions will gnaw your hand until it is mildly sore!

But seriously there is no such thing as random, just the culmination of causes we didn't know about. See the uncertainty principle and chaos theory for more.

*sigh*

corpsesarefun wrote:

Melissia wrote:

corpsesarefun wrote:

Melissia wrote:Change also happens without individual action.

Individual action is the only kind of action.

A group is nothing more than a collection of individuals who influence each other and ultimately are influenced by their pasts and present situation which in turn is influenced solely by past events.

Call me a loon but I firmly believe there is nothing more than cause and effect.

... the problem with that viewpoint is that there are billions of causes and trillions of effects at any given instant. Life has a lot of random chance to it because it is a giant mess of causes and effects, most of them completely and utterly outside of your control.

Also kitty, stop trying to eat my hand.

My kitten minions will gnaw your hand until it is mildly sore!

But seriously there is no such thing as random, just the culmination of causes we didn't know about. See the uncertainty principle and chaos theory for more.

Technically speaking, I should have said "chaotic" as that is the term used in Chaos Theory (not random), but still, the point stands-- our knowledge of reality is so vastly limited that it is effectively random even if it is not literally so.

As for kitty, he's not your minion. He just is asking me to fill his bowl with catfood. I did so and he left me alone so he could eat.

I'm guessing answering questions is too much to ask? :/

Cannerus_The_Unbearable wrote:Why does someone have to stay in that career path?

Because we humans are not perfect beings, we have our own selfish desires as well. The idea of probably being jobless, in debt, and despised by the business community where you spent so much of your life thus far for the next fifty years of your life is not a pleasant one.

Because that's the guaranteed outcome. Because there's no way it could turn out otherwise.

I agree with you on that point but if you retrace our steps back to the original line of discussion while remembering what we just agreed then the only two logical solutions to any problem are to accept you can do nothing or to take action, the latter is the sole cause of any and all reactions and thus is the fundamental root of change.

Cannerus_The_Unbearable wrote:Because that's the guaranteed outcome. Because there's no way it could turn out otherwise.

That is the probable outcome.

The idea of calculated risk is that you, you know, calculate the level of risk.

Okay, okay.

Cannerus_The_Unbearable wrote:Why does someone have to stay in that career path?

What if you were in the Police force, experiencing this discrimination, and you have never wanted to be anything other than a Police Officer? And there are plenty of careers that would be similar to this.

If we're speaking in terms of fictional characters, why don't they have super powers too?

I was speaking in terms of hypothetical situations, not characters. And even if I was this reply is childish.

Tell me you at least see what I'm saying? I've made no statements about it being practical or otherwise.

I get what you're saying, I just disagree with you.

corpsesarefun wrote:I agree with you on that point but if you retrace our steps back to the original line of discussion while remembering what we just agreed then the only two logical solutions to any problem are to accept you can do nothing or to take action, the latter is the sole cause of any and all reactions and thus is the fundamental root of change.

Just remember that taking action does not necessarily mean any positive change. In fact, it could just ruin you ability to have a job in that particular field for the rest of your life while accomplishing nothing.

Melissia wrote:

Cannerus_The_Unbearable wrote:Because that's the guaranteed outcome. Because there's no way it could turn out otherwise.

That is the probable outcome.

The idea of calculated risk is that you, you know, calculate the level of risk.

It is only probable because you cannot know all of the factors.

Melissia wrote:

corpsesarefun wrote:I agree with you on that point but if you retrace our steps back to the original line of discussion while remembering what we just agreed then the only two logical solutions to any problem are to accept you can do nothing or to take action, the latter is the sole cause of any and all reactions and thus is the fundamental root of change.

Just remember that taking action does not necessarily mean any positive change. In fact, it could just ruin you ability to have a job in that particular field for the rest of your life while accomplishing nothing.

Again positive change to one man is negative to another, change is change and men will do with it as they will.

Melissia wrote:

corpsesarefun wrote:I agree with you on that point but if you retrace our steps back to the original line of discussion while remembering what we just agreed then the only two logical solutions to any problem are to accept you can do nothing or to take action, the latter is the sole cause of any and all reactions and thus is the fundamental root of change.

Just remember that taking action does not necessarily mean any positive change. In fact, it could just ruin you ability to have a job in that particular field for the rest of your life while accomplishing nothing.

It doesn't mean negative change either.

I'm seeing a whole lot of middle class mindset here, and let's be honest, that's not exactly realistic either. Not everyone who "works hard" makes it. You'll never be better off than your employer with that mindset, and if that's what makes you happy, awesome, but many people seem to expect that by being someone else's underling they'll eventually get ahead.

corpsesarefun wrote:It is only probable because you cannot know all of the factors.

corpsesarefun wrote:Again positive change to one man is negative to another, change is change and men will do with it as they will.

What a load of sophism.

"Rocking the boat" so to speak could very well simply get you fired and set back any progress you had made with whatever your issue is (in this case, gender bias in wages). An entirely negative effect from the perspective of someone who feels strongly with the issue, and a long term negative effect on the company as a whole due to reinforced sexist policies alienating potentially valuable employees.

I mean feth, a woman who rocks the boat on a woman's issue is almost inevitably called a radical feminazi, a bitch, and so on and so forth, and is bashed and hated on by the males. Ideals are one thing, but you also need to take reality into consideration as well, because you have to live with the aftermath of your decisions.

Melissia wrote:

corpsesarefun wrote:It is only probable because you cannot know all of the factors.

corpsesarefun wrote:Again positive change to one man is negative to another, change is change and men will do with it as they will.

What a load of sophism.

"Rocking the boat" so to speak could very well simply get you fired and set back any progress you had made with whatever your issue is (in this case, gender bias in wages). An entirely negative effect from the perspective of someone who feels strongly with the issue, and a long term negative effect on the company as a whole due to reinforced sexist policies alienating potentially valuable employees.

Risks by their very nature may "fail" (a term I use loosely, perhaps being fired from one job leads you to a better job) but if nobody took any risks for this reason then society would cease to exist as we know it and we would all turn into borg.

I'm not saying not to take risks, I'm saying it's more complicated than your previous posts seemed to indicate.

Melissia wrote:
I mean feth, a woman who rocks the boat on a woman's issue is almost inevitably called a radical feminazi, a bitch, and so on and so forth, and is bashed and hated on by the males. Ideals are one thing, but you also need to take reality into consideration as well, because you have to live with the aftermath of your decisions.

Eh, hyperbole much. We've come a long way.

Emperors Faithful wrote:Okay, okay.

Cannerus_The_Unbearable wrote:Why does someone have to stay in that career path?

What if you were in the Police force, experiencing this discrimination, and you have never wanted to be anything other than a Police Officer? And there are plenty of careers that would be similar to this.

What if I was creating a set of circumstances that made my argument sound correct and yours implausible? That's like trying to use an Ayn Rand story as anecdote

Melissia wrote:"Rocking the boat" so to speak could very well simply get you fired and set back any progress you had made with whatever your issue is (in this case, gender bias in wages). An entirely negative effect from the perspective of someone who feels strongly with the issue, and a long term negative effect on the company as a whole due to reinforced sexist policies alienating potentially valuable employees.

My point exactly.

Cannerus_The_Unbearable wrote:Eh, hyperbole much. We've come a long way.

... speaking from experience as a woman who tries to push women's issues... no, it's not exactly hyperbole.

Emperors Faithful wrote:

Melissia wrote:"Rocking the boat" so to speak could very well simply get you fired and set back any progress you had made with whatever your issue is (in this case, gender bias in wages). An entirely negative effect from the perspective of someone who feels strongly with the issue, and a long term negative effect on the company as a whole due to reinforced sexist policies alienating potentially valuable employees.

My point exactly.

And my point is that it could also not. Both options exist.

It really isn't that complicated when it comes down to it.
If you value the potential (if unlikely) social changes brought by your risk being pulled off more than you value your job then its highly likely you will attempt the lawsuit, if not its more likely you don't.

Melissia wrote:

Cannerus_The_Unbearable wrote:Eh, hyperbole much. We've come a long way.

... speaking from experience as a woman who tries to push women's issues... no, it's not exactly hyperbole.

Going anecdotal here, I've had just as many female higher ups as males. I've seen women get promoted when I thought men should and the other way. I believe in modern America victim mindsets cause much more damage than outright discrimination.